from Sylhet, Bangladesh. It is a pity that a player of Prasanna's calibre has not been evaluated. The superficial statistics sometimes may be misguiding. Comparing 189 wickets of Prasanna with 688 of Murali is not a pleasant observation. Imagine whom did Prasanna play with ? Who were his competitors in the team ? What was the standard of opposition batsmen ? What was the average number of test matches per year ? Was there any alternative of Prasanna ? Is there any Clive Lloyd today ? Any Vivian Richards ? Any Majid Khan to score century before lunch on the first day of a Test Match? Any Gary Sobers ? Considering all these and many other related factors, Prasanna was one of the greats of the then time. Murali is one of the greats of the present time. One should remember that Prasanna had an alternative in the team, Venkat. Murali has no such competition to face. Even a few years ago, Murali used to bowl where the opposition used to play a long innings and bowling for 70/80 overs he got many wickets. On the other hand, Prasanna used to bowl one third of the spin overs and sometimes one fourth (team playing 4 spinners)on an average. If Prasanna had the scope of playing today with he as the only spinner, he will have to be a bit cautious about Lara, Ponting and Heyden. Most of the others would find it difficult to play him and the number of wickets would be difficult to believe since teams like Bangladesh, Zimbabwe, West Indies are in the total race. Moreover, Prasanna had a c
RE:Prasanna - the great
by sharma on Jul 11, 2007 12:16 PM Permalink
current batsmen r better than those of time prassana was playing if he were present player wouldnt get place in team
RE:RE:Prasanna - the great
by Tejas Gurjar on Jul 16, 2007 02:03 PM Permalink
You ignoramus. I actually thought twice before replying because its not worth wasting my time replying to your nonsense, but here goes.. Current batsmen look better because the quality of bowlers has deteriorated around the world. It would be a very ignorant person like you who would suggest that the modern day batsmen are better than Richards, Lloyd, Miandad, Gavaskar, Chappell, Pollock, B. Richards etc Today we have only 1 or 2 genuine quality fast bowlers (if fit) and only 1 or 2 good spinners/slow bowlers in the world. (I am not including chuckers in this list)
Obviously even mediocre batsmen will benefit from this and will try to bloat up their averages.
RE:Prasanna - the great
by babi ati on Jul 11, 2007 12:52 AM Permalink
It is not a good comparison because in those days Prasanna was not backed up with the fielding skills that we are accustomed to now. Catches were dropped at will and ground fielding was atrocious with no dives at the boundary line. It is foolhardy to compare stats of past with the present bowlers. The fact remains, Prasanna is the best.
RE:Prasanna - the great
by Mihirkanti Choudhury on Jul 10, 2007 09:16 PM Permalink
..... clean arm. He had no scandal of chucking after his name. This is one of the additional inputs of his greatness.
