Jump to content

Team is sabotaged by bad selections.


Recommended Posts

Jadeja was dropped for a reason and should never have been brought back.Rayudu was never considered because he was not good enough.the selectors have failed the team going into the WC by insisting on these 2 guys who are just not good enough.now we have no time to blood new guys and there are plenty of options but they wont get a chance because we have 2 games before the WC.We are well and truly *ed and on top of that the openers have picked a terrible time to go out of form.

Link to comment

Currently, we have following issues of varying degrees that need to be addressed soon to compete optimally in the World Cup:

 

* Rohit (poor ICC events record as well)

* Dhawan (but awesome ICC record)

* Rayudu (do not even count him as a viable option. Playing him = playing with 10 players as he can’t bat and field) 

* Dhoni (plays good here and there but past his best with the bat. Still a good wk though)

* Jadeja (should not have been recalled) 

 

Also the parallel issue of unnecessarily ignoring youngsters with match winning abilities to favor the above .... KL also went into a bad phase at a wrong time. However, he has shown improvement recently 

 

Like Pak in 2003, the selection is based on hope that these players will magically replay their good performances in WC 

 

While Jadhav and Shankar are good, Shaw and Agarwal are better options esp. vs good bowling attacks 

 

 

Based on recent performances and potential, below should have been the 11 

 

 

Shaw (in form flamboyant opener) 

Dhawan (ICC record) / KL (if Dhawan fails in first 2 games)

Kohli (can anchor or play quickly)

Agarwal (can also open to swap position with KL, and a better option than Rayudu, Shankar, etc) 

Hardik (his batting potential needs to be harnessed) 

Pant (wk)

X slot -> Jadhav / Shankar / ....

4 Bowlers 

 

 

However, per how things are likely to go, below is the 11 to salvage the situation 

 

Pant / KL

Dhawan (can be dropped if he does not live up to his ICC events champ reputation) 

Kohli 

Shankar 

Pandya

Jadhav

Dhoni (will be there)

4 bowlers 

Edited by zen
Link to comment
12 minutes ago, SRT100 said:

I wish you idiots would stop mentioning ICC records. They are irrelevant. Current form, age, and skill is all that counts.

 

Hitman, Dhawan, Rayudu, Dhoni, Jadeja are all finished at international level.

 

ICC records who cares, might as well bring back Tendulkar based on ICC records. FFS.

 

 

ICC, SENA bull sh*t makes no sense whatsoever. Current form. Going by that SA should not even send their team to world cups lol

Link to comment
24 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

ICC, SENA bull sh*t makes no sense whatsoever. Current form. Going by that SA should not even send their team to world cups lol

that shows the inability to comprehend things .... and create strawman arguments :hehe:

Link to comment
36 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

According to your own theory of if XX did well in ICC 2 years back he will do for the rest of his life lol

how is that my theory? :hmmmm: .... at least create intelligent strawman arguments  .... If that is what you "really" understood it remind me of the neem hakim story :lol: 

 

On one hand you write current form should be considered, then you talk about picking Rohit, who is struggling. And based on his past record in bilaterals as if he is magically going to come good. Then you talk about overall record vs a team  should be considered for ICC and when Rohit contradicts that by doing badly against those sides (how far away from reality you have to be to not see a point working against your own argument) :rofl: ....  I have not even bothered to respond your such points 

 

Then you talk about my theory, when I encourage picking youngsters / newcomers with potential like Pant, Pandya, Kuldeep, Bumrah, etc., who have zero to limited ICC experience .... I do not support Dhawan, Rohit, Rayudu, etc., however among the "shortlisted" experience players with other things being more or less equal, I would consider performance in ICC events, where you play different teams while being in relatively more pressure ....   Since you drew analogy with teams, it is like betting on teams that tend to do well in high pressure tournaments (does not imply they will always do well or others won't) 

 

Get this  -> just because your favorite player does poorly in ICC, saying that ICC does not count, means little to others .... That is like a bird closing its eyes, when the cat is around  .... And after this post, you have no reason to plead ignorance! 

 

Edited by zen
Link to comment
Just now, zen said:

how is that my theory? :hmmmm: .... at least create intelligent strawman arguments  .... If that is what you "really" understood it remind me of the neem hakim story :lol: 

 

On one hand you write current form should be considered, then you talk about picking Rohit, who is currently struggling. And based on his past record in bilaterals as if he is magically going to come good. Then you talk about overall record vs a team  should be considered for ICC and when Rohit contradicts that by doing badly against those sides :rofl: ....   I have not even bothered to respond your such points

 

Then you talk about my theory, when I encourage picking youngsters / newcomers with potential like Pant, Pandya, Kuldeep, Bumrah, etc., who have zero to limited ICC experience .... I do not support Dhawan, Rohit, Rayudu, etc., however among the "shortlisted" experience players with other things being more or less equal, I would consider performance in ICC events, where you play different teams and play under relatively more pressure ....   Since you drew analogy with teams, it is like betting on teams that tend to do well in high pressure tournaments (does not imply they will always do well or others won't) 

 

Get this  -> just because your favorite player does poorly in ICC, saying that ICC does not count, means little to others .... That is like a bird closing its eyes, when the cat is around  .... Don' support a player to such level that you have to resort to such gimmicks (that is if you really did not "understand" And after this post, you have no reason to pled ignorance! 

 

ICC ranking indicates current form. Your current form theory is more like "He failed in the last match so he should not be picked".  Pant come in place of only Dhoni nobody else. Stop living in fantasy land. It is all about balance. Why do you think India will go with Dhoni and Pant who is a dud fielder as well. If we are talking about pedigree batsmen like Gill, Shaw, Agarwal i can understand. But that ship has sailed. 

Link to comment
42 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

ICC ranking indicates current form. Your current form theory is more like "He failed in the last match so he should not be picked".  Pant come in place of only Dhoni nobody else. Stop living in fantasy land. It is all about balance. Why do you think India will go with Dhoni and Pant who is a dud fielder as well. If we are talking about pedigree batsmen like Gill, Shaw, Agarwal i can understand. But that ship has sailed. 

Again relying on dumb strawman arguments (may be you should google it if you do not understand its meaning) :lol: .... btw, Pant was played in T20s too with Dhoni as a batsman and can be played in ODIs too esp. if he is in the squad .... Dud fielder :hmmmm: .... you mean Rohit, Rayudu, Dhawan, etc., are exceptional fielders? .... buddy, think before you post 

 

May be it is your frustrations as Pant can replace not only Rohit but also Karthik (both players, who are past their best, that you support)! 

Edited by zen
Link to comment
37 minutes ago, zen said:

Again relying on dumb strawman arguments (may be you should google it if you do not understand its meaning) :lol: .... btw, Pant was played in T20s too with Dhoni as a batsman and can be played in ODIs too esp. if he is in the squad .... Dud fielder :hmmmm: .... you mean Rohit, Rayudu, Dhawan, etc., are exceptional fielders? .... buddy, think before you post 

 

May be it is your frustrations as Pant can replace not only Rohit but also Karthik (both players, who are past their best, that you support)! 

Check test series and how i have criticized Rohit. But your super dumb theory of using Pant as opener just because he is available over an opener who is ranked 2 in the world is laughable. You even exclude Rohit from the team. You are using that argument in every goddamn thread with some selective stats. It is no less dumber than GreG chappell's theories.  Atleast understand one's batting skills first for a start before thinking using batsmen randomly in random position. By your own admission Pant doesn't have middle gear. Slog or block. WHy do you think that is exactly a good quality to be an opener? Your idea of opener is to score 10 ball 20 and get out basically not go all the way and make century. You don't evaluate scenarios like whether the opener can go on to make a big 100 or not. Why do you think that is a great idea. Seriously. Atleast come up with logical argument like Shaw , Agarwal opening the batting even though it is still a fantasy atleast a sensible fantasy. 

Edited by vvvslaxman
Link to comment

India's tail is only making things complicated. On a road even Indian bowlers can go for runs. That is where batting depth is needed. You basically need 7 inform batsmen with multiple gears.  There are serious "Gear problems" in the middle. Apart from Pandya nobody can dominate. Even he will dominate only spinners not seamers. Against seamers from 4 to 7 we are never going to go at good rate. Basically if any of the 2 batsmen from the middle order bat at the end they cannot produce big overs at the death. Even Dhawan cannot score big against seamers in the death. He is more a 30 to 35 over guy. It will be down to Kohli or Rohit to attack seamers in the death overs. 

Link to comment
41 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

Check test series and how i have criticized Rohit. But your super dumb theory of using Pant as opener just because he is available over an opener who is ranked 2 in the world is laughable. You even exclude Rohit from the team. You are using that argument in every goddamn thread with some selective stats. It is no less dumber than GreG chappell's theories.  Atleast understand one's batting skills first for a start before thinking using batsmen randomly in random position. By your own admission Pant doesn't have middle gear. Slog or block. WHy do you think that is exactly a good quality to be an opener? 

Why not make simple points rather than irrelevant strawman arguments? Anyways, will address your key points: 

 

  • I do not pick players based on rankings. That is a system you are quoting only because Rohit is #2 on it. If he was ranked lower, I guess you would not cite the rankings :lol: .... As if you went by it, you would be picking Bhuvi (#17) over Shami (#30) and Stac (#18). From what I recall, you picked Shami so that invalidates your ICC ranking bluff 
  • I rate Pant as a batsman with better potential than Rohit. He is explosive (game suited to LOIs) and has test 100s in Eng and Aus, which Rohit will probably never have. Pant's gears are better suited for both opening and at the death (not that they won't work in the middle if he gets going) .... Rohit failed in the MO relatively speaking so again there is no point in you talking about gears (and when you are afraid of Rohit failing in MO)  

 

 

Quote

Your idea of opener is to score 10 ball 20 and get out basically not go all the way and make century. You don't evaluate scenarios like whether the opener can go on to make a big 100 or not. Why do you think that is a great idea. Seriously. Atleast come up with logical argument like Shaw , Agarwal opening the batting even though it is still a fantasy atleast a sensible fantasy. 

  • A strawman argument. Why would anyone play someone to play 20 ball 10? May be you are trying to pass your thought as someone else's or may be you only think in terms of black or white .... But I will take 20 of 10 over a 20 of 40 balls. On batting friendly tracks, doing tuktuk till you get to 50 (and when your conversion rate is not exceptional even when you play like that) is not acceptable (and you have read those threads where the point is explained) 
  • I do not believe in bolting the stables once the horses have left. I write what is best for team Ind and not report on "news" 

 

Many folks think that Ind should try opening with KL and/or Pant (both in the squad) ....  I do not understand your reliance on strawman arguments .... If this is about typing something to have the last word, go ahead and have one :hehe: 

Edited by zen
Link to comment
8 minutes ago, zen said:

Why not make simple points rather than irrelevant strawman arguments? Anyways, will address your key points: 

 

  • I do not pick players based on rankings. That is a system you are quoting only because Rohit is #2 on it. If he was ranked lower, I guess you would not cite the rankings :lol: .... As if you went by it, you would be picking Bhuvi (#17) over Shami (#30) and Stac (#18). From what I recall, you picked Shami so that invalidates your ICC ranking bluff 
  • I rate Pant as a better batsman than Rohit. He is explosive and has test 100s in Eng and Aus, which Rohit will probably never have. Pant's gears are better suited for both opening and at the death (not that they won't work in the middle if he gets going)  

 

 

  • A strawman argument. Why would anyone play someone to play 20 ball 10? May be you are trying to pass your thought as someone else's or may be you only think in terms of black or white .... But I will take 20 of 10 over a 20 of 40 balls. On batting friendly tracks, doing tuktuk till you get to 50 (and when your conversion rate is not exceptional even when you play like that) is not acceptable (and you have read those threads where the point is explained) 
  • I do not believe in bolting the stables once the horses have left. I write what is best for team Ind and not report on "news" 

 

Many folks think that Ind should try opening with KL and/or Pant (both in the squad) ....  I do not understand your reliance on strawman arguments.  If this is about typing something to have the last word, go ahead and have one :hehe: 

9

Just replace Pant with PUjara lol you will find how silly you sound there.       Pant is good at death? India does need slog over specialists . Why not                                    

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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...