Print

[Gerry SA]

How has Test cricket in India and the Caribbean been killed off?

Most Tests in the Caribbean are outside the IPL window. So hardly killing Test cricket.

In India people don't go to Tests as most of the bigger cities only host a Test every 2-3 years.

If you lived in Delhi, would you travel all the way to Calcutta? I highly doubt it.

[Manormanic]

If the IPL fell outside of the county and international season for England then I don't think we would really moan about the quality of it and we would just enjoy it for what it is.  But because it crosses over with our season there is always that conflict and the traditionals amongst us are always going to say that we prefer our guys playing in the championship rather than the IPL.

Okay, take this in context - there are ten IPL teams IIRC, so 110 layers per round of games, of whom 40 are overseas players.

By the time you take the ranks of big hitters (Pollard, Gayle, Warner, Watson) and faded seaside attractions (Gilly and several Indian names) out of that, you have a few decent overseas bowlers, a couple of cheap options, some very interesting Indian batsmen (all of whom I;d love to get on a juicy deck at Lords) and a LOT of second rate filler. 

And looking at the attacks you offered, Mumbai have a decent five but the others are reliant upom second and third tier bowlers in the easiest batting conditions....

[PedalsMcgrew]

How has Test cricket in India and the Caribbean been killed off?

Most Tests in the Caribbean are outside the IPL window. So hardly killing Test cricket.

In India people don't go to Tests as most of the bigger cities only host a Test every 2-3 years.

If you lived in Delhi, would you travel all the way to Calcutta? I highly doubt it.

You seem to have answered your own question!

[fros23]

Okay, take this in context - there are ten IPL teams IIRC, so 110 layers per round of games, of whom 40 are overseas players.

By the time you take the ranks of big hitters (Pollard, Gayle, Warner, Watson) and faded seaside attractions (Gilly and several Indian names) out of that, you have a few decent overseas bowlers, a couple of cheap options, some very interesting Indian batsmen (all of whom I;d love to get on a juicy deck at Lords) and a LOT of second rate filler. 

And looking at the attacks you offered, Mumbai have a decent five but the others are reliant upom second and third tier bowlers in the easiest batting conditions....

That works both ways though as there are plenty of county batsmen that would be all at sea on a turning track in Mumbai.  Can you name me a county attack that's better than that CSk lineup especially when you consider it's in indian conditions?

Some of those guys aren't the best in the world but when you go through the lineups of Glamorgan, Gloucester, Leicester, Derby, Worcester, Northants they are full of mediocre cricketers, the odd youngster with potential and a couple of overseas/ kolpak has beens

[Manormanic]

That works both ways though as there are plenty of county batsmen that would be all at sea on a turning track in Mumbai.  Can you name me a county attack that's better than that CSk lineup especially when you consider it's in indian conditions?

Yorkshire's T20 line up - perm 5/6 from Starc, Brooks, Bresnan, Sidebottom, Plunkett, Rafiq, Rashid etc and that is without having four overseas players per team.  And thats kind of the point - you might have four-six names per team but there are far too many p155 poor players for a country/tourney that size.

[fros23]

Fair enough that's a pretty decent lineup, take out Plunkett and compare like for like and I would wager that most Indians would pick the CSK side though.

I think it depends on who you are benchmarking the lower Indians against though.  Comparing them against Brooks, Woakes, Bresnan, who are the level just below England or are you comparing them against Wayne White, Harry Ball and David Griffiths? I agree that they are poor compared to Woakes etc but not when you compare them to the second set

[Manormanic]

I think it depends on who you are benchmarking the lower Indians against though.  Comparing them against Brooks, Woakes, Bresnan, who are the level just below England or are you comparing them against Wayne White, Harry Ball and David Griffiths? I agree that they are poor compared to Woakes etc but not when you compare them to the second set

Well, if we do the maths, there will be 70 Indian players in each round of matches.  So compare the 30 or so bowlers with the top 30 in any other T20 competition (that way taking the overseas out of the equation).  I'd say our version and the Australian one are certainly a lot stronger, and probably the South African one as well.