Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
sandeep

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

Recommended Posts

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.  

Share this post


Link to post

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 by maniac

Share this post


Link to post
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.   

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
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

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, maniac said:

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

:laugh:  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.   

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, sandeep said:

:laugh:  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 :laugh: 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 !!!!

Share this post


Link to post

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 :laugh: 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 by sandeep

Share this post


Link to post
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? 

Share this post


Link to post
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.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
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.  

Share this post


Link to post
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.  

Share this post


Link to post

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.

Share this post


Link to post
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 by gattaca

Share this post


Link to post

Soon we will have different teams for different formats. Not every youngster is flashy. There is a mix of them. You can't make Dravid out of Sehwag or vice-versa. Every cricketer has a game that comes to him naturally. So, there is a certain element of natural game in every top cricketer. Like bowling fast came naturally to Brett Lee. It was his natural game. I don't think anyone would ask him to slow down and try to bowl like McGrath.

Share this post


Link to post

I don't believe a Pujara could bat like Rohit. No because it doesn't come to him naturally. Same is the case with Rahane. You need natural power to bat like Sehwag, Yuvraj, or Rohit. Pujara and Rahane doesn't have that. I don't believe just because we have IPL, every young Batsman will start batting like Rohit or Sehwag.  Cricket is a game of natural ability. If you are a medium pacer, you won't start bowling fast. Same way a defensive Batsman won't become Sehwag.  A Batsman always play what comes to him naturally. What Dravid is saying is adjusting to the conditions and situations. Why is he expecting 19-20 year olds to do that. Such things come with experience.  And then it also depends on ability and skills of Batsman to adjust. Such young players won't have a completely developed game like how rotate strike, when to take chance. 

Share this post


Link to post
30 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

I don't believe a Pujara could bat like Rohit. No because it doesn't come to him naturally. Same is the case with Rahane. You need natural power to bat like Sehwag, Yuvraj, or Rohit. Pujara and Rahane doesn't have that. I don't believe just because we have IPL, every young Batsman will start batting like Rohit or Sehwag.  Cricket is a game of natural ability. If you are a medium pacer, you won't start bowling fast. Same way a defensive Batsman won't become Sehwag.  A Batsman always play what comes to him naturally. What Dravid is saying is adjusting to the conditions and situations. Why is he expecting 19-20 year olds to do that. Such things come with experience.  And then it also depends on ability and skills of Batsman to adjust. Such young players won't have a completely developed game like how rotate strike, when to take chance. 

Rohit is more timing than power.

Share this post


Link to post

To find gritty batsmen like Dravid, one must look at the 4-day A-team batters.


Panchal, Samarth, Vihari, Bawne, Shankar .... do they have grit  ?

 

Even Nair may not be short on grit and has failed in recent times more due to technical issues.

 

Trying to find grit in Pant and Iyer is like trying to find grit in Sehwag or Warner.

 

p.s - I would want every batter to play according to the situation, but it is easier said than done.  I am more pissed off at experienced batters like Kedar and Pandey who have thrown away their wickets in the name of natural game.

 

Young batters like Pant and Iyer may take some time to learn how to adjust to different situations.

 

Edited by express bowling

Share this post


Link to post
34 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

 

Trying to find grit in Pant and Iyer is like trying to find grit in Sehwag or Warner.

 

 

Sehwag and Warner both have grit. Their flamboyance notwithstanding.

Share this post


Link to post
34 minutes ago, express bowling said:

Young batters like Pant and Iyer may take some time to learn how to adjust to different situations.

Of course younger players should be given a long rope to learn to adapt etc. I have no qualms if a Rishabh Pant fails a few times.  But like you said, a Manish Pandey getting himself out in a crucial situation, trying to run the ball to third-man is atrocious shot selection from a guy who's been "around" for a bit.  I mean, even experienced players can have brain-farts once in a while, but Manish got himself out playing that stupid dab twice in the handful of games against Australia.  Shreyas Iyer is a guy that I will expect to show improvement on this front - again, no issues if he fails a few times.  That's cricket.  But if he keeps throwing away his wicket with poor shot selection, in this silly quest to maintain his self-image as a batsman who "dominates" bowlers, then its a problem that needs to be addressed.   In any event, I posted my thoughts in this thread not to single out an Iyer or a Pandey.   Just more of a general observation of a fan on the developing trends in Indian cricket.  

 

1 hour ago, gattaca said:

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.

I don't know much about Shubham Gill apart from the fact that he did well on the u19 series against England, home and away.  And saw a nice little 2 min promotional video made by Cricinfo.  

 

Armaan Jaffer is one young kid, who is supposedly old school in his batting approach, and is considered to have potential.   And I'm sure there are others out there.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, fineleg said:

Sehwag and Warner both have grit. Their flamboyance notwithstanding.

+1.   One of my favorite Veeru innings is his away hundred in the 2007-08 series in Australia.  It wasn't his usual slam-bang stuff.  It was a "You shall not Pass" effort.   And one of his finest.  Veeru had an under-rated defensive game.  And he drew the right lessons from his 195 at Melbourne.   He was quoted after getting caught off fulltoss, saying that he was satisfied with the runs he scored.  And a few years later, he was quoted as saying that he later realized that his dismissal ended up causing India to lose that match - he had the Aussies on the mat before he went for that hoick, and it would have been a very different game, if he had batted on for even another 30-40 minutes or so.  

 

Even Warner is not a guy who throws it away.   He is a Sehwag shishya in the truest sense of the word.  Especially in test cricket.  

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, sandeep said:

Of course younger players should be given a long rope to learn to adapt etc. I have no qualms if a Rishabh Pant fails a few times.  But like you said, a Manish Pandey getting himself out in a crucial situation, trying to run the ball to third-man is atrocious shot selection from a guy who's been "around" for a bit.  I mean, even experienced players can have brain-farts once in a while, but Manish got himself out playing that stupid dab twice in the handful of games against Australia.  Shreyas Iyer is a guy that I will expect to show improvement on this front - again, no issues if he fails a few times.  That's cricket.  But if he keeps throwing away his wicket with poor shot selection, in this silly quest to maintain his self-image as a batsman who "dominates" bowlers, then its a problem that needs to be addressed.   In any event, I posted my thoughts in this thread not to single out an Iyer or a Pandey.   Just more of a general observation of a fan on the developing trends in Indian cricket.  

 

 

sandeep .... it is a very valid observation which I respect.

 

I just want to channel it towards the experienced batters and not the new ones.

 

I would also like to observe the " innings building "  4-day A-team batters to find a suitable candidate, and not the dashers  .... but alas ! , the A-team games are not being  televised.

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

sandeep .... it is a very valid observation which I respect.

 

I just want to channel it towards the experienced batters and not the new ones.

 

I would also like to observe the " innings building "  4-day A-team batters to find a suitable candidate, and not the dashers  .... but alas ! , the A-team games are not being  televised.

Respect is mutual EB!  

 

And I don't think that the likes of Iyer, Samson, Nair can claim inexperience for much longer.   Pant and Shaw, of course can.  

 

Personally I have high hopes for Iyer and Samson, and I feel like they haven't done justice to their talent and skillsets at this point.  Indian cricket is a brutally competitive arena, especially for batsmen.  With a bit of bad luck, even the best of prospects can spend an entire career waiting for opportunities that never materialize.  I don't want to see potential talents "miss the bus" and turn into the next Manoj Tiwary.   Although that's a bit harsh - But I'm sure you get what I'm saying.  

Share this post


Link to post
28 minutes ago, fineleg said:

Sehwag and Warner both have grit. Their flamboyance notwithstanding.

 

What is " grit " according to you  ?

 

Iyer has a 200+ against a  full strength Australian XI   and Pant has a 300+ in Ranji

 

and they average 55 and 62 in FC   ..... and the type of  " grit "   Sehwag had. these 2 have too.

Edited by express bowling

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, express bowling said:

 

What is " grit " according to you  ?

 

Iyer has a 200+ against a  full strength Australian XI   and Pant has a 300+ in Ranji

 

and they average 55 and 62 in FC   ..... and the type of  " grit "   Sehwag had. these 2 have too.

I think Shreyas Iyer for one, definitely needs to learn to put a price on his wicket in certain situations, and not just go for his shots all the time.   He's too good a player to not do that.  

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, express bowling said:

 

What is " grit " according to you  ?

 

Iyer has a 200+ against a  full strength Australian XI   and Pant has a 300+ in Ranji

 

and they average 55 and 62 in FC   ..... and the type of  " grit "   Sehwag had. these 2 have too.

Exactly my point.

 

Nair has been out due to his issues against pace.that is more technical...but when he had the opportunity to cash in he made frickin 300 against a top side in his what 2nd game? That itself takes grit and temperament.

 

These players look flashy because we see them mostly in IPL where they have to bat like that..So are we saying that none of these batsmen have ever scored on a minefield or grassy track in domestics? If that is the case I agree with OP there is a problem...or else there is no tangible measurement for grit.

 

Reading Dravid's statement in the quoted part and then comparing to what OP says is contradicting...Dravid called Hardik a player adapting to conditions and who in recent times has more exciting strokeplay than Hardik? 

 

And as you said Pandey and Jadhav throwing it away in positions where they can cash in is more of a problem and at the same time coming in at 250/3 in 35 th over and getting a 50(45) balls is also a problem....adaptability would be a better word here

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, sandeep said:

I think Shreyas Iyer for one, definitely needs to learn to put a price on his wicket in certain situations, 

He probably needs to learn to put a price on his wicket in certain situations.  We don't get to see enough FC and List A matches to form a definitive opinion though and there he has some technical issues too.  His 200+ against an Aussie test-quality attack does show some wish to not get out in a big match. 

 

But that post was about comparing him to Sehwag .... and Viru threw away his wicket quite often.

Edited by express bowling

Share this post


Link to post

How many here believe Rahul dravid played better than laxman ? Always felt laxman won more games than dravid. Dravid once he went to shell no matter Odi or test he sucked and got out. Don't think I will call that grit for just blocking the balls.

Edited by gattaca

Share this post


Link to post

Agreed with the OP here. You need to put a price on your wicket. The need of hour is the Virat of 2010-2012 when he used to bat at No. 4 ( Because this is the slot which is not plugged since promotion of Virat to No.3 and loss of form of Yuvi).

 

Actually the selectors are doing a great job. Doesn't matter how much we crib about that why Pants, Iyers,Rahul are not getting chances in National Team. The thing is presently Pant/ Iyer don't deserve to be a part of this Indian team. They are outstanding talents but they need to sort out their consistency thing in A team/ IPL.

 

They have to be become a finished and consistent product from A squad itself, when we have R Dravid coaching the A team and also frequent tours and matches.

They can't expect they will come to National team and will learn there, and even the No. 1 ranked team is not gonna give them this opportunity.

17 hours ago, express bowling said:

He probably needs to learn to put a price on his wicket in certain situations.  We don't get to see enough FC and List A matches to form a definitive opinion though and there he has some technical issues too.  His 200+ against an Aussie test-quality attack does show some wish to not get out in a big match.

I would disagree with you,EB that Aussie attack had Mitchell Marsh, Jackson Bird, Lyon, Steve'O' Keefe. He is expected to do well against Lyon after facing Pragyan Ojha, Amit Mishra in India.

 

I am afraid both Pant and Iyer has messed this opportunity when facing Bolt, Southee, Milne, Santner and probably not gonna be a part of World Cup probables/ SL tour of India. They were so close to selection.:facepalm:

 

Edited by swastikpanda2

Share this post


Link to post

The current gen cricketers in the making are the most dynamic n have had great exposure at U19 level, IPL, n are confident, have a game to dominate n some can play astonishingly for their age.

Shaw, Sarafaraz, have great talent n it's not about hitting but stroke play, adjustments, time to play strokes, maturity, Samson, Nitesh, Pant, Hooda quite a few BATSMEN n some might turn out to be Rohit, some Virat n some Uthappa, it's how they work on their game , mature, adapt.

Share this post


Link to post
On 10/19/2017 at 11:30 AM, sandeep said:

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.  

Tough love, they call it.  He is calling these guys out and reminding them of their immense talent for strokeplay, and coaxing them into thinking about curbing their instincts under certain situations.  He himself couldn't play strokes like these guys play, but he has a talent that they can acquire - a single-minded focus on the job at hand.  

Share this post


Link to post

This is an apt post Sandeep. Although some pitches have gotten flatter in some countries, there are still challenging destinations in Eng, SA, etc. It makes me wonder too whether the next-gen cricketers will be willing to buckle down and treat the bowlers on merit instead of playing flashy shots and coming up with excuses later. I think they need to find a balance between their natural game and being smart about when to adapt/rein it in.

 

All of the people you named are aggressive, quick-scoring batsmen with lots of shots. But, I feel that with some application, some of them (Iyer, Shaw for example) can become all-format players. Otherwise, we still have a few fairly young domestic batsmen who seem to be more measured in their batsmanship - Bawne is a classic example. He is still only 24.

Share this post


Link to post
On 10/24/2017 at 2:46 PM, Vijy said:

This is an apt post Sandeep. Although some pitches have gotten flatter in some countries, there are still challenging destinations in Eng, SA, etc. It makes me wonder too whether the next-gen cricketers will be willing to buckle down and treat the bowlers on merit instead of playing flashy shots and coming up with excuses later. I think they need to find a balance between their natural game and being smart about when to adapt/rein it in.

 

All of the people you named are aggressive, quick-scoring batsmen with lots of shots. But, I feel that with some application, some of them (Iyer, Shaw for example) can become all-format players. Otherwise, we still have a few fairly young domestic batsmen who seem to be more measured in their batsmanship - Bawne is a classic example. He is still only 24.

Just saw this.  And the bolded sentence above is my primary point in this thread.   

 

My concern is that the "Bawne"s of the world aren't the ones getting the big IPL contracts, sponsors, and all that limelight.  All these incentives will have a massive influence on the next generation of cricketers - the ones that are 15 right now.   

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, ShebbySB said:

Haven't see Hanuma Vihari live....his stats are very impressive.Averaging almost 60 in FC and also

in the India A setup.

Vihari and Aparjith are the big southern hopes that somehow fail to step up when the spotlights are on.   Duleep Trophy etc.  

Share this post


Link to post
On 10/27/2017 at 10:16 AM, sandeep said:

Just saw this.  And the bolded sentence above is my primary point in this thread.   

 

My concern is that the "Bawne"s of the world aren't the ones getting the big IPL contracts, sponsors, and all that limelight.  All these incentives will have a massive influence on the next generation of cricketers - the ones that are 15 right now.   

Yes, I agree. I think it's already happened/happening though... i.e. in terms of what the players < 21-22 are saying and aiming for.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoticons maximum are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

Guest, sign in to access all features.

×