Adaptation: Asian batsman overseas vs AUS/ENG/SA/WI/NZ in Asia

[War]

The big question is: Do Asian teams have a better record outside of the s-continent than non-Asian teams in the s-continent?


I was listening to Sunil Gavaskar speak on commentary in a champions league game recently. He was defending India's batsmen recent struggles overseas on bouncy decks, in which he claimed any batting team right now would struggle if they face high-class, fast-bowling on a bouncy surface, whether its an Asian or non-Asian team.

That's a pretty fair statement I'd say since it was only recently AUS were rolled over for 47 and I'd back S Africa attack to be able to do that, to most batting line-ups in the world currently. On current form really only S Africa or England's top 6 is technically solid enough to handle high quality fast-bowling in the world game.

However negotiating pace for Indian batsmen and Asian is their historical Achilles heel, just as how it is for non-Asian batsmen when they face spin on s-continent turners. This why many for example would still have India favourites to beat England in the upcoming test series, even with the return of Pietersen etc.

But it made me think in a historical context, which sets of players of the world game demographic in cricket history, has a better record of adapting and overcoming their traditional Achilles heel's.



Asian batsmen:

Off my head in test cricket i know both India and Pakistan and have won a few test series in England: India (1971, 1986, 2007), Pakistan (1987, 1992, 1996). But no such successes in S Africa or Australia, while S Lanka have yet to taste any test success in those area's.

India have also won their last two test tours in the West Indies (2006, 2011), but we all know this was in a time in West Indies decline from their previous lofty heights. PAK although they had some great battles with the windies during their glory days (should have won that famous 1988 tour to the windies) have yet to win a series in the Caribbean.

Shorter formats i believe India won world series in 1985 and 2008, while winning the inaugural t20 world cup in 2007 in S Africa.

Pakistan won the 92 world cup in AUS, world series 1996, 09 t20 w-cup in England and their 2-1 odi-series win in Australia 2002 was one of the VERY few ODI series AUS lost in more than 10 years during the glory years.

SRI i don't believe have any other notable overseas ODI series triumphs other than to that 2-1 2010 series win in AUS 2010.



Rest of the world batsmen:

With regards to the non-Asian teams, well its obvious England and New Zealand have to worst records in the sub-continent in all formats, since IND/PAk/ became forces @ home since the 1970s and SRI in the late 90s.

NZ outside of a 1-0 series win in Pakistan 1969/70, have zero success in the regions big boys since they have been a force @ home.

ENG were okay up until the start of the 1980s, since they along with AUS/SA/WI have won big test series in India, since became a force @ home
in 76/77 (ENG), 83/84 & 74/75 (WI), 2000 (SA) and 2004 (AUS) respectively.

Otherwise other than that famous 2000/01 winter, when England won test series in Pakistan and SRI Lanka - times have been poor all over Asia in all formats for English teams.


AUS for example although they had struggled to win a test series in India much after 1969, except for the famous win in 2004. Between 1998 -2011, AUS actually have won every completed ODI series or tournament that they have played in India.

Their last test official test series in Pakistan 1998 was won. And, although although they found Ajmal to be very difficult to handle in recent years, still managed to win ODI series vs PAK in UAE 2009 & 2012.

Similarly in SRI Lanka, won their last two ODI series in that nation (2004, 2011) and test series 2004.

S Africa have been very competitive in India since readmission, drawing a fair few series which they probably could have won. While losing in 96 & 2004.

Not fully sure about S Africa's limited overs record throughout the region though. Nor their test record in Pakistan or Sri Lanka, although i remember them winning in Pakistan 1998 in a famous test series.

The Windies in their heyday never lost in India or Pakistan up until 1997, expect for a 1-0 defeat in 1979/80 to India mainly because their best players were unavailable due to the world series fiasco.


So based on this evidence the non-Asian teams historically tend to adapt better more often than not, when they venture into enemy territory & i don't expect to see a major change in this dynamic any time soon.

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

I'd agree with a lot of this but I think there's a lot of stuff missed out. for one, obviously these batsmen had to face particular bowlers and I think that counts.

for example, isolate it to performances in england and new zealand, the seaming countries that lacked and outstanding attack over most of the last 20 years (england not now) and laxman, mohammad yousuf, inzamam, ganguly, dravid and tendulkar all feature with pretty high averages.

(in england the big name asian batsmen have all out performed ponting, kallis and lara)

whereas if you look at the batting records in sri lanka during murali's era they're not quite as high in comparison to asian batsmen in england/new zealand.

I think overall I'd agree, there are perhaps more notable examples of asian batsmen dominating at home and then struggling away. However, I think bringing in the 80s west indies side and the late 90s to mid 2000s australia side is going to skew things a bit in favour and I think the relative strength of the bowling units is going to come into play.

just look at pakistan, we'll never know what was really going on with the results but there's no doubt about their ability to make england and australia (both in australia and england) looked very sub par against swing bowling.

Also, if we look back to england v india, the whitewash series, england had as much trouble with swing as india did in the first two matches. they were in serious trouble at 6-66 in the 1st test 2nd innings and 6-88 in the 2nd test 1st innings. it was india's inability to get the old ball to move in humid conditions that really screwed then in the first two tests, not their weakness against swing.

I've said before, good swing bowling is very difficult for anyone to score against, it just fits a narrative when asian teams fail and suits everyone, however, overal yeah, I'd say your average non-asian batsman are is better at seeing it out than the asian ones.

 

[Satan666]

for example, isolate it to performances in england and new zealand, the seaming countries that lacked and outstanding attack over most of the last 20 years (england not now) and laxman, mohammad yousuf, inzamam, ganguly, dravid and tendulkar all feature with pretty high averages.

(in england the big name asian batsmen have all out performed ponting, kallis and lara)

Interesting, if memory serves me right I read somewhere that Tendulkar averages 40 odd in England. I am pretty sure that Lara averages high in England, do you have any stats to back up this claim?

whereas if you look at the batting records in sri lanka during murali's era they're not quite as high in comparison to asian batsmen in england/new zealand.

Again some stats are needed to justify this.

I think overall I'd agree, there are perhaps more notable examples of asian batsmen dominating at home and then struggling away. However, I think bringing in the 80s west indies side and the late 90s to mid 2000s australia side is going to skew things a bit in favour and I think the relative strength of the bowling units is going to come into play.

It obviously will, since they both were dominant teams. I agree lets conveniently forget those 30 years then!

just look at pakistan, we'll never know what was really going on with the results but there's no doubt about their ability to make england and australia (both in australia and england) looked very sub par against swing bowling.

Well I am not sure what we need to agree on but true Pak over the years have bowled excellent in Aus/Eng with guys like Akram/Waqar/Imran!

Also, if we look back to england v india, the whitewash series, england had as much trouble with swing as india did in the first two matches. they were in serious trouble at 6-66 in the 1st test 2nd innings and 6-88 in the 2nd test 1st innings. it was india's inability to get the old ball to move in humid conditions that really screwed then in the first two tests, not their weakness against swing.

In swinging conditions Indian bowlers cant swing anything its their inability to adapt to the English conditions which was responsible for the whitewash!

[/QUOTE]

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

Interesting, if memory serves me right I read somewhere that Tendulkar averages 40 odd in England. I am pretty sure that Lara averages high in England, do you have any stats to back up this claim?



Again some stats are needed to justify this.

you can use statsguru to check, it's quite easy. tendulkar averages 54 in england, lara averages 48.

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

it obviously will, since they both were dominant teams. I agree lets conveniently forget those 30 years then!

it's not convenient because including obviously dominant forces creates outliers in statistics. people are very quick to exclude bangladesh when talking about murali because he was so dominant that it could potentially destroy the stats. I'm not suggesting we dismiss the timeframe but watch that performances against those teams don't end up warping the stats.

In swinging conditions Indian bowlers cant swing anything its their inability to adapt to the English conditions which was responsible for the whitewash!

in what way were they unable to adapt? the point anyway was that with englands top order failing twice in the first two tests, it's a little inaccurate to say englands batsmen were better than india's if we're just going for a vague generalisation. maybe their tail was a lot better and maybe their bowlers were a lot better, but pound for pound the two top sixes were not miles apart in the first two tests so conclusions should maybe drawn from bowling ability rather than batting.

 

[Satan666]

you can use statsguru to check, it's quite easy. tendulkar averages 54 in england, lara averages 48.

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

Interesting, thanks for posting this table. It actually shows that guys from AUS/WI did better than Asian batsmen, Dravid however was excellent he averages way more than Tendulkar.

 

[shravi]

*yawn* we get it Untouchable, you are the son of Satan, the protector of the underworld, wtv. The majority of people on PC support India so you don't like India. The majority of people on PC love Sachin so you don't like him. It's getting old now. Crawl back to your parents' basement already.

 

[sami ullah khan]

I think Asian Batsmen have over the years struggled more against bounce than swing in overseas condition. Inzamam has done well in England but his record in south Africa and Australia is not that great although he used to play pace pretty well. He struggled against Warne a lot if my memory serves me right.

 

[Epic]

Well it's very well known fact that going from high bounce to low bounce is easier than vice versa and I'd say that's just about why none of the sub-continent teams have won a series in Australia(not 100% sure on this one ).

 

[spooony]

Just SA Australia and SA as England is useless in India and in the desert. Think its simple. SA and Aus handle spin better than what they can handle pace. Not to forget the fact they use a collective team effort where a sub continent team usually start to give up after losing 6 wickets

 

[War]

you can use statsguru to check, it's quite easy. tendulkar averages 54 in england, lara averages 48.

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo.

Not trying to turn this into a Tendy vs Lara debate. But when looking at the records of both greats in england, its should be noted that Lara in general faced far superior english attacks, in english conditions than Tendy.

Lara really only faced average England attack in the 1995 test series. But in his next two tours in 2000 (although he had an eye problem durign this series) and 2004 he faced some of the best English attack of the last 20 years - probably stronger than the much hyped current crop of bowlers.

In 2000 Lara faced Gough/Caddick @ the peak of their bowlers, backed up by Dominic Cork/Craig White. While in 2004, he faced the Hoggard/Harmison/Flintoff/Jones quartet that eventually won England the 05 ashes a year later.

Tendy faced average English attacks in 1990 & 96. While come 2002, Gough/Caddick were either not around or passed it. In 2007, the ashes 05 quarter had broken up. Its only during the 2011 series, did Tendy really face a strong English attack @ home for the first time in his long career.

 

[spooony]

You must remember the Windies team went to shyt after the bouncer restrictions and over rate laws. Lara have been carrying them more and they were more dependent on him to save matches or maybe put them in a better position.

Sachin had some support of Ganguly, Dravid and one of my favorites VVS Laxman. They had a good bowling attack and Kumble. It was really suprising that they did not live up to reputation considering the teams they had. They had a very strong side. Its just when their morale drops it drops till they go home unless SAchin do something magical or play a wonderful knock to lift them and give them that inspiration. But sadly a lot of times it did not happen and no one else stepped forward and lift their hands to lift them instead of Sachin. If they took every game as a new beginning they would have done better but unfortunately their morale can hamper their tour performances very quickly.

That is why its so hard to go win in Australia as they will break you down till you rise to the occasion or crack and falter under the pressure. I think Australia is the hardest place to win a series.