Jump to content

There is no one matching Hardik Pandya’s abilities in India: MSK Prasad


Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

Hardik Pandya should be 6th bowler in ODI, batting in top 6.  he can easily be a #6 bat in ODIs like Stokes does for England.  

 

11 minutes ago, SK_IH said:

Both Pandya brothers can share 10 overs

 

Exactly, if we have a couple of ARs, they can combine to bowl the 5th bowlers quota and also chip in with extra overs if one of the 4 specialist bowlers has a bad day 

 

Talking about Pandya brothers, both of them are good enough to bat at either 6 or 7 depending upon form, match situation, etc. 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Tendulkar1996 said:

Good joke.Both krunal and khaleel are massively overrated and will be crushed by strong batting line ups.

Khaleel will develop with time. Whereas Krunal, I agree will be cannon fodder. Against genuine pace and quality attack, his batting will be tested no ends 

Link to comment
8 hours ago, zen said:

Let's not make caveman like comments where despite a player scoring a 100 and bowling at 140+, you want to "act" as if he does not do that :lol: 

 

Anyways, enjoy:

 

12484779.jpg

Just like a caveman you are getting your news from Prehistoric Times.

 

140 + does not make him a bowler. Big difference.

Few shots here and there does not make him a batsman. Big difference.

When he bowls he looks like the worst. When he bats he looks better than tailenders.

Link to comment
8 hours ago, Rightarmfast said:

MSK keeps proving everyday why he doesn’t belong in the selectors chair. The guy is a clown.

The first thing is, being a selector, you can’t make such careless and umbrella statements, that too clearly favouring one player over others. He needs to be taught what kind of statements he can make.

 

Pandya at best is a T20 player, nothing beyond that. If the selectors are happy with one performance once every 10 matches, I wonder where the standard of indian cricket has fallen down to. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Khota said:

Just like a caveman you are getting your news from Prehistoric Times.

 

140 + does not make him a bowler. Big difference.

Few shots here and there does not make him a batsman. Big difference.

When he bowls he looks like the worst. When he bats he looks better than tailenders.

And sun revolves around the earth too I guess per your tribe :lol:

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Khota said:

Just like a caveman you are getting your news from Prehistoric Times.

 

140 + does not make him a bowler. Big difference.

Few shots here and there does not make him a batsman. Big difference.

When he bowls he looks like the worst. When he bats he looks better than tailenders.

 

what are the pandya alternatives. big striker who can bowl decent medium pace?

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Khota said:

Just like a caveman you are getting your news from Prehistoric Times.

 

140 + does not make him a bowler. Big difference.

Few shots here and there does not make him a batsman. Big difference.

When he bowls he looks like the worst. When he bats he looks better than tailenders.

    Give me one  indian name  who you think better than Hardik so that we can replace him right now. 

    If you do not have , then you have to go by what you have . 

     

Edited by prudent_kreeda
Link to comment
2 hours ago, Khota said:

Just like a caveman you are getting your news from Prehistoric Times.

 

140 + does not make him a bowler. Big difference.

Few shots here and there does not make him a batsman. Big difference.

When he bowls he looks like the worst. When he bats he looks better than tailenders.

Don't let him troll you. He is the same guy who said he expects Kohli and rahane to score same number of runs in test series in Australia

 

That should tell you all about his cricket knowledge or lack thereof

Link to comment
3 hours ago, UnknownGenius said:

He is the same guy who said he expects Kohli and rahane to score same number of runs in test series in Australia

I don’t .... but as a SENA specialist and someone who hints at wanting to be the best, I would “allocate” similar number of runs to him as he scored last time and not over burden Kohli (reduce Kohli's allocation) :winky:

Edited by zen
Link to comment
4 hours ago, UnknownGenius said:

Just because you bowl 140+ doesn't make you a good bowler. Umesh phaast Yadav bowls well above that and is one of the worst ODI bowlers Eve

 

People like zen need to take a step back and understand basic cricket first...

He knows it all. Anyone who an write that someone bowls at 140+ is a good bowler shows his lack  of understanding of the game. Very immature statement on his part. What makes it worst is that he has doubled down on it.

Link to comment
27 minutes ago, Khota said:

He knows it all. Anyone who an write that someone bowls at 140+ is a good bowler shows his lack  of understanding of the game. Very immature statement on his part. What makes it worst is that he has doubled down on it.

Of course I know it all .... including the cavemanesque qualities I see in some posters .... nobody has said Pandya is a good or bad bowler yet. Just that he can bowl at 140+, which when combined with his batting and fielding talent, makes him an useful cricketer and a game changer in certain aspects (won us a test with the ball for e.g.)

 

It is you who is acting as if he did not hit 100s and cannot bowl at 140+ .... when you got exposed, you tried to turn it into a how good or bad he is which is a separate discussion and relative to other options  .... so accept that he can hit 100s and bowls at 140+ 

Edited by zen
Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...