Time is running out for KL Rahul

[Cricket_Fan]

9 hours ago, Stradlater said:

I wouldn't have believed it myself either but go to his Instagram page and you would realize he seriously considers himself one.

Him and that bhikhari Pandya.

So does every damn Indian with an instagram.Nothing new here.

[Lannister]

8 hours ago, Gollum said:

Repeating myself for the umpteenth time.

1. We had the wrong combination...blame Kohli for selection blunder...who picks spinners in these conditions?

2. We were without our 2 best bowlers because of team management's lunacy.
3. Yesterday was sunny and easier to bat, everyone agrees so. Had our batsmen showed more spine and batted 34 overs without getting bowled out they would have got good batting conditions yesterday, but no these FTBs can't even play a session without shitting their pants. Rewatch how Dravid-Bangar negotiated conditions 10x worse in 2002 Headingley...pity the current losers don't even have the guts of their batting coach. 

 

I agree with all impediments our bowling was pathetic but batting even more so and twice at that. Bowlers stepped up in Birmingham and SA...batsmen and catchers let them down there. Forget this match, Rahul failed in Edgbaston, Rahul failed in Jo'berg, Rahul failed in Centurion, Rahul's last 100 was in 2016, Rahul is in downwards spiral and seems lost. If you can't come to terms with these irrefutable facts no point arguing. As a Rahul fan you should be more concerned (just like me) about the current state of his game and descent into FTB territory....please stop talking about bowlers after all that has happened this year. 

So you are saying they batted in a much better conditions compared to Indian batsmen. Then there's your answer why the batsmen have failed. 

 

Their fourth seamer looked better than our two strike bowlers, who were going at a runrate of over 4 per over. Saying we picked up a wrong combination and that our 2 best bowlers were not available are just a poor excuse. 

 

Rahul is not the only one who failed here and this is his first tour to England. 

[Khota]

Time is not running out. he is young and he can improve. He needs to be benched.

[express bowling]

6 hours ago, Pollack said:

Chris Woakes batting comfortably yesterday. A few minutes after India comes to bat and start dancing on the pitch. In second innings of India it wasn't unplayable. But yes very relentless bowling by England yet again. Gave absolutely no relief at any point.

 

Woakes did not bat comfortably on day 4.   Shami bowled 8 jaffas to him in 4 overs  and could hardly put bat to ball against Shami.  Was extremely lucky to survive.

 

Hussain pointed out that stats were showing ... Woakes had played and missed 11 times the whole of day 3 while scoring his century ... But had played and missed 8 times in 4 overs from Shami on day 4.

 

The sun was shining brightly on day 3 with no clouds ... so minimum swing.  

There was cloud cover and intermittent rain on day 4 ... so there was more swing.

[UrmiSinhaRay]

Rahul looks like a proper "uncle" now
 

 
 

He still looks better than 90% of Indian men at the same age.


Sent from my CPH1609 using Tapatalk

[Pollack]

5 hours ago, express bowling said:

 

Woakes did not bat comfortably on day 4.   Shami bowled 8 jaffas to him in 4 overs  and could hardly put bat to ball against Shami.  Was extremely lucky to survive.

 

Hussain pointed out that stats were showing ... Woakes had played and missed 11 times the whole of day 3 while scoring his century ... But had played and missed 8 times in 4 overs from Shami on day 4.

 

The sun was shining brightly on day 3 with no clouds ... so minimum swing.  

There was cloud cover and intermittent rain on day 4 ... so there was more swing.

So Shami bowled 8 Jaffas in 4 overs and still conditions were better for batsman.  conditions were decent for both batting and bowling.

Oh yeah! We were unlucky to get wicket. Age old excuse. Truth is Woakes survived and to me looked pretty comfortable. This is because we bowled filth. Shami was obviously decent throughout the match. But Shami was not the only bowler.

Edited August 13, 2018 by Pollack

[WeStMiDz]

Guy looks demoralised before a ball is bowled. Cannot open in the remaining tests. Number 5 may be a better option. 

[Yoda-esque]

I knew he did not have it in him..

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

[sarcastic]

7 hours ago, UrmiSinhaRay said:

 

 

He still looks better than 90% of Indian men at the same age.


Sent from my CPH1609 using Tapatalk
 

 

Also, I think in the picture he is out of a workout or something. He is not ready like how one can for a formal event or so. In that case, he might look much much better than most men of his age (even with their makeup etc.). 

[express bowling]

4 hours ago, Pollack said:

So Shami bowled 8 Jaffas in 4 overs and still conditions were better for batsman.  conditions were decent for both batting and bowling.

 

Read what I had written before " debating "  strongly.

 

Let me repeat ...

Conditions were relatively easier for batting on Day 3 ( as the sun was shining brightly and there were no clouds and hence much less swing ).  On this day, we were able to beat Woakes only 11 times throughout the day.

 

On day 4,  it was raining on and off and quite cloudy and more consistent swing was avsilable.  On this day, in the first hour, Shami beat Woakes 8 times in only 4 overs.   

 

Quote

Oh yeah! We were unlucky to get wicket. Age old excuse. Truth is Woakes survived and to me looked pretty comfortable. This is because we bowled filth. Shami was obviously decent throughout the match. But Shami was not the only bowler.

 

Where does the question of excuse arise !   I was merely pointing out the prevailing conditions and the ensuing results on 2 different days.

 

Obviously, our bowling attack was not as effective as it could have been.  When the captain plays only 2 specialist fast bowlers ( which includes an Ishant )  in conditions which are far more pro-pacer than pro-spinner ... what can we expect ?  Shami was the only effective specialist bowler we had in these conditions.

[Pollack]

38 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

Read what I had written before " debating "  strongly.

 

Let me repeat ...

Conditions were relatively easier for batting on Day 3 ( as the sun was shining brightly and there were no clouds and hence much less swing ).  On this day, we were able to beat Woakes only 11 times throughout the day.

 

On day 4,  it was raining on and off and quite cloudy and more consistent swing was avsilable.  On this day, in the first hour, Shami beat Woakes 8 times in only 4 overs.   

 

 

Where does the question of excuse arise !   I was merely pointing out the prevailing conditions and the ensuing results on 2 different days.

 

Obviously, our bowling attack was not as effective as it could have been.  When the captain plays only 2 specialist fast bowlers ( which includes an Ishant )  in conditions which are far more pro-pacer than pro-spinner ... what can we expect ?  Shami was the only effective specialist bowler we had in these conditions.

You should have first had a look at what I was responding to when you quoted my first post:

On 8/12/2018 at 9:44 PM, rkt.india said:

Chris woakes didn't exactly had to bat in these conditions. Are you blind?

 

16 hours ago, Pollack said:

Chris Woakes batting comfortably yesterday. A few minutes after India comes to bat and start dancing on the pitch. In second innings of India it wasn't unplayable. But yes very relentless bowling by England yet again. Gave absolutely no relief at any point.

So what I wrote what was definitely correct. rKT seems to feel woakes batted in easier conditions. I responded just few minutes later of Woakes batting in so called easier conditions, Indian batsmen were dancing to England bowlers tune. 

Maybe he meant in the  previous day. But honestly I believe Indian bowlers failed to exploit conditions properly. And yes he looked comfortable to me the next day too. A few play and misses are not a big deal here.

Edited August 13, 2018 by Pollack

[express bowling]

1 hour ago, Pollack said:

You should have first had a look at what I was responding to when you quoted my first post:

 

So what I wrote what was definitely correct. rKT seems to feel woakes batted in easier conditions. I responded just few minutes later of Woakes batting in so called easier conditions, Indian batsmen were dancing to England bowlers tune. 

Maybe he meant in the  previous day. But honestly I believe Indian bowlers failed to exploit conditions properly. And yes he looked comfortable to me the next day too. A few play and misses are not a big deal here.

 

I did know the context ... and I agree with Rkt on the batting condition issue.

 

I don't think you watched our bowling carefully on day 4.  Or somehow managed to watch Ishant mostly.

 

However, I agree with you that Ishant was poor in this test and that, along with no specialist 3rd pacer,  did not make our pace attack as effective as it could have been even on a relatively batting friendly day 3.

Edited August 13, 2018 by express bowling

[The Outsider]

Batsmen fail and have poor series all the time. But if someone, as a top order batsman, is struggling to get to double figures over two consecutive test series which are months apart, it is a serious question mark on their work ethic.

 

Also, batsmen go out of form, and they struggle to convert their 20s and 30s, but whatever I’ve seen of Rahul, he has serious and fundamental issues of technique. Maybe, he’s going through a bad patch, but his back and across movement seems conspicuous by its absence. Plonking the front foot and driving doesn’t work in these conditions. 

 

Moreover, once you get out like that a few times, it makes you vulnerable to the leg before dismissal because you’re no longer confident of plonking your front foot, neither do you have the technique to judge the length and go back and across.

 

Pretty pathetic batting, so far. Sure, give him the series, because there aren’t really better options I am aware of, but time to tone down the expectations.

[Switchblade]

On 8/12/2018 at 8:53 PM, Straight Drive said:

Rahul model  One can say a popular cricketer but model. Ek se ek zampu dikhte hai. batting ka standard to sabne gira diya hai, ab modelling ka to mat girao. 

 

[SK_IH]

Time is running out for sure,his stocks will fall steeply if this continues.Again a start wasted and his dismissal was carbon copy of Lord's 2nd innings.

[putrevus]

this guy is looking more and more like Kohli wannabe with out his drive. Who was that Pakistani opner who wanted to be Kohli.

[Switchblade]

2 minutes ago, putrevus said:

this guy is looking more and more like Kohli wannabe with out his drive. Who was that Pakistani opner who wanted to be Kohli.

Ahmed Shahzad

[putrevus]

Just now, Switchblade said:

Ahmed Shahzad

Yes, thanks for got his name.People were making such a big deal about his non selection for one test in SA.

[rtmohanlal]

seems it is time to move on from him

[Switchblade]

Didn't see him bat today but just feel his game is suited for shorter formats.