e5

In the Big 3 podcast, Adarsh and Adam discuss England's cricket performance against Pakistan and India. They criticize England for not selecting a team to win the series and instead focusing on future plans and loyalty. They also highlight the issues with England's batting and bowling strategies, particularly when it comes to bowling to tailenders. The hosts suggest making changes to the team, including removing certain players and considering replacements for Stokes. They emphasize the importance of considering context when looking at statistics. Hello and welcome to the Big 3 podcast with Adarsh and Adam. In this podcast, me and Adam take you through all things cricket. And in today's frame of discussion, we are in a very depressed mood, as both of our sides have been pretty abysmally. So, starting off with the lesser of the two evils, England versus Pakistan. Pakistan won by nine wickets in what was a 2-1 victory to them in the entire series. And yeah, it was just a show which no one expected, as was the Indian New Zealand series. But on this topic, I just think that it came as a surprise for everyone. And I think most of all, the new selectors for Pakistan are happy that they haven't lost their jobs within two hours. Yeah, I think one thing I will give credit to the Pakistani selectors is they respected the integrity of a test series. So, even though you can argue that it was a knee-jerk or whatever, and it wasn't like a foolproof plan, they did try like hell to win that series. And I'm a bit envious in a sense, because we used to do that as well. When we used to go like one down or when we were one all going into a deciding test, produce like green tops and win and bring back kind of, in a way that they've brought in the three spinners. And they're okay spinners, but they're not like Meridia Wall or something. We'd bring in like the traditional English seamers, and it would work, and we'd win the series. And that's because a series is important in and of itself. We've tried to be a bit too clever, or not really Rob Key and McConnell, or maybe it's this kid, I don't know which it is, where they just use tests as like a kind of a practice, I would say. The tests that aren't against Australia are a practice. Even against a big side like India, if they selected Merit, Dawson would have been in that squad, for instance, but they picked Bashir, because they thought maybe in two or three years, he'll be brilliant. But the series itself against India seemed to be less important. Here, it was the same. We've had people like Bashir and Holt play, who've hardly played any domestic cricket at all. Now, I do understand that some people don't do great in county cricket, but do well in tests, people like Michael Vaughan, Marcus Triscotic, etc. And some people do brilliant in county cricket, but not in tests, like Graham Hicks, Mark Rambachan, etc. But they did all play a certain number of games in domestic cricket. We've got Bashir and Holt, these are people that played a handful of games. So we have that. And then we also have this issue, where we have players that don't merit the place in the side that are being kept there, because of like a show of face, like a misguided sign of affection in the sense of Crawley never converts 100, so he must have about 550 tests. And Pope had 52 tests now. His average is very poor in an area where he's got very flat pitches. And then you've got the captain, who probably just, if you look in terms of output now, probably doesn't want a place in the side. Now, he's got so much to draw on historically, that he probably merits a place for that reason alone. But if he were just like a robot picking a side that the best in the top seven, he wouldn't really be in it because he doesn't bowl anymore. So he's someone who has now, in the last few years, really struggled against spin. Yeah. So you wouldn't pick him in the top seven. Although this is a very long answer to your question, but Pakistan picked a side to win this series. England didn't. England didn't pick a side to win that series. They picked a side, you know, some picked because of loyalty, and some picked with an eye on the ashes and the future and the future in general. And so that's always going to leave England at a disadvantage, I think, and the sooner they kind of wake up to that, the better. Yeah. And I think there was a statement from Stokes where he said that these are the top six are the best six batters in England or something like that. And that just does not make sense because a batter who's going to do well in India isn't going to do the same in South Africa. So like, if you're planning out for going to different tours, I just got the sense of, well, like you said, Pakistan treated this like a tour which they wanted to win, and they had a plan for it. Even though I criticize them as much as I do, because there's a reason for it. But England seemed like they just went through the motions, at least in this test to me, that, like you were talking about the place, I think, even though maybe Stokes still deserves a place on the side. And that is true. But conversations need to be had in that dressing room because you can't just go on comforting yourself, telling yourself that you're good when literally who, Sajid Khan is scoring more than you, who hasn't played a test in more time than last. I don't know. Karun Nair may have played a test more recently than him. That's how old he is. And he's scoring more runs than you. Both look clueless. And what was the ball that got Stokes out? It was a ball he left on middle stump. Yeah, that was a real sign, wasn't it? Was that a sign of both a technique or was it a sign of a kind of a mind stress, kind of stress affecting him? Or was it both? Maybe I don't know. But that seemed like he's someone who used to be very kind of cool and calm at the crease, a bit like Dodi, where you could always rely on him to think clearly. And in this case, he didn't. Yeah, it just felt to me like, do you remember that Indian England series where I remember the commentator saying that this is the last test, so they want to leave, they want to get on the flight. It felt like in the last innings, they weren't batting to save the test, they were batting to get onto the flight to England as soon as possible. And sadly, even in the second test as well, they were set like 290. And instead of thinking, I've got a plan, let's try this plan, they just thought, we'll try and literally snag every single ball. Yeah. And then he goes to six or get out and that's it. Okay, who cares? Yeah. And there are three tests in hand. And this just feels like they have absolute, I thought and asked Stokes a question. Do you have anything to reflect on here? No, we wouldn't. We wouldn't do anything different. I just cannot come to terms with that statement, because there's a lot of things that you do different. And if you're saying that we won't do anything different, that means you're accepting mediocrity, which they have shown throughout the series. And if I just go through the numbers, then like we mentioned on the last week's podcast, the bowling to tail bit is the real thing which hampers England, because how many runs did they score? See, let's see. Pakistan scored 103 runs extra, England didn't score a run in their first innings. And in the second innings, Pakistan didn't get to bat with their tail. So yeah, around 100 runs you can take and they would take 150 runs. So how much? We should have had a lead of at least 50, but they got a lead of 80. Exactly. I mean, my calculation, I think there's 130 more than they should have gotten with Ali and Sajid Khan. Ali got a 40-odd and Sajid Khan got a 40-odd. And really quick time after tea, I think that killed England. Yeah, they don't seem to have a plan to bowl to tail enders. And you don't really need a plan, just keep on bowling bouncers. And honestly, like you said, Bashir, he looks really ineffective to me. I saw a stat, some guy called Smith, I don't know, he's a correspondent for the BBC. He posted that Nathan Lyon in his entire career averages 30 and Bashir under Stokes averages 32. And he tried to imply somehow that Lyon and Bashir are on the same plane right now. And I just was like, what are you trying to say? Bashir has played eight out of his 14 games in Asian conditions where the ball does everything. And Nathan Lyon has played 70 to 80% of his career on non-spin friendly pitches. And we can also add eight out of his 14 tests in Asian conditions and three against the worst ever West Indian batting lineup in the whole history of that country. Number two, two to number six was the worst they've ever, ever had. And these are guys who had like 100 each in their whole career in domestic cricket. It wasn't, let alone like international hundreds. And so Bashir's record should be much better. Exactly. And you need context numbers. This is the main problem with them, that you're just going to throw numbers in there to back your one in 17 and everything like that. They just do not understand that there are things behind those numbers, which people do understand. And I think taking people for granted is what we're coming to here. But since they might be statistics, these kind of enthusiasts of basketball. The Brazilians as you say? Yeah, the Brazilians. And this, this isn't a digger, maybe the fans, by the way, supported, I respect them, but I'm talking more about the journalists and the players and staff. If they lose, if they lost to Pakistan, they could lose to New Zealand, could lose to India, could lose to Australia. That would be 11 tests plus the one they lost to Sri Lanka just before. That might be 12 tests. It could even, it could be, I don't know, one in, I don't know, three, three in, three in 12 or something. Well, maybe they're talking about that's what they say. Well, three in 12 is better than one in 17. Yeah, show the fractions for that and just make a sign out of that, that we are better in that regard. Yeah, I just, I just think that if there are specific areas where I'd point down to, I'd say you need to remove folk from the clineup. And I think Sam Hane is one I have heard a lot of people say that he should be in the team or Keaton Jennings for a matter of fact that Crawley doesn't look suited to his conditions. And if, if at all, Stokes, there came a situation where you had to replace Stokes, is there an all-rounder who can fit in on his place? Maybe even a spin bowling all-rounder, not Dawson because they clearly don't like him. I mean, Ahmed was supposed to be an all-rounder, but he doesn't really get enough runs. Yeah. So is there anyone? Yeah. So is there anyone? You've got Sam Corran, but they don't fancy him really in, in tests. There's a guy at Somerset called Tom Abel, but he's about 13 now. So maybe it's too late for him. I mean, what they could do is the old West Indian trip from the eighties where they, they use a part-time spin in route and you just pick four paces and what they have to do now, just before they find a proper all-rounder. Yeah. That, that seems like the way forward. And I'm just coming on to Pakistan. I think they deserve credit as well, because honestly, after the first test, it felt like they were just on, on rock bottom and they have somehow managed to win this series, which, which is a huge thing for them. And, and I think the chief orchestrators of their win have been Sajid Khan and Oman Ali and, and they, they have shown the way to, to bowl on the, in these conditions and both of them look, look lively. And did they not have any seamer? I'm just seeing four spinners. Did no seamer bowl? They had to know, didn't they, in the series? No, in the first links, I'm seeing the four bowlers were Sajid Khan, Oman Ali, Zahid Mahmood and Agha Salman. No spinner at all. No pacer, sorry. Yeah. They didn't bowl him. So yeah. So really good plans. And I just think that Masood, Shan Masood deserves a lot of credit. And there was a statement from Ramesh Raja, which I think is another, is another school, basketball school of Pandit 3, where he says, where he asked Shan Masood that after winning, he asked him, how does it feel to have lost six tests in a row before this? And, and, and I just felt like, what, what are they trying to achieve? Does he want him to go back to that shell? And yeah, and I think that's the kind of environment in which these Pakistani players live in and they deserve a huge shout out for doing whatever they have done right now. And credit to them. Because remember in the second test, all the bad defenders were saying, we only lost because of the toss. If he won the toss, he would have won the match. Yeah. Well, England won the toss this side, batted first. A ball turned, they panicked and thought it was like a 130 pitch or something. And just batted like a bunch of tailenders. Yeah. And apart from Jamie Smith. And so it wasn't the toss, was it? It's just England cannot play on any pitch that isn't flat. That's it. It's going to play. And even in the past, we could play on green seam as we can't even do that now, under this regime. We can literally just play on flat pitches. Yeah. And Saud Shoukri showed the way for how it's done. He, he manoeuvred the ball throughout the gap and showed how it's done and, and just coming on towards the player. Yeah, really, really good. And I criticised him in the first test because he didn't go fast enough, but on these pitches, he's shown how, he's shown the way to play. Now, also coming onto the pitches, which I think have been discussed a lot and, and that is a common narrative for every single test England plays in. And I just get the sense of trying to disregard this England loss slash Pakistan win by somehow framing it as only a product of the pitch rather than a product of the skill levels in display or the, or the attitudes in display, which I think is just brash and trying to be an apologist. Because honestly, every team prepares pitches according to what their team strength is. And yeah. And trying to frame it as some sort of pitch doctrining, some sort of corrupt involvement is, is just wrong to me. What do you think about this? Yeah, definitely. Because I remember when Michael Vaughan was complaining about a test, it was a second test in 2021 against India, do you remember? And the ball turned on the first day. And I think Ali got coley with the good ball and he said, oh, this pitch is not acceptable or whatever. And I was thinking, so, so when you were captain, did you prepare turners when India came or when Pakistan came or when Sri Lanka came? I don't think you did, did you? You know, everyone's got the right to prepare their own pitch to suit themselves. And England do it now in a weird way where they just produce really flat tracks. Exactly. So that Crawley and Pope can score runs. So we all do it. I don't know why preparing a really flat pitch, which is, which is like a synthetically flat, which shouldn't be as flat as that. Is any, is any better or more moral than preparing a turner? I think preparing a turner is completely fine. Yeah. And, and when you do that, you breed an environment just like the prospect that unless we get the perfect, we get a perfectly aligned situation where everything was well for our team. If we don't win, it does not matter. And that just means there's a culture now. The World Cup tournament, it doesn't matter. That doesn't count. Okay. Tests in Asia don't count because they're difficult. Tests against Australia don't count if there's rain. So I don't know what counts. Tests at home to West Indies, that counts. And Zimbabwe, the one test in Zimbabwe. And when he pokes 200 against Ireland, that counts. That's a really amazing inning. His, his low scores against Pakistan, they don't count. That goes above Headingley and Stokes. That goes above Headingley and Stokes. Yeah. We don't hate Brendan McCullum or Ben Stokes. Some people think that we hate them, but there's no hate from here. It's just the fact that I personally and Adam as well, that we have been really, really disappointed by the way this bunch have gone about it. Because it's not as if England is completely dying out of a lack of talent. There is some talent there. And, and playing in a way which, which just is like, we are going to do this our way. And if it does not go that way, we won't adapt to the conditions. That just does not work. And we'll have a podcast coming out next week, trying just deconstructing everything about basketball. So stay tuned for that. Yeah. Yeah. So now coming on to the India versus, now coming on to the India versus New Zealand test. I've got no words, basically lost a home test series after 12 years. So is Rohit Sharma India's worst test captain ever? You're on the spot there. Well, I remember as a kid, Tenduka getting the job, or maybe it was like a teenager, and he didn't do that well. So he's the one off the top of my head. And since then, they've had good ones really. And Ganguly was a good captain. Obviously Dhoni was a good captain. I think Tenduka might have done it twice, if I remember right. And I think off the top of my head, I don't want to disrespect Tenduka because he's an all time great as a batsman, but he might have been the worst captain. What would you think? Yeah, but the Tenduka situation was different for me because he had the worst team to captain with and also the fact that Tenduka had a lot on his plate. He was the lone warrior for the Indian team at that point. And for me, in that situation with the team he had, yes, he was a substandard captain. But considering the levels where Virat had left Rohit with, and the returns which we have got now, I think it's a fair assessment to say that even if you look at Kapil, he is the first captain who has captained for more than 15 tests at home and lost four tests for India. In our entire history, like 100 years of test history, he's the only captain to do that. So yeah, I think there's some solid back putting to say he is that. And yeah, just looking on to the test as it happened, I think New Zealand dominated and no one expected this to happen. And just the Kiwis deserve a shout out because Conway played well and Rachan Ravindra looks like class for now. Yes. But the interesting thing is, we did have this one of our predictions we were right about. We said Ravindra is going to be the next kind of fast forward, didn't we? Yeah. At least we got that right. Yeah. And Santner, he just, he comes in, he did not play one game for CSK. But I think the time he spent with Amazon, he just changed it because he was picking seven wickets and six wickets. He was bowling left arm straight darters and everyone was missing them. That Virat Kohli dismissal, which came in right at his front pad and Virat tried to flick it away and got plumb LBW in front. That just felt like that summarized the entire two tests as they have been for India. New Zealand has completely dominated India for the two tests. And if you had to summarize what you see, what would that be for the series? I think it's one of the all time great shocks because when we were talking, we're building up both series like we before. And we both said, Pakistan is a bit more predictable than the journalists are making it. We both said, you said one all and I said a narrow England victory. I said, it's going to be two on to someone and I'll go for England. But we both realized there was a weakness in England. With this one, we both said 3-0 to India. New Zealand had come out of a whitewash in Sri Lanka and it just looked like impossible. It wasn't the New Zealand side of like three years ago, which was a really, really good test side. It's still a good one, but there was no King Williamson either was there. And it just didn't look possible. And you have to just give them credit. Because the last time India lost at home 12 years ago, it was a very good England side. It was a side of Kevin Peterson, Bell, Cook, Broad, Anderson, Yannasar, Swan, Pryor. That was a very good side and it had been number one in the world the year before. This is a different New Zealand side. And I don't think also England had won in India before. They won there with, I think Dowell was the captain. But I don't think New Zealand had won in India before. I think they haven't. It's an amazing feat. Yeah, that's an amazing feat. And there's some serious questions that need to be asked of the Indian contingent because Ashwin looked lackluster and there are huge voices going around saying that, is the time over for Rohit, Jadeja, Ashwin and Kohli. And because they're all in the same kind of batch 34, 35, 36. And it just feels like they're hit the ceiling and now the only way is down for them. Because the way I've seen all of them play, at least I can see that maybe Jadeja has some way to go because he's not really one dimension. But apart from him, Ashwin, if he does not perform in home conditions, he's not going to play anywhere else. And Kohli to me, as much as I like him, he's just looked pathetic over the last two tests, missing a straight full toss of a winner that's not acceptable at top level. And Rohit Sharma is the same for me. He does not warrant a place in the side as captain and as batter, he'd done well over the last two years. But then there's some sort of baseball which has gotten inside him and he wants to smack every ball for six. So would you say that it's the right time for, or not right now, but do you think the end is near for all four of them? It's such a tricky one. When people, when a really successful, a really successful player, England are going to have places stoked now as well. Yeah. What you do with them, because it seems disrespectful just to discard them. If you were a robot or an alien, you would just pick the best side, that's it. But as we're humans, we have like a section that people have done really well for us in the past. And that wave in their mind, I think. And so it's a bit tricky. I think they've got to give them the BGT, because you could say that was a bad defeat against New Zealand, but they deserve another chance because a lot of these guys are legends. And if they fail then, then you'd say, okay, it might be a time for a new era. But I'd definitely give those guys a BGT. And maybe even if they make it the World Test Championship final, and that might be a good way to sign off or sign off by winning in England. But if they lose a BGT, lose or don't make the World Test Championship final and lose in England to a very kind of average England side, I would say that then it's time to just rebuild completely. Yeah. And they look like a team in transition. They look like that to me for the entire time they were in there. And coming to Shubman Gill, who came around this, this game and Sarfaraz Khan, to me, both of them just look like there's, there's a serious lack of hunger to win. I just, I just feel with this Indian side, compared to what it was, say, seven years back in 2017, you felt like, I don't know if you saw the Borda-Gavaskar Trophies 2017, but it was all fire. Yeah. Smith got 100 and nothing for the rest of the series. Oh, I think he's the one with Smith and Warner were banned in India, one in Australia. No, I'm talking about the 18th. No, the one in India, 2017. Oh, okay. Yeah. Yeah. So that series was, was absolutely lit because everyone was having a go at each other and you felt like both teams wanted to win. And the impression which I've got from these set of players is that apart from a really, really limited bunch, say Rishabh Gandhi, he looks like one who's a bit excited to play cricket. Apart from that, it just looks like guys who are at the workplaces rather than guys who are having fun out there. And I've noticed that not, not just India or England, that there's a real change now. It's a bit like, you can't unscramble an omelette since the franchise leaves. I think a lot of international players just think they're doing people a favor by playing international cricket. I get that impression from them. And it's almost like the results don't matter. And you feel like that it's more like an entertainment than a sport almost because they're used to playing in these franchises where they get a lot of money for low pressure, IPL is high pressure, but the other ones are really low pressure and no one cares about the results. And they just think, well, why am I bothering getting sticks from a fan or some kind of Twitter or answering a journalist's question when I can just literally get money for nothing, playing a Dubai league, playing another league, so you're grateful to even have me. So I'll just play my shots and if it goes wrong, it goes wrong. Do what you want. Too much player power. I think that's where we're getting at because there was a real shift in cricket where people said that we need to give players more power. But I think we've got to a position where players have too much power, not even in football do players have this much power. And just coming on to the specific bits where I think the management played horribly in this match, they picked Aakash Teep who hasn't bowled an over. I think he's bowled one over in the entire test. And you have Kuldeep Yadav, Akshar Patel, both really good spinners waiting in the wings and you pick a team who can't bat and who's not going to bowl. I thought they were going to pick Akshar. I really thought they were going to pick him. I thought in home conditions he would come in and save the day. Exactly. And he was really good in the Border Gavaskar Trophy as well in the 2023 series, I think, the home series. And even the selection of Washington Sundar, people are going bananas over him getting seven wickets. But if you saw the way he got those seven wickets, it was like, you know, you're keeping shit and putting a bow on top of it. That was the kind of bowling performance because India got 156, India bowled also 156, New Zealand got 259. And in that entire innings, it didn't feel like they were under any sort of pressure. And I think Kuldeep Yadav is a better exponent of bowling in spinning conditions. And they got that wrong. And also the fact that I think these players do not look adept enough to play test cricket. People are saying we should bring back Piteshwar Pujara and Ajinkya Rahane. I think that's a wrong, I think that would be a wrong decision because you should look forward, not backwards. Exactly. And the complaints which people have is that players don't have the requisite technique or seem like their technique is fading, especially for people like Rohit and Kohli, who used to have really compact techniques for spin. And it just seems like they have tailored their techniques for the 20 cricket and white ball cricket. I think that's common across the world now, don't you? Yeah, I think it has. But I think for teams like us, at least Australia, it seems like they have managed to keep a level of batting to themselves. And India prided themselves upon, at least I think, upon their test match batting in India, at least under spinning conditions. But it seems like that's going as well after Rahane and Pujara. And now that Kohli and Rohit are going as well. So yeah, I think those are the few key points which the management faltered here. And just coming on to the press conference, which happened after the game. There was a very, very famous line which happened where Rohit said that losing a test series in 12 years is fine. And that just seems like, you cannot say that after. Like you said, they take fans for granted. People are going out saying, in India, people are not very good. Speaking for the masses, people go out and support you. And they're putting hours in for you. And I just feel that's a very insensitive thing to say. And what did you make of that phrase? Well, what I thought was, it would be true if he'd been the captain for those 12 years. So if he'd been the captain for 12 years, and he only lost one home series, he'd go, fine, that's true. But he hasn't. So he's the one who's broken the record. So it doesn't count. If you've been there for 12 years and only lost one home series, then you have to say that's kind of a true statement. But no, it doesn't really, doesn't make sense. Yeah. And just coming on to his captaincy, I think the olive openings, I think you'll see that this is not something which has happened overnight. This was something which is always on the offerings. Because even in the Australia series and in the England series, I think you'd have noticed that England were a lot closer this time around. And unaccustomed to how it was in 2021, where they were completely rolled over. And in 2016, it actually felt like they had a chance, which obviously responded to some ways. And same with Australia. If you saw the series in 2023, India didn't look like winning. But Aksar Patel came in and saved the day. And I think where I got at is that there was a lot of no plan B sort of captaincy. And unless you have someone like Pumra and Ashwin who are at their peak, it didn't feel like it. Do you feel like there's a shift from where India looked like dominating to just competing and it's not been overnight? That's a good point. I suppose, thinking back to February, March time in the England series, England did take them close, but then they kind of committed suicide. And I suppose you give Sharma credit for holding his nerve and realizing what England were going to do. So in one sense, it's England's fault, but also well done to him for realizing and kind of adapting to that. But it's very hard to kind of dismiss a home series defeat to New Zealand when you've never lost to them at home before. Without Williamson and Bolt. Yes, without those two. And when you hadn't lost at home in 12 years in the series. I wonder if it'd be another 12 years before the next defeat. No, no, I think the next one will come very soon. The next time Australia come, I'll say this right now, Australia, the next time they go to India, it will be a loss. Because I think that the screws are coming off this Indian side and I don't really see who's going to take over in the batting trend because I think the bowling will take care of itself. But I think Umar is there for five more years, five years max. And we have some spinners, we have a lot of spinners to play around with. But the batters who are there, they're Safaraz Khan, Rishabh Pant, and most of these guys just are sloggers, like I won't say sloggers, but they're naturally attacking and they're not nitty players who are going to dig it out. And unless there's a serious change of conditions in India, I don't see India being as dominant as they used to be. So I think we can safely say this has been the end of an era. And, and it was really nice while it lasted. And if I had to rank, and if you had to rank this 12 year period of Indian dominance in home conditions, where would it be say, does it go as high up as the West Indies 80s or Australia 2000s? Or is it far from that? I think the West Indies stretch of dominance is amazing from basically the 70s right up until the mid 90s. Yeah, I think that's probably the best. And then that's Steve Orr Australia side. And then along with the Ricky Ponting one. Yeah. I mean, if you're just talking about home dominance, it's as good as those two. But overall dominance, you go West Indies and Steve Orr's Australia, I think, and then maybe Ponting's Australia. Yeah, I'm not talking about away or dominance, because we were not really very dominant away from home. We lost a lot of series in England, I think we lost 4-1 in South Africa. I just think at home, this was a thing to be proud of. Yeah. And now looking up to the 12 years. Yeah, almost like they were invincible for a period of time, at least to me. Yeah. Looking up to the third test for the India New Zealand series. It's in Mumbai and they expect it to be another ranked turner, not a slow turner this time, it will be a ranked turner. So expect it to be gone by two days. And because we need to win this test for the World Tech Championship final in Pakistan. Yeah. I expect some wholesale changes made just because they want to try people out. And if I had to just, if I were Rohit Sharma, I would, I would just try to salvage any sort of harm that's been happened by whatever has transpired over the last two tests. And yeah, I think that there's not much point in this match. And it's the first time we're having a dead rubber in an India series. How amazing is that? Yeah, I mean, it's, it's, I hate, I hate dead rubbers. When, when my side's losing, if you're tuning up one to play it's still fun, you think, oh, we can win like a clean sweep. When your side's lost already, it's a bit depressing, even if they win, you think, oh, so what? Yeah. But the World Test Championship does have context that the much maligned World Test Championship, it does mean this game is actually important still. Yeah. And if you're a South African or a Sri Lankan, or an Australian, you're looking at that third test in IndyCar, hopefully we can win this one again. And then we've got a better chance of making that final. So for that reason, I think that's the reason it's still of interest. Otherwise, it wouldn't really be. I'm not really sure that, does New Zealand have a chance of qualifying for the World Test Championship? I think it's not as good as Sri Lanka, South Africans or, or Australians. Oh, I think if that's true, then, then that'd be, I thought that if New Zealand do have a chance, then it'll bring a lot of people in the contest. Yeah. So if they win that, and then they've got three against England, which they could win three nil, it's possible. And I don't know, I'd have to do the math, but it's possible. Yeah, that's what I'm saying that if you have three players in Australia, India and New Zealand, then I don't think South Africa and Sri Lanka would like that all that much. So yeah, so what do I expect from the match? At least what I would want from the Indian team is just to go out there and, and give a good performance, win the test and come back. Yeah, but realistically speaking, I think, I think this is going to be another loss. Yeah, I think there's this down and out on confidence and it, and it showed in the way they were, they were going about their motions after the game. And yeah, I just feel like... What was the last time India were whitewashed at home? I don't really remember, I'd have to look that up. The 30s or something. When, when they got introduced to cricket by the British Raj, I think that might have been the time. Yeah. Yes. I can't think of one. I've seen, I remember there being whitewashed before, but never at home. So I'm just, I'm trying to think, I can't think of one at home. Yeah. I don't think there has, maybe in the 1930s, let me just Google it up one, so that we can remove the confusion. Yeah. So it was in the 1930s. I just Googled it up. So yeah. It was in England. No, it doesn't show which team, but Chad G. Pitty apparently says it was the 1930s. Yeah. So 1920, if anyone was trying, if they were satisfied, they were trying. Yeah. Like you define whitewash by winning all the games, right? Yeah. Yeah. So Chad G. Pitty says that, but I'm not really sure it's reliable. So what are your predictions for the next test between India and New Zealand? I think India will win that one, especially if the pitch is like you've described it. And I also think New Zealand might be a bit more relaxed. They've won it. Now, this is an amazing achievement. And maybe they're a bit, they're in kind of celebration mode. Yeah. And if you had to rank this series in the list of the best ever series ever played, where would you keep this one? I don't know about the best ever in terms of quality, because I haven't seen enough of it, but in terms of the results, it's one of the great, the great test series wins. If you had to just, yeah, like in the context of say the Gabba series, like the Australia series in 2021, where India, India beat them to one. So just really unexpected and a series, which, which no one really thought how it would turn out to be eventually. So where would you rank it in that sort of discretion? See, in terms of drama and entertainment, that 2021 BGT and the 2005 Asia are better in terms of drama and entertainment. But in terms of achievement, I think that's the biggest achievement I can think of in recent history, not going back to the fifties or something, but that, that is such a huge achievement. And it's sad that people don't, because like we're saying that test cricket is less important now, and so it's not getting the coverage it deserves, but that is a really huge result. Yeah. And, and I think well played to New Zealand and they deserve all of it. And, and someone said they are the smartest team to play cricket. And I think that holds true because they make best use of the 5 million people and the 25 million sheep that they have available. Yeah. I think, I think that's a good thing that England used to do, to field good South African players. That's always a good trick. Yeah. Devon Conway and Glenn Phillips are smiling right now. Yeah. So we'll just keep this podcast short. And if you have any questions to ask from both of us, just send them over to our Twitter handles. It's been nice. And we'll see you Friday night again. Ideal season. Yeah.