Case for Pandya to be the no.4

[maniac]

I always believed a genuine allrounder is someone who makes the team as a specialist in one aspect of the game but at the same time he is so naturally talented in the other facets of the game,it automatically qualifies him as a genuine allrounder. 

 

Obvioulsy this is a rare breed in cricket.

 

There is no way to measure the perfect balance of skills to determine if a rookie player is a genuine allrounder or not.

 

Shopping for an allrounder just for the sake of it always leads to sub standard products like Adam Hollioke, Stuart Binny and Mark Ealhams of the world  

 

If we analyze some genuine allrounders of the past and understand their legacies we might get a better understanding of this.

 

Jacques Kallis- did South Africa need Kallis the batsman or Kallis the bowler?

 

Kallis is considered one of the greatest batsmen of all time to represent South Africa but as a bowler,Do you think he was really the top 4-5 fast/ fast-medium bowling talents in his country during his playing days?

 

I don't think so.

 

This would  be the 90's we are taking about here when South Africa had abundance of genuinely superb fast bowling resources at their disposal.

 

Kallis is hands down one of the greatest batsmen in South African cricketing history but at the same time it so happens that his bowling was so good and complimented his amazing  batting skill that he became a genuine allrounder.

 

In fact made him one of the greatest allrounders of all time

 

Kapil Dev is another example. Kapil Dev was a genuine entertainer,the guy when batting would make people stop in whatever activity they were in the midst of ,apart from maybe India's favorite pastime which explains 1.3 billion people.

 

However no matter how exciting Kapil's batting was ,Kapil the fast bowler  is really what that is integral to India's cricketing history and not Kapil the batsman.

 

The guy singlehandedly helped inspire  a generation of  Indian quicks after him and maybe some dashing batsmen but not a combination of both because as I said a genuine allrounder is something that just happens organically and is not something that can be manufactured.

 

From a time  where Indian team would have Sunil Gavaskar of all people open the bowling to take the shine off the new ball ,so that the spin quartet could do their thing to atleast having 2 presentable opening new ball bowlers by the 90s is something that can be totally attributed to Kapil's influence.

 

Yes the 175* and the 4 6s of Hemmings or the 100 against a rampaging Donald or his innings against the WI pace bowling are all a part of folklore but still it was always  Kapil the bowler that Indian cricket needed so badly even though  the batting wae a huge bonus.

 

Even if bonus sounds like somewhat of an understated term.

 

Every genuine Allrounder be it Imran Khan,Botham,Hadlee or Sobers were all integral to their respective teams because they happened to be the Top batsmen or bowlers in their respective countries.It just so happened that they all possesed additional dimensions to their primary cricketing skill which made them part of this rare breed.

 

Even the somewhat understated allrounders of the modern era like Jayasuriya,Watson and Afridi had their niche.

 

Jayasuriya is known as one of the most destructive batsmen of all time who revolutionized ODi cricket in the modern era, but his bowling record in the format speaks for itself. Even though bowling when discussing Jayasuriya would be an afterthought more often than not.

 

Shane Watson was opening the batting for a strong Australian side while being a more than a handy 5th or sometimes even 6th change bowler who had all the bowling talent in the world.

 

Even Afridi when you think of it,I mean which cricketer can you think of who has been a butt of so many jokes and ridicule than him? Yes he did overstay his welcome and had a longer career than he should have had but there is no denying that he had a case for being a genuine bowler in his side at the twilight  of his career. Again his record in his final years probably speaks for itself(I might be wrong but again Afridi has always been an anomaly) 

 

Now coming to Pandya

 

I have never seen such a clean hitter of the ball especially against the spin bowlers in recent times. Even though there is an ongoing analysis  about his striking ability against pace bowlers, he has shown a great technique and composure against fast bowling when he has been given the time in the middle .

 

He does however look a little off when he has to force the proceedings against pace.

 

A no.4 is perfect for someone who can get their eye in  by being somewhat conservative against pace and adequately handle  the spinners  in the middle overs and Pandya has shown this on multiple occasions already in his short career.

 

If you think that Pandya is the best 3rd seamer in the country than the logic is totally flawed because Md.Shami has that slot locked in and it is almost a mystery why he is not in the odi scheme of things.

 

Clearly,Pandya's strength is his batting where he has looked like a million bucks under the right circumstances.With the no.4 slot being a curse and treated like a game of musical chairs why not take a gamble with Pandya? 

 

I don't want to sound impatient because Pandya is probably the 2nd or 3rd name on the LOI sheet for me.

 

 However  as cricket 101 dictates,you need a player to adapt to a specialized role to make themselves an integral part of the team and I still think Pandya is in the purgatory still.

 

I really think Pandya is the right answer to this ongoing puzzle because eventhough he has been groomed and handled well so far, about time he takes the big leap and become the key to all our cricketing problems.

 

I think he should be our no.4. His bowling can be a bonus but I think it's his batting is what we need right now. Yes sounds strange that an Indian who can naturally hit 140ks bowling should concentrate on batting but I think that's what we need right now.

 

 

[gattaca]

Nah. His strength has been to play finisher role. We need a specialist at 4. Image bowling 6-7 overs and playing long innings.

[Jimmy Cliff]

I am okay with him coming at 4 if we are 250/2 in 35-40 overs but would rather have a specialist batsman come in at 4 otherwise. Think it would be too much workload for him if we expect him to come in at 4, build an innings and then bowl his quota of overs. Plus we are short of power hitters anyway so would rather prefer him to bat 6 and 7 and go ape **** in the slog overs more often than not.

Edited October 23, 2017 by Jimmy Cliff

[chewy]

I worry for his power hitting against pace, especially genuine pace, he looks comfortable but those 4s and 6s disappear and when he attacks pace he skys one and gets out

reminds me of Yusuf's end of career where he struggled against pace and especially short pitch stuff

 

[speedheat]

He will struggle against the quality pace attack, a big no for his num 4 position.

 

 

[rkt.india]

3 minutes ago, speedheat said:

He will struggle against the quality pace attack, a big no for his num 4 position.

 

 

He did well against Cummins and NCN.

[rkt.india]

1 hour ago, chewy said:

I worry for his power hitting against pace, especially genuine pace, he looks comfortable but those 4s and 6s disappear and when he attacks pace he skys one and gets out

reminds me of Yusuf's end of career where he struggled against pace and especially short pitch stuff

 

Most Indian Batsmen struggle at the start of their careers against genuine even the best have. He will only get better with more exposure and will learn that against genuine pace, you need to time and place the ball and not try muscle them. The reason he is prone to get top edges.

[speedheat]

He did well against Cummins and NCN.

But clearly was not comfortable against them, but good thing is that he will only get better from here.

[mancalledsting]

He's capable- but we'll burn him out and he'll start trundling.  

[maniac]

Simple...a bowler should be expected to

complete 10 overs every single time he bowls...if the expectation is that he should get through 5-7 overs per game than there is no place for him unless he bats in the top 5....similarly if a batsman has too many weaknesses where he cannot bat in a certain scenario he doesn't deserve a spot either just because he can bowl a few overs.

 

The great Westindies team of the 70s 80s and the great Aussie team of the 90s,2000s did not have a single genuine allrounder...they had specialists who were really good at what they do.

 

Pandya is a genuine talent but he needs to find his niche and I think he is a batting allrounder because as a bowler I don't think he deserves a spot over say someone like Shami or even Umesh....if he can be a top order batsman than his natural bowling skill is a huge bonus.

[Laaloo]

7 hours ago, speedheat said:

 

But clearly was not comfortable against them, but good thing is that he will only get better from here.

 

He was better than the rest of the batsman. He didnt look out of place at all. He kept the strike rotating instead of sucking up the momentum at one end.

[Ankit_sharma03]

Nope, at this point his position shud be 6,7 and on some occasions he shud be promoted when needed 

No. 4 has to be a solid player who has the ability to turn game on its head with his power game as well 

We have been wasting time at wrong player and pandya wud be another name in the list. For few yrs he shud enjoy his cricket as he lacks domestic exp so he is gaining that here so lets not add more burden . 

 

Lets give iyer and rahul a proper go at 4 who are much better suited to that role then going pandya, waise bhi there arent many good option for slot 6,7 to.......jo potential option hai bhi unko pata nhin chance milega ya nhin

[Pollack]

^ and Iyer has power game????

[Ankit_sharma03]

2 minutes ago, Pollack said:

^ and Iyer has power game????

Iyer can destroy spinners ......and in the middle u will mostly get that.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/18032/scorecard/1120099/India-A-vs-New-Zealand-A-2nd-unofficial-ODI-new-zealand-a-in-india-unofficial-odi-series/

 

90 in 73 balls with 5 sixes from a situation of 84/5 , where ull have to keep some caution as well 

 

 

[maniac]

14 hours ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

Nope, at this point his position shud be 6,7 and on some occasions he shud be promoted when needed 

No. 4 has to be a solid player who has the ability to turn game on its head with his power game as well 

We have been wasting time at wrong player and pandya wud be another name in the list. For few yrs he shud enjoy his cricket as he lacks domestic exp so he is gaining that here so lets not add more burden . 

 

Lets give iyer and rahul a proper go at 4 who are much better suited to that role then going pandya, waise bhi there arent many good option for slot 6,7 to.......jo potential option hai bhi unko pata nhin chance milega ya nhin

Let me ask you this...As a 3rd seamer do you think Pandya is the best in the country after Bhuvi and Bumrah?

 

Now fair enough he has an advantage over other bowlers ahead of him because of his batting ability.

 

Now coming to batting ability, you want him to be the guy to come in and blast a quick fire 20-30 at the death as a no 6 or no.7,fair enough....but you realize that role is a subset of a subset  It is a lottery,sometimes a guy like Bhuvi comes out like a million bucks in such situations and sometimes even someone like a Kohli can get a 0(1) if he has to slog from ball 1...

 

If Pandya starts trundling at 125k all of a sudden because his batting has improved by leaps and bounds,I will take it as long as can get through 3-4 overs....it is his own fault if he lets that happen.....it did not effect Kallis,etc before.

 

I think Pandya can become a top class middle order bat. Now on the other hand if he can become as good as say Shami with the ball,that would be his batting a bonus as well.

 

We have a problem and that's what great players in the making do,volunteer and fix the gap

[Vijy]

11 minutes ago, maniac said:

Let me ask you this...As a 3rd seamer do you think Pandya is the best in the country after Bhuvi and Bumrah?

 

Now fair enough he has an advantage over other bowlers ahead of him because of his batting ability.

 

Now coming to batting ability, you want him to be the guy to come in and blast a quick fire 20-30 at the death as a no 6 or no.7,fair enough....but you realize that role is a subset of a subset  It is a lottery,sometimes a guy like Bhuvi comes out like a million bucks in such situations and sometimes even someone like a Kohli can get a 0(1) if he has to slog from ball 1...

 

If Pandya starts trundling at 125k all of a sudden because his batting has improved by leaps and bounds,I will take it as long as can get through 3-4 overs....it is his own fault if he lets that happen.....it did not effect Kallis,etc before.

 

I think Pandya can become a top class middle order bat. Now on the other hand if he can become as good as say Shami with the ball,that would be his batting a bonus as well.

 

We have a problem and that's what great players in the making do,volunteer and fix the gap

That's too much to ask. I don't see both happening together.

[maniac]

12 minutes ago, Vijy said:

That's too much to ask. I don't see both happening together.

That's the point I was making...I think his batting has more of an upside than his bowling....while the fact that he can hit 140k is a bonus and he is a natural athlete,I still think his primary skill is batting.

 

 

Edited October 24, 2017 by maniac

[Vijy]

9 minutes ago, maniac said:

That's the point I was making...I think his batting has more of an upside than his bowling....while the fact that he can hit 140k is a bonus and he is a natural athlete,I still think his primary skill is batting.

 

 

yes, he is a batting allrounder for sure.

[Ankit_sharma03]

6 hours ago, maniac said:

Let me ask you this...As a 3rd seamer do you think Pandya is the best in the country after Bhuvi and Bumrah?

Pandya is not the 3rd seamer, his is our 5th bowler

In india, our spinners become our attacking option....pandya role is 5th bowler here and so it is overseas . Him being 3rd seamer in india doesnt hurt us much. The stupidity was paying him as 3rd seamer in eng n benching our best bowler shami 

 

 

6 hours ago, maniac said:

 

Now fair enough he has an advantage over other bowlers ahead of him because of his batting ability.

HE is an all rounder , advantage over other bowlers makes no sense as his role is diff 

6 hours ago, maniac said:

 

Now coming to batting ability, you want him to be the guy to come in and blast a quick fire 20-30 at the death as a no 6 or no.7,fair enough....but you realize that role is a subset of a subset  It is a lottery,sometimes a guy like Bhuvi comes out like a million bucks in such situations and sometimes even someone like a Kohli can get a 0(1) if he has to slog from ball 1...

M ok with promoting him sometimes infact i have said that before he shud be given promotion time to time but cant make him no 4

 

Now ill ask u some question 

 

1. have we exhausted all options at no.4 specially the better batsman. Rahul, iyer, pant  are better batsman then pandya have we given them a long run . Let them fail and then go to extreme options. Even if all fail ill still want shankar to be given a chance at 4 before pandya

2. Not long ago 7 was also our problem atleast pandya has soughted that, now if we promote him up.......is there are better option then pandya for 7 in the wings ???????? No. He is our best option at that place as of now and why to change it .....if he fails at 4 we ll have two problems of 4 and 7 rather one of no.4 position

 

No.4 has been a problem coz we have tried all wrong options possible from raydu, rahane, raina and pandya at this stage wud be another name in that list. 

 

At this stage i dnt wanna see pandya walking at 4 when its 12/2 specially in overseas condition may be in india that to depending on opposition n conditon 

 

 

[rkt.india]

One thing I know is that Pandya is your most dangerous Batsman in middle order and he is wasted at 7. He should be batting at 4 or at max 5 not below than that.