Younus Khan,s Best innings

[Dare]

Younis has scored some double hundreds that counted way more than this 300+.

 

[ali_ed2001]

Lets see...according to cricinfo statsguru thing..averages of both players on "away" grounds.

KP in AUS: 54
YK in AUS: 44

KP in IND: 41
YK in IND: 77

KP in NZ: 43
YK in NZ: 70

KP in SL: 25
YK in SL: 57

KP in WI: 45
YK in WI: 23

KP in PAK: 34
YK in ENG: 52

YK averages 34 in SAF, which is not good but KP has not even played a test in SAF....and as mentioned by angryangy, KP has never had to face likes of Ambrose and Walsh in WI like YK did..

So your claim that Younis Khan is just an average batsman is not right...he's scored well in Australia, NZ, and ENG...and let's not forget he averages 57 in SL and 77 in IND facing likes of Murali, Kumble, Harbhajan.....

 

[King Pietersen]

Why the hell has this turned into KP vs Younis Khan? I just said that there's no way that Khan should be rated ahead of the players I named. Pietersen's a better batsman as well, YK may have a better record in certain countries, but KP's far more talented, and is very early into his Test career. He's played just over a 1/5th of his games against Warne and McGrath, and still averages over 50. Younis Khan benefits massively from playing alot of his games in the subcontinent, which if you've grown up on the pitches, they're very easy to score on first up, especially those in Pakistan, which generally are roads. Pietersen will end his career as a far better player than Khan, he's not reached anything like his prime yet.

 

[aus_maestro]

but the fact he's been made #1 in the world after playing his 1st Test in 2 years is ludicrous.

Yeah, he's been made number one, and its all his fault for hitting a tripple hundred to rescue his team. I don't see how you ranting on about the ICC ranking system has much relevance to the subject of this thread, which was to congratulate him. Why not write the guys who can do something about it, a nice little letter. Here ya go:

The International Cricket Council
P.O.Box 500070
Dubai
United Arab Emirates

 

[ali_ed2001]

so if you're going to scrutinize Younis Khan's away record, then why not scrutinize KP's away record ? KP has not done anything good away, he's also played well on pitches that he's grown up on and suited to. What has he done in SL, Pak and IND ? pitches not familiar to him ? which according to you seem to be batting paradises. whereas Younis Khan atleast averages around mid to high 40's on pitches that he's not suited to in SAF, AUS, Eng and NZ combined..

 

[Dare]

Dan its equally difficult for Younis to play in England, South Africa, Australia, New Zealand as is for Pietersen to play in India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka.

 

[King Pietersen]

Yeh, you're right, averaging 50 in Australia in a series where England got whitewashed 5-0 by the best team in the world is nothing. Pietersen struggles in the subcontinent, so what, he's very early into his Test career, he'll come good eventually. As I said, he's not anywhere near his prime yet, and he's still averaging over 50 in Test cricket. The guy's getting better and better, and will end his career as one of the greats of the game, Younis Khan won't.

Averaging over 40 in India, over 40 in New Zealand, over 40 in West Indies and over 50 in Australia is not a bad record. He struggled in Pakistan right at the start of his career, that was his first Test away tour. Then his tour of Sri Lanka was his only period of poor form, which continued into New Zealand before he made a hundred. So his away record is not bad at all.

Dare, I know, and Pietersen averages higher than Younis in places that are different to the conditions they're used to. Pietersen averaging 41, and Younis averaging 40. Pietersen's the better player, in terms of results and in terms of talent.

 

[Dare]

Well in my eyes by time Younis ends his career he will be considered on of the greats of the game. He will probably end up being the best Test batsman out of Pakistan!

 

[ali_ed2001]

Averaging over 40 in India, over 40 in New Zealand, over 40 in West Indies and over 50 in Australia is not a bad record. He struggled in Pakistan right at the start of his career, that was his first Test away tour. Then his tour of Sri Lanka was his only period of poor form, which continued into New Zealand before he made a hundred. So his away record is not bad at all.

Exactly. Just like that for Younis Khan, averaging over 40 in Australia, around 70 in NZ, over 50 in ENG, over 50 in SL and over 70 in IND is not a bad record at all and makes him more than an "average" player. His record in SAF and WI is not good (just like KP's record in Pak and SL) because that was also a period of his poor form, and the fact that he was up against the like of Walsh and Amborse, and the likes of Pollock in his prime.

 

[Insomniac]

He won't score 5 runs in the rest of the series, all the Pakistan pitches are flat as a glass table. I imagine he'll make another big score in the next game, on another pitch where over 1000 runs are scored in the 2 sides first innings, and he'll be proclaimed as a God of cricket, allowing his already inflated average to rise further. He's the epitomy of the subcontinental 'farce' batsman that Aussie Ben was ranting about before getting banned.

I will hold you to that.

Funny coming from someone who has a test match ground in their country who has 6 draws in its last 6 test matches.

I speak of Lord's

zMario added 1 Minutes and 59 Seconds later...

Very insecure? This thread's about Younis Khan, who happens to have been made #1 in the world thanks this 1 innings on a road of a pitch. I've not doubted the fact that it's a good innings, any triple ton is a great effort, but the fact he's been made #1 in the world after playing his 1st Test in 2 years is ludicrous.

And why so?

He's consistent, he has runs in his last tests?

He's just continuing where he left off in 2007.

Honestly, just accept that it was a good innings, played well under pressure.

 

[King Pietersen]

You've taken that out of context. I didn't mean he won't score more than 5 runs. FB said 'he could score just another 5 runs in the rest of this seres', to which I was disagreeing, and saying that he will score more runs, as the majority of pitches in Pakistan are as flat as anything.

That's 1 ground, Lord's is the only non result ground in England, the others all offer something for the batsmen.

I've accepted it was a good innings Mario, quote me to prove where i've said it wasn't a good innings. I even said in this thread it was a good innings. But the ICC rankings should be an indication of form currently, and Younis hasn't been in form in the past year, because Pakistan haven't played a Test. I'm not saying that's his fault, it's the ICC's, but I can't see how Younis Khan deserves to be #1 in the rankings considering that was his first Test since 2007. That's my point, I'm taking nothing away from the innings, other than it was on a pitch that seemingly offered nothing for the bowlers until the end of the 5th day.

 

[Will_NA]

Thing is, out of those 6 Lords draws, I don't remember one that wasn't taken to the 4th innings which couldn't be said for the Pak-SL test.

 

[Insomniac]

You've taken that out of context. I didn't mean he won't score more than 5 runs. FB said 'he could score just another 5 runs in the rest of this seres', to which I was disagreeing, and saying that he will score more runs, as the majority of pitches in Pakistan are as flat as anything.

That's 1 ground, Lord's is the only non result ground in England, the others all offer something for the batsmen.

I've accepted it was a good innings Mario, quote me to prove where i've said it wasn't a good innings. I even said in this thread it was a good innings. But the ICC rankings should be an indication of form currently, and Younis hasn't been in form in the past year, because Pakistan haven't played a Test. I'm not saying that's his fault, it's the ICC's, but I can't see how Younis Khan deserves to be #1 in the rankings considering that was his first Test since 2007. That's my point, I'm taking nothing away from the innings, other than it was on a pitch that seemingly offered nothing for the bowlers until the end of the 5th day.

But here's the thing - this was an abnormal situation in which Pakistan did not play a test for a year

Who would have expected this?

Now we have test cricket planned this year, we tour SL for 3 tests and 5 ODIs, and then NZ tour Pakistan, and then Pakistan travels to Australia.

Normally it would be of form currently, but really no one is to blame, other than the Aussies

Also at Lord's - Sri Lanka v England - did not go to a 4th innings
England v Pakistan - Pakistan only have to bat about 78 overs, easily accomplished.
England v West Indies - 22 overs into the 4th innings - a bit pointless?
England v India - very close match of course, the one where an umpire got a decision wrong, think Panesar bowling?
England v New Zealand - not even close to a 4th innings, since Vettori can hold a bat, and Flynn was well set
England v South Africa - no 4th innings, SA following on making 393/3. Flat pitch?

So really, out of these 6 draws, 3 never went to a 4th innings, and 1 only went 22 overs into a 4th innings.

Hmm.

 

[Jit]

Dan you are always on with Kevin saying how he is the best, yes he is a great player but not the best. Younis is a great player and it takes a lot of skill to get 300 in a test cricket no matter what team or what kind of pitch.

 

[mattfb]

You've taken that out of context. I didn't mean he won't score more than 5 runs. FB said 'he could score just another 5 runs in the rest of this seres', to which I was disagreeing, and saying that he will score more runs, as the majority of pitches in Pakistan are as flat as anything.

Yes, I did, but I didn't mean 5 runs literally. I'm just saying making him the world number 1 batsmen when as far as we know he could be very inconsistent in his next few tests is stupid.