Why Team India should watch out for Pakistan?

BEWARE TEAM INDIA! The Pakistani team’s evilness is now surfacing. This frightening team has been working very hard at their training camps and are coming up with wicked plans to dismantle and mentally break the Indian team.

Read More

Analyzing Pakistan's preparation for the T20 WC

For someone who follows cricket, it is obvious to them that the Pakistani team is one incredibly unexplainable phenomena – at times they exceed miraculous expectations, play like cornered tigers and snatch the unlikeliest victories and other (more often) times, they falter when no one anticipates them to. A cricket fan would know that all predictions, calculations, and projections go haywire when Pakistan takes the field of play. Add to that the unpredictability and spice that comes with T20 cricket and you know you are bound to get an intense mix which can be either being exhilarating or disastrous.

Read More

Pakistan's deadlock situation

Misbah ul Haq is a captain with a bag full of tricks - so many that not only does he leave the opposition surprised but also sometimes leaves his team members and fans scratching their heads. He added another feather to his cap when he decided to field 6 bowlers against India in this recent Asia Cup at the cost of a specialist wicket keeper. That move baffled me.

Sarfraz Ahmed

I was confused at the team selection: Pakistan had opted for Umar Akmal as the keeper and Sarfraz was left out to accommodate the extra bowler - Wahab Riaz. It is not like Pakistan has not done this in the past but I could not quite understand what Sarfraz had done to be left out. The keeper did not get the opportunity to catch in the first game against Bangladesh and scored a useful 19 not out (although that came at a Strike Rate of 67.85 which by ODI standards might be considered mediocre but in the context of the match, those were useful runs nonetheless as the difference of victory was 21 runs). He took a catch against Sri Lanka and did not bat. Yet Pakistan went ahead to field an extra bowler in the team against India, a speedster who last performed with the ball a year ago, played only 2 ODIs since May 2011 and conceded 47 runs in 7 overs in his last outing.

Apply some MBA?

Maybe it was a genius move by the MBA grad. One might say that it was to widen up the bowling options and I will not argue against that. The result of this clever experiment was that Umar Akmal as a makeshift keeper spilled around 10 runs easily and missed a few chances and Wahab conceded 50 runs in 4 overs. And I will not object to their performances as them doing better might have not impacted the result of the match given the way Virat Kohli was playing.


My objection is not against the captain trying different things but as to the frequency of these experiments.

Pakistan has played 9 ODIs in 2012 so far and the maximum games without changing the keeper were only 3 - Umar Akmal kept wickets against Afghanistan and the first two ODIs against England. His brother (Adnan) was brought in for the next two games. Then Sarfraz was entrusted with the glovework against Bangladesh and Sri Lanka but for some reason he could not win the captain's trust and was replaced by Umar Akmal in the next game against India. He was then drafted in for the final against Bangladesh.

The following question rises as a result: Why the management is not consistent on the team selection and when will this wicket-keeper dilemma be resolved?

Adam Gilchrist

Most likely if Misbah is asked this question he potentially might suggest the need for a wicket-keeper batsman, someone who can add depth to the batting line up - a reason which actually justifies making Umar Akmal keep. And given the trends in cricket, it is understood that a keeper-batsman adds a totally different dimension to the team. We can look at the examples of Adam Gilchrist, MS Dhoni and Kumar Sangakkara.Wicket keepers in the past were understood to be a conventional number 7 batsman who played a useful innings if they could and it was assumed that the batting was the responsibility of the batsmen in the team and not the keeper.But players like Gilchrist came along to change that perception. Adam Gilchrist, who has been named as the keeper for the Greatest ODI Team of All Time was known for his explosive batting and safe keeping and was one of the main catalysts in the Australian domination over world cricket in the early 2000s. It was a perfect combo – an excellent, safe keeper who bats like a batsman and not like a basher lower down the order. It changed the way teams looked at their keepers and soon many teams followed the trend. 

Kamran Akmal - Another drop?

Pakistan too had Moin Khan and Rashid Latif at the time, who were excellent keepers and could bat but their batting was not of the level of Gilchrist, Dhoni or Sangakkara. They retired and were replaced by everyone's favourite and an all-time great in his area of expertise:Kamran Akmal.With the aggressive style of his batting, it seemed like Pakistan had found its own keeper-batsman. Kamran Akmal strengthened his position in the side after a match winning 113 in the infamous Karachi test against India in 2006. He did not hold back in ODIs, scoring 100s while opening, against West Indies and England. But even who don't follow cricket regularly would know elder Akmal's consistent achievements with the gloves during 2007-2011. He was in and out of the team and Pakistan experimented with the likes of Zulqarnain Haider, Sarfraz Ahmed and Mohammad Salman but could not find the perfect combination.

Sarfraz Ahmed has made a point with his safe pair of hands and scored his career best knock of 46* against Bangladesh in the final of the Asia Cup - an almost Man of the Match worthy innings in this close game. It is the captain's job to give him th econfidence and the consistent run with the side. His career spans 4.5 years and he has only played 18 ODIs. For a young keeper, the pressure of being dropped and not being given a consistent chance can be disconcerting. He definitely has the potential to become the next Moin Khan or Rashid Latif if not Adam Gilchrist.

Opinion: A Potential Best Solution

A potential ideal scenario might be to let Adnan Akmal keep in Tests (since he just proved himself in the tests against England), Umar Akmal in T20s (it is with the hope that the mistakes of a makeshift keeper can be overcome in the shortest format) and Sarfraz Ahmed in ODIs. Pakistan’s next assignment might be a series against Bangladesh and that can be considered a possibility for the team to groom this young keeper and make him a permanent in the team.

Read More

Who is the best finisher in ODI cricket?

In the 4th ODI of the recently concluded CB Series, when faced with a task of chasing 13 runs in the last over, MS Dhoni, with his nerveless batting, delivered one of the most sensational victories for India. In doing so, he re-established the fact that cricket might be a team game but the difference between victory and defeat can sometimes be the skill of one man – the finisher.

Read More

Pakistan vs England - ODI Review

My dad often says that life is never a constant; that it is a series of successes and failures. One day you win, the other day you may not. However, the key is not to panic when you fail. Rather, look back at your actions and learn from your mistakes.  It is unforgivable that a failure is not taken as an opportunity for improvement.

England’s tour of UAE has been an excellent reminder of the lesson that dad always taught me. After a 3-0 whitewash in the test series, no cricket pundit gave England a chance in the ODIs.  The odds were stacked heavily against them. England took this as an opportunity to re-assess their game and played with more resolve and determination to come out on top as the better side.


Most experts suggest that a team is the embodiment of their coach’s personality. All great men fight harder when the going gets tough and good coaches have the skill to instill in their players the confidence and willingness to win. No other team is a better example of this than England.

Ever since Mohsin Khan has taken over as Pakistan’s coach, Pakistan has tasted success. But the real test of a coach is when his soldiers are down, wounded and shattered in confidence. This is a testing time for Mohsin Khan and Misbah ul Haq. Imran Khan would probably tell you the same: A great leader is one who has the ability to stand up and fight, especially when the chips are down.

It is true that Pakistan were beaten by England in every department: batting, bowling, fielding and most importantly captaincy. But it is important to analyze every aspect of Pakistan’s defeat to learn why England did well and why Pakistan surrendered so easily.  

This week Cricketing Minds has analyzed the 4-0 whitewash of the Pakistan team against England. 

Batting

The graphs below show the total runs Pakistan and England scored and total wickets lost in different stages of the game.

  

England dominated the first 10 overs by scoring 203 runs for the loss of just 1 wicket in the 4 ODIs combined at 5.075 runs per over. Once known as the best in the business for picking up early wickets, Pakistan are now struggling in the fast bowling department. England on the other hand has found an excellent opening partner in Pietersen for Cook. 
During the same stage of the game, English bowlers were able to pick up 8 Pakistani wickets at a cost of 169 runs only. It matters less that 4 of these wickets came in the first ODI itself and Finn was the chief destroyer, picking up 6 of these wickets. Once again that shows how superior the English fast bowlers performed compared to their counterparts when it came to utilizing the new ball.

Surprisingly Pakistan did slightly better than England between overs 11-20 where Pakistan scored 7 less runs but more importantly lost 3 less wickets too.
This is the stage when Misbah employed his strike bowlers Afridi and Ajmal who were able to contain England and also pick up wickets. But Pakistan was unable to maintain the pressure in the next stage.

In ODIs, the most important phase of the game is the middle stage (Overs 21-35) where a game is usually decided. Unfortunately for Pakistan they lost 12 wickets during this stage of the game which had a major impact on their runrate as well. England on the other hand mastered the middle stage play with the bat by scoring over 300 runs for the loss of just 2 wickets at 5.02 RPO.

For Pakistan to win ODI games, their batsmen have to put a higher price on their wickets and place an importance of occupying the crease during these middle overs. Their only decent performance during this stage of the game came in the 3 ^rd ODI when they scored 68 runs for the loss of only 1 wicket.  
Because Pakistan had already made a mess of their batting by the end of the 35 ^th over, the following stages mattered less because by the start of the 36^th over (mostly with the batting powerplay) Pakistan would be at least 4 wickets down already. [Breakdown of Pak’s scores at the end of 35^th over: 130/10, 151/4, 157/5 and 153/4].

Entering the batting powerplay and last 10 overs with 4-5 wickets down restricts the batsmen to play their shots and not make the best use of the fielding restrictions. Hence, only two things can happen as a result: (i) Your batsmen play too many shots to accelerate and lose wickets as a result OR (ii) Play defensive cricket and let the run rate to drop even further which puts extra pressure to accelerate during last 10 overs.

The best way to counter this problem would be to keep at least 7-8 wickets in hand when entering the last 15 overs. Which is exactly what England did and hence they were successful throughout. [Breakdown of Eng’s scores at the end of 35^th over: 169/2, 154/2, 203/1 and 158/4].

Analysis of boundaries hit

This table shows the % of runs scored in boundaries by each batsman.  It must be a shame for Umar Akmal to sit at the bottom of this table despite being known for his aggressive nature. I am not surprised to see Malik and Misbah at the bottom as well. Malik has not been able to middle the ball ever since his forceful comeback. Misbah on the other hand needs to find innovative ways to score more boundaries and rotate the strike in ODIs rather than his usual ‘tuk-tuk’. Defensive play may bring him success in Tests, but Mohali 2011 should have been a lesson for him that the ‘tuk-tuk’ strategy mostly fails in ODIs. 

Partnerships

Partnerships are crucial in any format of cricket. I am not sure why the Pakistan batsmen fail to acknowledge the importance of partnerships in ODIs. Pakistan’s best partnership came in the last ODI when Azhar Ali and Asad Shafiq added 111 for the 2^nd wicket. What is noteworthy here is that there were only 4 50+ partnerships for Pakistan during the 4 ODIs. Whereas, England had 9 50+ partnerships. 

 Analysis of Extras Conceded

 

Ajmal has been Pakistan’s standout bowler. But if there is some area of improvement for him then that is ‘extras’. World's No 1 ODI Bowler will not be proud of being at the top of this list.

Pakistan’s fast bowlers’ lack of ability to pick up early wickets has already been mentioned as a reason for concern. But they also need to work on their wides and no-balls, especially Wahab Riaz who conceded 5 extras in just 7 overs. 

Analysis of Maidens bowled

 

This table shows the percentage of maidens bowled by the Pakistani and English bowlers during the 4 ODIs. The top four slots are occupied by the English bowlers. This shows that despite favorable conditions the Pakistani bowlers were unable to choke the English batsmen by drying up the runs. The strategy of containing opposition batsmen and drying up the flow of runs was successful against Zimbabwe, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh last year. However, against quality batsmen such as Cook, Pietersen and Trott this strategy was clearly difficult to implement. Hence, Pakistan needs to think of other strategies to pick up wickets. 

Other interesting stats

Pakistan averaged 20.48 runs per wicket and 27.6 balls per wicket which is extremely poor and reflects inconsistency and the fact that the batsmen were unable to build partnerships. England should be commended for their efforts with the ball throughout the 4 ODIs.

Pakistan can take pride in dropping fewer catches than England. Umar Akmal dropped Cook off Afridi in the 2^nd ODI and Azhar Ali dropped Pietersen in the 3^rd ODI. Both of them went on to score match winning centuries. Umar Akmal also missed a stumping chance of Bopara in the 1^st ODI who went on to build a century partnership with captain Cook.

England dropped 5 catches: Patel dropped Afridi in the 1^st ODI. Broad couldn’t hold on to a tough chance offered again by Afridi in 2^nd ODI. Kieswetter did an Akmal when he dropped Umar Akmal in 3^rd ODI. Cook and Pietersen were guilty of dropping Rahman and Misbah in the last ODI. 

Conclusion

Pakistan failed to perform with the bat, ball and most importantly with the mind. Perhaps, Misbah can learn from Jayawardne who is being appreciated and rewarded for his aggressive captaincy and field settings despite having weaker bowling resources.

Here is something for your food for thought: It were these same English batsmen who struggled on the same surface against the same bowlers a few days ago when the field was up. So what changed during these few days?

The answer to that question in my opinion is “defensive captaincy”. Feel free to share your opinion with us and the answer to the above food for thought question.

Follow us on Twitter: www.twitter.com/CricketingMinds

Read More

Pakistan batsmen vs England bowlers - 2012 ODIs

In Part 1: we used numbers to calculate the probabilities of English batsmen being dismissed by various Pakistani bowlers and their modes of dismissals.

Now we use the same methodology to do a Pak Batsmen v Eng Bowlers analysis.

(NOTE: England doesn’t have a Left arm Fast bowler (LF) in their ODI squad and hence there is no column for a LF in these tables)

Read More

England Batsmen vs Pakistan Bowlers - 2012 ODIs

On 13^th Feb when Gul runs in to bowl, what are the chances of him dismissing Cook? What are the chances of Cook getting bowled or LBW?

This week Cricketing Minds has taken a slightly different approach towards statistical analysis and compiled tables which would list out the probability of each Pakistan bowler dismissing an English Batsman and the mode of their dismissal.

So when you’d be watching the game live secretly in college or office cubicle or while relaxing on your couch, you can use these tables to predict the fall of wickets and mode of dismissals.

Read More

VVS Laxman - Truly Great or Truly Average?

As India succumbed to another 4-0 whitewash, fans and critics are trying to figure out who to blame for this miserable performance. A lot of the focus has been on the performances of VVS Laxman, who is considered to be India’s all-time greats, and part of the “big three”.  

Team mates and coaches have stepped in on his defence, saying that just like any other great player Laxman will bounce back when it matters most. The fact that the team has failed as a whole has also helped Laxman, since there are people who suggest that the team should be blamed as a whole and not one person.

The true question, however, is that should Laxman be considered as a batting great of his generation? Here at CricketingMinds, we believe that Laxman is just an average batsman in the context of other great players, and we have the numbers to prove it.

Some of the standards shared by the greats of the game: 

1 -  Minimum of 20 test centuries

2 -  A century against all test playing nations

3 -  High rate of scoring centuries 

4 -  Low rate of scoring ducks

5 -  Away average of  > 40

6 - Overall average of > 50

7 - Consistent performance

A first look at Laxman’s statistics shows that he is below the mark in 5 of the first 6 criteria listed above. Let’s look at each piece one by one. 

Minimum of 20 Test Centuries - FAIL

A great batsman is one who is able to convert starts into big valuable knocks. Tendulkar, Ponting, Kallis and Dravid have over 35 Test centuries.

Laxman has played 134 test matches and scored only 17 centuries. Rahul Dravid, on the other hand, has scored 36 centuries and has only 33 more matches. Laxman will have to score a century in less than every 2 matches just to equal that number. In fact, even Virender Sehwag, who has only played 96 test matches, has scored 22 centuries in a relatively shorter career.

A century against all Test playing nations - FAIL

Tendulkar, Dravid, Ponting and Kallis have all scored big in all conditions against all Test playing nations. Laxman on the other hand has failed to score a century against England (Hs: 75 in Ahemadabad) and minnows Bangladesh (Hs: 69* in Chittagong). Note that some of the greats like Matthew Hayden, Sehwag and Inzamam fail to satisfy this criterion but do well on the other criteria – all of them have more than 20 test centuries.

High rate of scoring centuries - FAIL

Laxman takes approximately 13.11 innings to score every century. This happens to be almost twice as many innings per century than some of the following players:

Batsman	# Innings/Century
Tendulkar	6.05
Ponting	6.85
Kallis	6.2
Dravid	7.8
Avg for top 66 centurions	8.2

As can be seen by the table above, the number of innings that Laxman takes to score a century is really high. In fact, amongst the top 66 Test centurions, only Alec Stewart does worse than Laxman – scoring a century every 15.7 innings.

This begs the question then, why do the so called experts of the game (and fans alike) talk about Laxman as being a batsman who “makes big scores” and punishes the opposition when he’s on song, when he’s only scored 17 centuries in 134 test matches? It’s simple; he has done it when the spotlight was on him.

 

Laxman has happened to have made a couple of big scores against Australia at times when he was about to get the axe. The media starts talking about the end of Laxman, and in his last chance, he happens make a big score in an innings which is nothing short of commendable. When this happens, it seems that the cricket experts are willing to forgive the number of times Laxman has failed to live up to the expectations. No one remembers his repeated failures and instead choose to focus on his heroics of one innings. It’s just part of human nature, everyone likes a comeback.

Low rate of scoring ducks - FAIL

A great batsman is one who is considered a prize wicket by his opposition, and one who knows how to put his opposition on the back foot early on. VVS Laxman, however, knows how to give his opponents an early drinks break and happens to be quite kind to the scorers as well. Laxman has a really low number of innings per duck, and compared to some of the top batsmen of his generation, he’s known to make quiet exits on a frequent basis.

On average, Laxman registers a duck every 15.9 innings.

Batsman	# Innings/Duck
Tendulkar	22.07
Ponting	17.1
Kallis	19.5
Dravid	35.5
Avg for top 66 centurions	20.1
Laxman	15.9

Overall Away Average of > 40 - PASS

Laxman passes the criterion of an overall away Test average of over 40 to be a great batsman. He has scored heavily against the mighty Australians in Australia where he averages 44.14. He averages the most in Sri Lanka (48.18) and West Indies (47.75).

What is notable is that Laxman doesn’t average more than 50 in any country except at Home and he averages only 39 in Bangladesh. This shows he hasn’t been able to capitalize against weak oppositions.   

Overall Average of > 50 - FAIL. 

This is perhaps the most arguable of the points we are seeking to make. Yet, it is the most critical one in this argument, since it ties in very closely with the most subjective criteria 

A great player is known to be consistent, and can cash in with a run of big scores when in form. The batting greats from Laxman’s era, such as Sachin Tendulkar, Ricky Ponting, Jacque Kallis, Rahul Dravid, all have had not just good series, but great years when they’ve made bucket load of runs.

Ponting during his golden run had back to back years with averages of over 70 during 2002-2003 and scored over 1000 runs in 2005-2006.

Kallis averages the most amongst these great batsmen (57.02 from 150 Test matches).

Dravid has averaged over 50 in Tests for 5 continuous years (2002-2006). This speaks volume about Dravid’s class. In 2003 Dravid averaged over a 100 including a match winning 233 and 72* vs Australia at Adelaide. 

Using numbers to prove Tendulkar’s greatness would be just waste of space.

VVS Laxman, on the otherhand, has not managed to achieve an average of 50 despite playing 134 Test matches, a mark that top players have been able to maintain despite extended patches of poor runs in their careers.

Consistency

(a) Runs scored: Year-by-Year
 
Only once during his 17 year career has Laxman hammered over 1000 runs in a calendar year (2008). To prove the point of Laxman’s lack of consistency, in 2007 and 2009 Laxman couldn’t even score 500 Test runs.

Tendulkar has pounded over 1000 Test runs in a calendar year 6 times in his career. Tendulkar was most consistent between 1997 and 2002, when he scored 1000 or more runs 4 times.

Dravid on the other hand has worked hard to score 1000 or more Test runs in a calendar year 3 times in his career.

Kallis and Ponting have achieved this 5 times in their careers; With Ponting scoring back-to-back 1000+ runs in 2002-2003 and again in 2005-2006.

(b) Average (Home, Away and Overall): Year-by-Year

The table below shows that Laxman has averaged a mere 24.06 for the first four years of his career, spanning from 1996-1999. It was only after this point that he started making meaningful contributions to the team. In 2000, his away average spiked to 87, but that was not a result of consistency, but rather one good performance against australia where he scored a century. Even then, he was unable to get his team over the line.

A more general observation, Laxman during the peak of his career, never seemed to have a purple patch where he would be on a tear of scoring runs at an average of 70+ for a couple of years. His best year was in 2003, where he averaged 85, but that was followed by an out of form calendar year performance with an average of 32.06. His average at home was 18.88, which is more significant because India played more matches at home that year.

His next best year was in 2009, but once again, it wasn’t because Laxman played spectacularly throughout the year and dominated oppositions repeatedly, but rather because of a condensed schedule where he played only six matches in the entire year. This good year came for him after a gap of 6 years; again showing his lack of consistency. It also shows that he has never really been a threat to his opposition on a regular basis.

Note that we have saved Laxman from some embarrassment by excluding his performance in the 3 Tests he has played so far in 2012.

(c) Percentage of runs scored in last 6 series:

Indian Batsmen %'s in Last 6 Series
Laxman	Dravid	Sachin
12.24	16.09	14.22

In India’s last 6 series, Dravid has been their main man – scoring 16.09 % of the team runs. Whereas Laxman’s contribution is worth just 12.24% which is lower than both Sachin & Dravid’s contribution.
NOTE: These stats take into account all the innings played which resulted in India being all out, chased a score successfully in the 3^rd or 4^th innings or the case where the batsman was dismissed. There was a case or two where India just played out 30 overs to secure a draw.

% of Team Total	Laxman	Dravid	Sachin
>30%	4	6	3
20-30%	3	5	6
10-20%	6	9	5
<10%	20	15	14

In India’s last 6 series, on 20 occasions Laxman has scored less than 10% of the team total which is the highest compared to Dravid (15) and Sachin (14). 
Note that Sachin played less games than Dravid or Laxman and hence he has scored less than 10% runs of the team 14/28 times, Dravid 15/35 times, and Laxman 20/33 times.

These stats reflect the mediocrity of Laxman and why he is the likeliest candidate, amongst India’s big 3, to be shown the exit door.

(d) 4th innings analysis

Indian players in 4th innings
	Laxman	Sachin	Dravid	Ganguly	Sehwag
Overall	40.76	38.75	40.78	37.56	30.28
Wins	100.5	72.55	56.77	70.75	40.44
Wins + draws	83.87	53.1	67.68	85.83	38
Losses	21.61	23.4	21.22	20.52	16.55

Laxman can be considered India’s most dependable when it comes to 4^th innings despite his recent slump. He averages more than Sachin, Sehwag and Ganguly and is par with Dravid’s 4^th innings efforts. What is notable is Laxman’s performance in the 4^th innings when India has won – he averages over 100 which is much better than Sachin, Dravid, Ganguly and Sehwag. This would give the reader an impression that Laxman plays crucial match winning knocks in the 4^th innings.

But how true is this statement?

(e) Laxman in Match-Winning Innings

For all the 50+ scores of Laxman, a match winning innings is one in which:
India has won and either:
(i) Laxman has scored more than 25% of the teams runs in 1^st, 2^nd or 3^rd innings, or
(ii) scored a 50+ 4^th innings total in a successful run chase.

Laxman has batted 259 times in Test cricket and only 17 times he has managed to produce a Match-Winning knock satisfying the above criteria.

This translates to show that when Laxman goes out to bat, the probability of him scoring a match winning 50+ score is 0.065 (6.5%)

(f) Laxman in Match-Saving Innings

For all the 50+ scores of Laxman, a match saving innings is one in which:
India has drawn and either:

(i) In 1^st or 2^nd innings: Laxman has batted during a crisis (collapse) OR
(ii) In 1^st or 2^nd innings or 3^rd innings: Laxman has scored a 100 which is more than 25% of the team’s total OR
(iii) In 1^st or 2^nd innings: Laxman has scored a 50 which is more than 40% of the team’s total OR
(iv) In 3^rd innings: Laxman has batted during a crisis (Note: There should be an attempted 4^th innings chase by the opposition) OR
(v) In 3^rd innings: Laxman has scored a 50 which is more than 30% of the team’s total (Note: There should be an attempted 4^th innings chase by the opposition) OR
(vi) In 4^th innings: Laxman has scored 50 or more which is more than 30% of the team’s total in order to save India from a loss.

Out of the 259 times Laxman has batted, he has produced a match saving innings only 11 times which satisfies the above criteria.
This translates to show that when Laxman goes out to bat, the probability of him scoring a match saving 50+ score is 0.042 (4.2%)

(You can contact us to see the full list of these match winning and match saving innings)

Conclusion

Contrary to popular belief that Laxman is a great batsman, the numbers in this article argue that Laxman might have shown glimpses of greatness but has failed to live up to the standards set by the great batsmen of his generation.

The table below summarizes Laxman’s failure to grab the chance of being named amongst legendary batsmen like Tendulkar, Ponting, Kallis and Dravid.

Criteria	Judgement
Min. 20 Test Centuries	Fail
Test Century vs All Test Playing Nations	Fail
High Rate of Scoring 100s	Fail
Low Rate of Scoring 0s	Fail
Away Average > 40	Pass
Overall Average > 50	Fail
Consistency	Poor

Follow us on Twitter: @CricketingMinds

CricketingMinds: www.cricketingbrains.blogspot.com - Proudly associated with accredited cricket media website PakPassion at: www.pakpassion.net

Read More