Next gen Indian batting talents - Plenty of Flash, but light on grit?

[sandeep]

Shreyas Iyer.   Sanju Samson.  Rishabh Pant.   Karun Nair.   Sarfraz Khan.  And the latest addition to the mix, chota packet promising to be the next big dhamaka - Prithvi Shaw.

 

All of these guys seem to have that 'it' factor when it comes to their batting.  That certain something that jumps out when you watch them bat - plenty of timing, a plethora of strokes, and a willingness to take the attack to the bowlers.   But take a bit of a closer look, and you can start to see telltale signs of inconsistency - a tendency to "live hard or die trying".   Given the way the economic and 'popularity' incentives are stacked in favor of "modern" bats who are capable of exciting stroke-play, its not hard to see why the teenyboppers of Indian batting are all out to emulate the ABDVs and Rohit Sharmas of the world, as opposed to the Gavaskars and dare I say, even the great Sachin Tendulkar.   

 

Gone are the days where the domestic circuit prioritized, taught and honed the ability of a young batsman's ability to put a premium price on his wicket.  These days, all you hear in terms of "cutting edge conventional wisdom" is the tiresome cliche of "expressing yourself" and "playing your natural game".  So widespread is the epidemic in India's young ranks,, that even the normally reticent Rahul Dravid felt compelled to publicly call out some of his wards.    An annoyed Dravid was quoted as dismissing all this emphasis on "natural game" as "frustrating".   Dravid chose to make his point with an unusually strong choice of words.

Quote

This concept of 'play your natural game', which I hear all the time, frustrates me because there's no such thing in my belief as 'natural game.'

"It's only about how you play different situations. Are you good enough to play when the score is 30 for 3, or 250 for 3? Are you good enough to bat when you go in first over or are you good enough to go in first ball after lunch? You have to learn to bat differently in different conditions, and if you can do that like Hardik is showing at the moment, those would be signs of a developing cricketer, someone who can make consistent contributions and not someone who is a one-off, who can produce brilliance once in a while. The aspiration and challenges set for a lot of India A players is to be all-weather players, all-situation players, all-condition players."

 

Strong words they might be, but I feel that it will be inevitably swamped by the tsunami of $$$$ that has flooded cricket since the inception of the IPL.  After all, what will a young Indian cricketer aspire to be, considering the cricket circuit today - Why should he devote his energies to building his skills like say, a Murali Vijay, Che Pujara, or even an Ajinkya Rahane?  When a test cricket 'failure' like Rohit Sharma is a multi-millionaire superstar IPL team captain, and gets to be a glory hogging ODI opener for the national team because of his ability to hit sixes?  

 

To some extent, this evolution of incentives and the corresponding evolution in batting is not restricted to India alone.   One look at the young batsmen coming through the ranks in England and Australia will show you a markedly 'same-ness' in the ranks.  James Vince.   Marcus Stoinis.   Chris Lynn.  Glenn Maxwell.   

 

I wonder where the next Rahul Dravid will come from.  Or if he will show up at all.   Cricket will be poorer for it, if he doesn't.  

[Ankit_sharma03]

Was just going to write this line - Its worries me how next generation is not cashing in when chances are given on consistent basis to force selectors to consider them . 

[Vilander]

not but its important to give 110% play your natural game  play to your strengths give 110%..

[maniac]

What Garbage!!!

 

What is the basis for this gibberish?

 

Let us see

None of the guys you mentioned bar Karun Nair have played international test cricket and infact the guy got a 300 in one of the matches.There was nothing flashy about how he got out in the remainder games. It was a certain weakness against pace that got exploited and hopefully he will improve on it.

 

The rest like Iyer,Samson,Pant the place most of us have seen them for the most part  is IPL which last time I checked is hit and miss cricket.

 

Now if you are basing this on their domestic performances,don't most of these guys have stellar domestic records? which you only get due to "consistency" ....you don't get consistency if you don't have the temperament...and all the guys can score at a much faster rate shows the clear improvement over previous era.

 

Sachin evolved to become a consistent run machine after a couple of years of experience and before that he did play a lot of flashy innings.

 

Gavaskar was a flashy cricketer who for the sake of the team became a super defensive batsman...he did have a arsenal of shots as well but that won't work in 2017.

 

Rahul Dravid another name you bring up upped his scoring rate in all forms of the games as he evolved and adjusted to the needs of the modern game which makes him a great.A Rahul David of the 90s is the last thing you need in this day and age.

 

This thread reminds me of something a man from

old city Hyderabad once said  -dehleez pe thook dena which in English translates to premature ejaculation

Edited October 19, 2017 by maniac

[Vilander]

play proper cricket shot , be a better player than stats suggest..when you hit it it stays hit...finally cricket is the winner...

[maniac]

Thinking like this is why we keep recycling Nehra,Karthik,Yuvraj etc and keep persisting with Dhoni. 

 

 

[sandeep]

17 minutes ago, maniac said:

What Garbage!!!

 

What is the basis for this gibberish?

 

Let us see

None of the guys you mentioned bar Karun Nair have played international test cricket and infact the guy got a 300 in one of the matches.There was nothing flashy about how he got out in the remainder games. It was a certain weakness against pace that got exploited and hopefully he will improve on it.

 

The rest like Iyer,Samson,Pant most of us have seen for the most part which is IPL which last time I checked is hit and miss cricket

 

Now if you are basing this on their domestic performances,most of these guys have stellar domestic records which you only get due to "consistency" ....you don't get consistency of you don't have temperament...and all the guys can score at a fast rate shows the improvement over previous era.

 

Sachin evolved to become a consistent run machine after a couple of years of experience and before that he did play a lot of flashy innings.

 

Gavaskar was a flashy cricketer who for the sake of the team became a super defensive batsman...he did have a arsenal of shots as well.

 

Rahul Dravid another name you bring up upped his scoring rate in all forms of the games as he evolved and adjusted to the needs of the modern game which makes him a great.

 

This thread reminds me of something a man from

old city Hyderabad once said  -dehleez pe thook dena which in English translates to premature ejaculation

As usual.  Reading comprehension fail.   Ek kaam kar.  Thodi coffee pee le.   Phir shaant ho jaa.  Phir dheere se read kar.  A couple of times if you need to.  Slowly.   Then you might start to understand the point being made.   

 

 

[maniac]

58 minutes ago, sandeep said:

Shreyas Iyer.   Sanju Samson.  Rishabh Pant.   Karun Nair.   Sarfraz Khan.  And the latest addition to the mix, chota packet promising to be the next big dhamaka - Prithvi Shaw.

 

All of these guys seem to have that 'it' factor when it comes to their batting.  That certain something that jumps out when you watch them bat - plenty of timing, a plethora of strokes, and a willingness to take the attack to the bowlers.   But take a bit of a closer look, and you can start to see telltale signs of inconsistency - a tendency to "live hard or die trying".   Given the way the economic and 'popularity' incentives are stacked in favor of "modern" bats who are capable of exciting stroke-play, its not hard to see why the teenyboppers of Indian batting are all out to emulate the ABDVs and Rohit Sharmas of the world, as opposed to the Gavaskars and dare I say, even the great Sachin Tendulkar.   

 

Gone are the days where the domestic circuit prioritized, taught and honed the ability of a young batsman's ability to put a premium price on his wicket.  These days, all you hear in terms of "cutting edge conventional wisdom" is the tiresome cliche of "expressing yourself" and "playing your natural game".  So widespread is the epidemic in India's young ranks,, that even the normally reticent Rahul Dravid felt compelled to publicly call out some of his wards.    An annoyed Dravid was quoted as dismissing all this emphasis on "natural game" as "frustrating".   Dravid chose to make his point with an unusually strong choice of words.

 

Strong words they might be, but I feel that it will be inevitably swamped by the tsunami of $$$$ that has flooded cricket since the inception of the IPL.  After all, what will a young Indian cricketer aspire to be, considering the cricket circuit today - Why should he devote his energies to building his skills like say, a Murali Vijay, Che Pujara, or even an Ajinkya Rahane?  When a test cricket 'failure' like Rohit Sharma is a multi-millionaire superstar IPL team captain, and gets to be a glory hogging ODI opener for the national team because of his ability to hit sixes?  

 

To some extent, this evolution of incentives and the corresponding evolution in batting is not restricted to India alone.   One look at the young batsmen coming through the ranks in England and Australia will show you a markedly 'same-ness' in the ranks.  James Vince.   Marcus Stoinis.   Chris Lynn.  Glenn Maxwell.   

 

I wonder where the next Rahul Dravid will come from.  Or if he will show up at all.   Cricket will be poorer for it, if he doesn't.  

Is there anything I misinterpreted...all those points have been debunked

[sandeep]

1 minute ago, maniac said:

Is there anything I misinterpreted...all those points have been debunked

  Debunked? How so? 

 

And yes, you have completely misinterpreted my words.  How you came to the conclusion that this post is somehow a justification for selecting Nehra or Yuvi etc only a psychiatrist can decipher, maybe after a few sessions of electro-shock therapy.   

 

 

[sandeep]

55 minutes ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

Was just going to write this line - Its worries me how next generation is not cashing in when chances are given on consistent basis to force selectors to consider them . 

Banjo why is common sense so uncommon.  

[maniac]

2 minutes ago, sandeep said:

  Debunked? How so? 

 

And yes, you have completely misinterpreted my words.  How you came to the conclusion that this post is somehow a justification for selecting Nehra or Yuvi etc only a psychiatrist can decipher, maybe after a few sessions of electro-shock therapy.   

 

 

What I got from your post

 

You said the current lot lack grit- they have stellar domestic records just like the previous era and have more adaptability across all formats-which is a upgrade 

 

You were clamoring for the next Sunil Gavaskar and Rahul Dravid  when there is no place for them in the modern era may be a 2006 Rahul Dravid but that's about it.

 

Then you brought in IPL hacks into the debate-which the players you mentioned atleast are clearly not may be apart from Sarfaraz a case can be made.

 

Sachin Tendulkar type player comes once in a generation but then Sachin was a flashy cricketer when he started as well,so were most ATG batsmen so that is a good start rather than a concern which is what I addressed 

 

I have never explained the dame thing written in the same language 3 times before-congratulations !!!!

[sandeep]

This is a thoroughly incorrect reading of my post.  

13 minutes ago, maniac said:

You said the current lot lack grit- they have stellar domestic records just like the previous era and have more adaptability across all formats-which is a upgrade 

 

You were clamoring for the next Sunil Gavaskar and Rahul Dravid  when there is no place for them in the modern era may be a 2006 Rahul Dravid but that's about it.

I didn't say they lack grit, I'm asking whether they care enough about being gritty.   My point is that the economic incentives and the current "fashion" of natural game etc is changing the definition of what a successful batsman should be.   And guess what?  I'm agreeing with Rahul Dravid - a giant of the game, in deed as well as thought.    Forget my words.  Scroll back up and read the direct quote of what Dravid said, in the first post.  

 

By the way, asking to prioritize grit, and placing a value on your wicket, doesn't automatically mean I want them to stonewall away at a scoring rate of 1960s cricket.   That's an extrapolation you made without any basis.   And please, get your head out of your ass while you are on a hiding to nothing in terms of just being contrarian for the sake of it.   I mean, in one post you claim that Gavaskar had all the shots and was forced to play defensive, while in another you claim there is no place for a Gavaskar in the modern era? Which one is it?  

 

13 minutes ago, maniac said:

Sachin Tendulkar type player comes once in a generation but then Sachin was a flashy cricketer when he started as well,so were most ATG batsmen so that is a good start rather than a concern which is what I addressed

Sachin may have been aggressive in his scoring approach, but you could never, ever accuse him of being flashy at the cost of giving his wicket away.  Especially while he was coming through the ranks in domestic cricket.  IIRC he scored hundreds on debut in Ranji, Duleep and Irani trophy.  And he would never say something like what Shreyas Iyer said after getting out for 80-odd in a crucial game - "Oh I have scored enough runs this season, with my 'natural game', I got out.  Its ok".   Tendy is a batsman from the Ramakant Achrekar school of batting.  Apocryphal story of the one rupee coin and all. 

 

13 minutes ago, maniac said:

I have never explained the dame thing written in the same language 3 times before-congratulations !!!!

Repeating nonsense x number of times doesn't really convert it into sense.   You keep missing the forest for the trees in this thread.  I guess the fact that I mentioned tailunt's failure as a test player probably got your panties all twisted up into knots.   

Edited October 19, 2017 by sandeep

[maniac]

2 minutes ago, sandeep said:

This is a thoroughly incorrect reading of my post.  

I didn't say they lack grit, I'm asking whether they care enough about being gritty.   My point is that the economic incentives and the current "fashion" of natural game etc is changing the definition of what a successful batsman should be.   And guess what?  I'm agreeing with Rahul Dravid - a giant of the game, in deed as well as thought.    Forget my words.  Scroll back up and read the direct quote of what Dravid said, in the first post.  

 

By the way, asking to prioritize grit, and placing a value on your wicket, doesn't automatically mean I want them to stonewall away at a scoring rate of 1960s cricket.   That's an extrapolation you made without any basis.   And please, get your head out of your ass while you are on a hiding to nothing in terms of just being contrarian for the sake of it.   I mean, in one post you claim that Gavaskar had all the shots and was forced to play defensive, while in another you claim there is no place for a Gavaskar in the modern era? Which one is it?  

 

Sachin may have been aggressive in his scoring approach, but you could never, ever accuse him of being flashy at the cost of giving his wicket away.  Especially while he was coming through the ranks in domestic cricket.  IIRC he scored hundreds on debut in Ranji, Duleep and Irani trophy.  And he would never say something like what Shreyas Iyer said after getting out for 80-odd in a crucial game - "Oh I have scored enough runs this season, with my 'natural game', I got out.  Its ok".   Tendy is a batsman from the Ramakant Achrekar school of batting.  Apocryphal story of the one rupee coin and all. 

 

Repeating nonsense x number of times doesn't really convert it into sense.   You keep missing the forest for the trees in this thread.  I guess the fact that I mentioned tailunt's failure as a test player probably got your panties all twisted up into knots.   

Again your question doesn't make any sense-how can they have stellar domestic records if they do not care enough about being  gritty? 

 

Sure IPL $$$ has  made some players clearly take the easy option of just focusing on IPL and skipping everything else-That has more to do with laziness than grit

 

as far as the batsmen you have mentioned I haven't seen anything that suggests that. Once again for your benefit-having a good career domestic record shows grit and IPL is the last place where you need to show grit isn't that obvious?

 

Now Dravid as a coach might have some issues with the overlapping of techniques while adapting from one format to other and he might have noticed something but nothing as a follower of the game gives me that opinion yet as I have not seen any of the players you mentioned in that setting. Have you? 

[maniac]

Also I have seen a certain section of ICF always mocking the failures of new comer or a youngster  and suggesting there are no alternatives to the oldies...now @sandeep I don't know if you fall in that category or not but nitpicking on youngsters without having seen anything bugs me.

 

 

[sandeep]

18 minutes ago, maniac said:

Again your question doesn't make any sense-how can they have stellar domestic records if they do not care enough about being  gritty?

Overall numbers can still be maintained at a high level, even if a batsman is unwilling to buckle down when needed.   For me, I have been following Shreyas Iyer a bit, since he burst onto the scene in his first Ranji season.  He is a prime example of a talent that is at risk of not maxmizing his potential.   I still want to see him in the Indian team sooner rather than later, but I want to see him 'finish' games more often than he has.   He has a troubling pattern of scoring attractive 40s, 50s.   But getting out instead of finishing the job.  Because he wants to "dominate" the bowlers, as his "natural game". He's clearly a capable bat, but to me, is underachieving.   And Dravid's words on him have the unmistakeable ring of truth.  

 

[sandeep]

20 minutes ago, maniac said:

Also I have seen a certain section of ICF always mocking the failures of new comer or a youngster  and suggesting there are no alternatives to the oldies...now @sandeep I don't know if you fall in that category or not but nitpicking on youngsters without having seen anything bugs me.

 

 

So you started with a theory, that may not apply to me (and fyi, it really doesn't).  Accused me of it, without any basis, just because its a pet peeve of yours.  Lahori logic.  You can do better than that.  

[sandeep]

31 minutes ago, sarchasm said:

Those are some big words from David. I mean all he did for the first half of his odi career was stall the momentum no matter how comfortably placed the team was. He should probably go easy on his wards in public. 

And yet, its the Delhi IPL team, that on Dravid's advice, has shelled out big $$$ to all of these young guns - Iyer, Karun, Samson.   

 

Dravid has his limitations as an LOI bat, even as a test bat.  But I don't think anyone can honestly cast aspersions on his motives, or his insights on Indian cricket or the young batsmen whose development he's currently overseeing.  

[G_B_]

@sandeep

 

excellent op

 

can icf use it as an article?

[gattaca]

IPL skills for bat are well payed but depends on skills on batsman and willing to learn. IPL is a shortcut for fame and money but playing for India is ultimate goal for a pure cricketer. If someone is  only interested in money then IPL makes sense. This is actually better since now we will have people who are only really interested in cricket playing for India. Also op forgot to all shubham gill.

[gattaca]

1 hour ago, sandeep said:

So you started with a theory, that may not apply to me (and fyi, it really doesn't).  Accused me of it, without any basis, just because its a pet peeve of yours.  Lahori logic.  You can do better than that.  

He is just not happy pant is not selected and dhoni is not dropped. 

Edited October 19, 2017 by gattaca