Old discussion in a new bottle

[zen]

Recently, youngsters Pandya and Pant were introduced to test cricket. In their first season, they did a good job. Pandya hit a 100 in SL, along with 50s in SL, SA, Ind and Eng. Pant scored a 100 in Eng. Pandya also produced a match winning spell in the 3rd test. Overall, we can be satisfied with such performances by those in their first season 

 

But we still have a group of fans that are usually criticizing these youngsters. For e.g. if Pandya picks up wkts, he did not score runs. If he scores runs, he did not pick up wkt. If he scores a 100 in one game, picks up a 5-er in the next, and fails in the 3rd, he failed. Someone in the reserve and not playing is always the better option. Ind brought in an extra batsman and that was supposed to solve the problems. Guess what, the 5th test turned out to be among our worst batting performances by the top 6 as a group in relatively batting friendly conditions. We don't learn our lessons and conjure up 11s based on what the team of 2000s did. This is 2018, which has its own dynamics 

 

When I look at these discussions, I find that these are not new. For e.g. when Sehwag started, he was supposed to fail in test cricket. The likes of Jaffar, Chopra, etc. were supposed to be better options. When Dhoni started his test career, he was a hack and likes of Karim were better, iirc. Both these players went on to become Ind ATGs in their respective categories. Now the attention is on players such as Pandya (and Pant), who are being written off w/o first giving them adequate chances to adjust to the learning curve 

 

So there is a group of people who see unconventional players such as Sehwag, Dhoni, and now the likes of Pandya as impact players who should be given the opportunity and breathing space before conjuring up a verdict. And then there is another group that only looks at technique or whatever, for whom the ability to get a 15-20 per inning is better than the ability to hit a game changing 100 in a session. And also ignoring that a team could need different type of players. They live in the past and want to replicate that w/o considering modern/current dynamics 

 

All these discussions are like old wine in a new bottle. We never learn and write off unconventional players too easily w/o given them the opportunity to adjust to the learning curve. New players need the breathing space. They are not there to cover for TTFs, who should be replaced if not performing. When TTFs were new, they were backed accordingly and now as veterans relatively should take the responsibility or make space for new talent(s) 

 

Let us give breathing space and opportunity to adjust to the learning curve to our youngsters w/ potential   

Edited September 13, 2018 by zen

[nevada]

Good post. While hyping up players is not good, bashing rookies is not good either. Even rookies who had instant success have sophomore blues and get dropped, coming back stronger after fixing weaknesses. Bashing new players and dismissing their chances altogether is unwarranted. 

Edited September 13, 2018 by nevada