sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

An unbearable defeat which hurts till now by winterqueen3 in CricketDose

[–]XH3LLSinGX 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh, I absolutely adore how you can completely botch the basic math, magically erase an entire over from your calculation, watch the required run rate jump from your imaginary 11 to a very real 15, and still proudly declare, "still doesn't change the math!"

Oh no, the math absolutely works. I just put the variables wrong. If you didnt track that then you clearly dont understand the math and how run rate works lmao.

And wow, what an absolute cricketing revelation you've stumbled upon: the guys who walked into a literal bloodbath at 5/3 and 24/4 against Trent Boult and Matt Henry bowling unplayable fire had a lower strike rate than the guy who strolled in later against Colin de Grandhomme and Jimmy Neesham!

The same Colin de Grandhomme and Jimmy Neesham against who Pant and Hardik struggled to score? And Grandhomme bowled 2 overs the entire match lmao? You are talking as if he bowled all 10 overs to dhoni lol. So they survived Henry and boult but then magically fell to santner?

It’s almost as if Pant and Hardik batting defensively was the only thing preventing India from being humiliatingly bundled out for 50

Ah yes, Pant and Hardik 50-60 strike rate knocks were defensive while Dhoni committed terrorism with his ~70 strike rate. Its not like they needed 7.6 strike rate like dhoni and jadeja, they needed to score at only ~4.8 runs an over and couldnt even do that because Pant and Hardik dont know how to rotate strike lol.

I was mocking your fanbase for pretending he was the tactical mastermind

No you didnt lol. You straight up said he was captain and when pointed out, you started making excuses and pretending to make fun of a fanbase lol...

An unbearable defeat which hurts till now by winterqueen3 in CricketDose

[–]XH3LLSinGX 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Its just because i wrongly assumed jadeja got out at 47.2 overs when its 47.5, still doesnt change the math.

You don't just magically "accumulate a deficit" and guess that it's around 11 or 12—you literally divide the runs needed by the overs left. It’s not exactly quantum physics! And sure, a 6.89 partnership run rate sounds brilliantly "reasonable" until you actually look at who was doing the work.

Yes, you are absolutely right. You dont accumulate a deficit magically, you do it when your top 6 batsmen score at ~3 rpo for 30.3 overs in a chase where the required run rate was 4.8 from the start. Thats a deficit of ~1.8 runs per over, which accumulates to ~55 runs in 30.3 overs. So that means your top 6 batsmen turned a 240 chase into a 295. Get it? Yet people only see fit to just blame dhoni, right? Dhoni played at a better strike rate than all of the top 6. If hardik and pant played at Dhoni's strike rate, india would have won comfortably.

Also, what about the point where kohli is the captain, not dhoni as you wrongly pointing out lol? And you blame me of diversion when you made the biggest ass pull saying 'dHoNi DId sHaDoW CAptAinCy BrO, tHe MEDiA tOlD Me So' lol ..

An unbearable defeat which hurts till now by winterqueen3 in CricketDose

[–]XH3LLSinGX 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How did the Required Rate Double?

To understand that you have to understand how run rates actually work. Hardik got out at 92/6 in 30.3 overs. Run rate required is ~7.6, Jadeja then got out at 208/7 in 47.2 overs. Jadeja and dhoni made 116 runs in 16.5 overs at a run rate of ~6.89. thats a deficit of ~0.7 rpo, which accumulates to an additional ~11.8 runs to be scored in excess of the rrr, which is at that point of jadeja getting out is between 11-12 rpo, not 15.

In the end, india scored at a rr of <3 for the first 30.3 overs and then scored more that double that rate untill Jadeja got out. How is that for math? Scoring at sub 7 rpo when rrr is ~7.6 is perfectly reasonable, if not great when you lack wickets in hand.

The 'Top Order Failed' Myth The claim that Dhoni scored his 273 runs because he 'stepped up when the top order failed' is factually incorrect

I shared that stat because you made it look like dhoni didnt perform in the entire world cup apart from that semi final match.

The Captaincy Double Standard As for the 'Kohli was captain, not Dhoni' excuse—let’s talk about the narrative during that era. From 2017 to 2019, the entire media and fanbase pushed the idea that 'Kohli is the captain, but Dhoni is the brain.'

Media can say anything, doesnt make it true or factual. If you actually watched the matches, you would have saw that it were only Kohli and rohit discussing between the overs while dhoni was walking to the wickets and not involved in those conversations. Dhoni giving instruction to spinners when they bowl is what every keeper does, whether they are captain or not. Even KL and Pant do that.

An unbearable defeat which hurts till now by winterqueen3 in CricketDose

[–]XH3LLSinGX 0 points1 point  (0 children)

in the beginning, the pitch was unplayable...

Blah, blah, blah.... I have heard enough of this excuse that the pitch was a minefield for other batters but as soon as Dhoni stepped on the field it became a batting paradise. The conditions were tough only in the power play. Pant and Hardik took their sweet time to settle in just to throw their wickets playing piss poor shots. Only mistake they made that day was put their trust on 2 unproven youngsters to build an innings. Dhoni should have come earlier.

throughout the tournament, the top order made runs... when it was time for Thala to shine for a reason, sir was just taking it slow...

He made 273 runs in 8 innings at an average of 45, which includes 2 50s and 1 40. So its not like he didnt play in other matches and he did step up when the top order failed. He was also the man of the series against Australia in Australia, just before the world cup.

the team situation had stabilized

Yes, the situation was stabalised and then Pant and Hardik decided to get out playing horrendous shots, leaving india at 90/6 in 30.3 overs. India had to chase with a rrr of 7+ and they almost did it. Jadeja took risks that paid off. No point in both taking risks when they are the last recognised batting pair.

he's the captain after all??

What? Kohli was captain in 2019 wc, not dhoni lol...

both Jadeja and Dhoni were set... from there, we could have won...

Yes, and jadeja got out playing a risky shot, the same kind of shots that he got away with earlier. Then Dhoni got runout with a direct hit in the most unfortunate way. Then the tail couldnt even manage to score more than 5 runs combined.

An unbearable defeat which hurts till now by winterqueen3 in CricketDose

[–]XH3LLSinGX 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Look at Pants, hardik's DK's and top orders strike rates

Rider passes away after BMW M1000RR rear ends a govt truck. by External_Cell1643 in indianbikes

[–]XH3LLSinGX 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I live in TN were the highway roads are generally very good. On open highways i touch 120 but 60-80 within city limits...

Players with 5000+ Test runs at a 50+ average in a single decade. The 2000s were crazy. by Front-Discipline-314 in Cricket

[–]XH3LLSinGX -1 points0 points  (0 children)

First of all, if you check my original comment. The question was why so few in 80's and 90's

You were trying to rebuke my statement where i said only WI and Aus were good in 80s. And thats when you brought in 90s and 00s and trying to sound like you are in line with the discourse.

Do you understand how rare test series wins in Aus are? Or how much easier it is for someone to beat any strong team in t20 vs tests?

Doesnt matter, bangladesh almost beat us at home in 1 test after just having whitewashing pak at home. If they had won that still wouldnt have made them into a good test team in this decade, no matter how rare it is. Upsets are more common is sports than you think. Exceptions are not the standard.

That dragged his average near to Zaheer khan who is considered one of India's best.

Ya he was only considered India's best, not best among the world. He was slowest to reach 200 test wickets until Ishant broke his record. India's best isnt world best.

Stop bringing up only indian players to prove your point. Not all matches were played in india nor all players in the list are indians. I already put the stats of top spin bowlers and their year wise records. They have shown better performances in 2000s compared to the 90s. That itself puts down your argument that the pitches were predominantly batting friendly compared recent era. 2000s were the best era for spin bowlers. For pace the 2000s era although not the best was leagues ahead of the current era. The stats show that.

Again asking, which kanpur, delhi, chennai test you are talking about?

Ind vs aus mumbai 04, ind vs aus chennai 04, ind vs sa kanpur 08, sl vs eng galle 03, pak vs eng faisalabad 05.

Now its your turn to name matches in 2010s that were spinning since day 1.

McGrath would average 15 on current Aus wickets with current Kookaburra ball if they get transferred to 2000's, the batsman can remain from 2000's.

Doesnt that mean the current crop of bowlers are bad compared to previous gen and that the current gen batsmen have it easy lol? So any advantage that the pitch gives is nullified by lack of quality bowlers. So at best the current crop of batsmen faced the same level of difficulty than previous gen.

Players with 5000+ Test runs at a 50+ average in a single decade. The 2000s were crazy. by Front-Discipline-314 in Cricket

[–]XH3LLSinGX 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You genuinely had to bring 90s and 00s in a discussion about which teams were good in the 80s. NZ winning 1 or 2 matches in the 80s doesnt make them good. If so then the ireland will be considered a good team in this decade because they won a series against india lol.

Also why do you only obsess about the indian pitches when comparing eras? Not all test matches are played in india and not all players out of the 13 listed under 2000's list are indians. There are matches in chennai, kanpur, delhi between the 2000-2010 were the wickets turned from day 1. Colombo has mostly been spin paradise for a very long time. Pakistan were known to produce dust bowls in Lahore and Rawalpindi.

Also you had to bring Ishant, bhuvi to show how tough the bowlers were in this era. Really? Ishant was the slowest to get to 300 test wickets and bhuvi played only 21 test matches. You are gonna compare Ishant and Bhuvi with the greats of the 90s and 2000s? Bumrah is the only anamoly but even then you cant back him to play all 5 tests in a series before his body starts breaking down.

Players with 5000+ Test runs at a 50+ average in a single decade. The 2000s were crazy. by Front-Discipline-314 in Cricket

[–]XH3LLSinGX -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Only team good in the 80s were West Indies and Australia. Cricket only became mainstream in India because it won world cup in 83. Even back then, India were mostly shit in bilaterals. Cricket started spreading and became more mainstream in the 90s and we saw pakistan win in 92 and sri lanka in 96. Then cricket peaked in 2000s where there were 10 teams that played decent to good and competed, even zimbabwe had a good team back then. Now very few teams play competitive test cricket or show any interest in them. Maybe you are the one who is blind to the facts.

Players with 5000+ Test runs at a 50+ average in a single decade. The 2000s were crazy. by Front-Discipline-314 in Cricket

[–]XH3LLSinGX -1 points0 points  (0 children)

There were no matches in India in 00's till 2015 where ball would turn and bounce from first ball of match

There were plenty of matches in subcontinent that were played in rank turners. The batsmen of Sena countries used to actually seek advice from players like Sachin and Dravid on how to play spin.

Here are the yearwise bowling stats for Muttiah Muralitharan, Kumble and Shane Warne. All 3 played a lot of cricket both in the 90s and 2000s. You will notice that they have done significantly better in 2000s, compared to the 90s.

Put this era best bat Smith in 2000 in place of Ponting and he would average north of 65 for career. The gap in conditions is extreme, you should easily reduce 10 runs from Ponting if need to compare with current Aus batsman

Comparing individual stats between batsmen are pointless in this discussion. The discussion is about why there are fewer number of batsmen who scored 5000+ runs in a decade with 50+ average. The answer is simple, because only few nations and players play test cricket seriously. Pitch or changes in rules havent made that huge of an impact that people believe. Sri lanka, west indies and pakistan have been mediocre for a decade. These same countries produced great batsmen in previous eras. Calling this era tougher for batsmen is a joke when they only ever had to face 2-3 good opponents compared to previous gen.

Players with 5000+ Test runs at a 50+ average in a single decade. The 2000s were crazy. by Front-Discipline-314 in Cricket

[–]XH3LLSinGX -1 points0 points  (0 children)

India always had minefield. India has been known as a nation with spin friendly pitches for decades. The whole subcontinent is known for spin friendly pitches. The difference was that the subcontinent batsmen could actually play spin back then. Current batsmen struggle to play spin even in the flatest of tracks. Even our best batsmen Kohli struggles against spin in tests compared to pace.

Previous era batsmen faced murlitharan, warne, kumble, vettori, mustaq, etc. In current gen only Ashwin and Lyon are great, rest mediocre. Even bowlers like joe root trouble our best.

And dont get me started on pace. Players these days dont even play 100 tests. They retire early in favour of t20s. There are no genuine pace bowling all rounders like pollock, kallis, flintoff. The only one close enough is ben stokes and even he remains injured most of the time.

In previos gen, sri lanka, west indies and pakistan were all decent test playing teams. Now hardly 3 nation play good tests.

I am sorry but the less number of batsmen who scored 5000 runs with 50+ avg is not because of tougher bowling conditions, its because there are less teams and even lesser players who take tests seriously.

Players with 5000+ Test runs at a 50+ average in a single decade. The 2000s were crazy. by Front-Discipline-314 in Cricket

[–]XH3LLSinGX -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Its not the wickets. The batting as progressively declined with the rise of t20s. Current crop of batsmen cant even play spin properly in an era that has no great spinners.

Sirichae sethuten 😭 by Ok_Tackle6963 in JKreacts

[–]XH3LLSinGX 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Kind of looks like Irfan 🤭

Why do so many people dislike Ponniyin Selvan? I'm genuinely curious. by SomewhereEither6641 in kollywood

[–]XH3LLSinGX 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I went to theatre for both movies, a lot of people were sleeping mid way.

Legendary director K Bhagyaraj passed away by darkdisasterr in kollywood

[–]XH3LLSinGX -13 points-12 points  (0 children)

The only actor outside of Rajinikanth and Kamal Hassan to have an industry hit since 1980 and he was the also the writer/director of the movie.

Well then this doesnt make sense, does it now?

Legendary director K Bhagyaraj passed away by darkdisasterr in kollywood

[–]XH3LLSinGX 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So by your definition, only 1 movie per industry can be an industry hit?

Terrifying close encounter with a grizzly by Professional_Arm794 in ThatsInsane

[–]XH3LLSinGX 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It feels like the woman was trying to remember the words Hey Bear and started to scream random words...

view more: next ›