Jump to content

Did our best, left the team with good bench strength for T20 World Cup: MSK Prasad


Gollum

Recommended Posts

To be honest he was a rubber stamp selector, however within his abilities, he did select every prospect that was talked about on ICF into the Indian team. Can someone tell me a player who didn't play for India yet that was hyped here on ICF?

 

Poor guy, no BCCI and the axis of evil made it worse for him.

 

Shaw,Gill,Saini,Aggarwal,Vihari,Siraj,Pant,Krunal,Sundar,Shankar even hyped up hacks like Dube all made debut in his tenure.

 

Rayudu was dropped as per people's wishes.

 Wasn't the worst by any means

Link to comment
21 minutes ago, maniac said:

To be honest he was a rubber stamp selector, however within his abilities, he did select every prospect that was talked about on ICF into the Indian team. Can someone tell me a player who didn't play for India yet that was hyped here on ICF?

 

Poor guy, no BCCI and the axis of evil made it worse for him.

 

Shaw,Gill,Saini,Aggarwal,Vihari,Siraj,Pant,Krunal,Sundar,Shankar even hyped up hacks like Dube all made debut in his tenure.

 

Rayudu was dropped as per people's wishes.

 Wasn't the worst by any means

What region is Prasad from?  What domestic team did he play for?

Link to comment
32 minutes ago, sandeep said:

Well said Bharat Sipahi!  

 

Chor ki daddhi mein tinka

 

 

 

 

I have criticized MSK many times here for being a Wuss. In fact I am still saying he was a wuss for giving in to the axis of evil.

 

However he also did select and give break to a lot of youngsters. How they were handled in the squad and what opportunities were given to them is not on him.

 

Apart from Mavi and Nagarkotti who were injured, every youngster hyped on ICF was picked in the team. sometimes not a good thing obviously in case of guys like Dube etc.

 

Tell me one guy who missed out from not being selected in his tenure?

 

Also sometimes I played along with the Rayudu thing but you missed the part when I criticized when he came back into the team on the basis of IPL and even after he flunked the initial yoyo test. However he did get unfairly dropped right before the WC event after being in the scheme of things for over a year and that too for Vijay Shankar of all people despite being adequate during his run and not having anyone even remotely ready to fill in.

 

In fact funny thing is I have seen you have more or less similar opinions on the above but obviously you lose all subjectivity or is it objectivity when it comes from me :giggle:

Edited by maniac
Link to comment

I think you're kidding yourself if you think he had any real control. In a revealing press conference after the WC, MSK talked about how specific 'requests' from team management ( Kohli + RS) influenced selection decisions of Shankar/Pant/Mayank in the squad.

 

link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nwoQIeK98E ( from 1:23 )

 

Anybody who knows about the Kumble sacking should know what happens to people in the system who go against Kohli's 'requests'. If someone of Kumble's stature wasn't enough to overcome this fact, a small fry like MSK had no chance. I think he realised this and tried to do the best that he could. He would have realised that he had a say in the selection, but that was all it was- a say.

 

 And I agree with Maniac, he selected pretty decent teams(at least those that were in his control).

 

 

 

Edited by Dada's Army
Link to comment
2 hours ago, Dada's Army said:

I think you're kidding yourself if you think he had any real control. In a revealing press conference after the WC, MSK talked about how specific 'requests' from team management ( Kohli + RS) influenced selection decisions of Shankar/Pant/Mayank in the squad.

 

link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nwoQIeK98E ( from 1:23 )

 

Anybody who knows about the Kumble sacking should know what happens to people in the system who go against Kohli's 'requests'. If someone of Kumble's stature wasn't enough to overcome this fact, a small fry like MSK had no chance. I think he realised this and tried to do the best that he could. He would have realised that he had a say in the selection, but that was all it was- a say.

 

 And I agree with Maniac, he selected pretty decent teams(at least those that were in his control).

 

 

 

MSK looks like a decent man with an eye for talent who did a respectable job despite working with his hands tied. He picked the likes of Pant, Gill in the squad and spoke positively about them. It is the so called team management which screwed with them. He did not give in to regionalism - for right or wrong, he dropped Rayudu despite both of them having played for Andhra. Also, he had the balls to say Dhoni is not in the scheme of things after the world cup. If only a sensible captain and coach were in place, MSK's tenure would have been very successful. It is entirely on Kohli for not nurturing and developing young talent in the team. Heck, he destroyed even veterans like Pujara and Rahane.

Link to comment

During his tenure ----

 

Minuses ----

 

---- Not a single new fast bowler has been successfully introduced in ODIs or tests. 

---- Even for India-A,  Saini is the only fast bowler who has got regular chances.  All the other regulars have been trundlers. 

---- Mixing up formats. 

Dhawan, Shami, Pandey etc. picked for T20Is. ( They are good in ODIs but not in T20s )

Siraj introduced via T20I route despite being good primarily in the 5 day format. 

---- No new batsman had been successfully introduced in ODIs before the World Cup, despite glaring gaps in the middle order. Iyer has been the only successful introduction in recent times. 

---- Followed the dreaded " Queue System ". Players who became India prospects earlier were usually preferred even if that player was mediocre ... and a new superlative talent came up. 

 

 

Pluses ----

 

---- Introduction of wrist spin twins, Kuldeep and Chahal, in LOIs. 

--- Introducing Shaw, Mayank, Gill and Vihari in tests. ( Pant's introduction was a forced one after Parthiv and Karthick failed )

---- Some good new players tried in T20Is.

 

 

Edited by express bowling
Link to comment
1 hour ago, express bowling said:

During his tenure ----

 

Minuses ----

 

---- Not a single new fast bowler has been successfully introduced in ODIs or tests. 

---- Even for India-A,  Saini is the only fast bowler who has got regular chances.  All the other regulars have been trundlers. 

---- Mixing up formats. 

Dhawan, Shami, Pandey etc. picked for T20Is. ( They are good in ODIs but not in T20s )

Siraj introduced via T20I route despite being good primarily in the 5 day format. 

---- No new batsman had been successfully introduced in ODIs before the World Cup, despite glaring gaps in the middle order. Iyer has been the only successful introduction in recent times. 

---- Followed the dreaded " Queue System ". Players who became India prospects earlier were usually preferred even if that player was mediocre ... and a new superlative talent came up. 

+ getting dhawan back in test cricket based on lanka bashing 

+ selection of thakur ahead of siraj in test cricket

+ a lot of pref to finger spinners in A-games 

+ dropping nair after one series from squad only 

+ Not resting top players in many easy series

 

1 hour ago, express bowling said:

--- Introducing Shaw, Mayank, Gill and Vihari in tests. ( Pant's introduction was a forced one after Parthiv and Karthick failed )

Even shaw n mayank selection were forced as vijay, rahul, dhawan failed. One of those shud have gotten in team way back specially mayank as dhawan was proven failure overseas in test 

 

Link to comment
8 hours ago, Khota said:

Not sticking with Rayduu and Jadhav after investing so much was a mistake on his part.

But they have stuck with jadhav.....he was dropped from playing XI by captain. Selectors select squad ...captain selects playing XI

jadhav is still persisted knowing he ll be on a very wrong side of age by 2023 Wc

Link to comment
3 hours ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

But they have stuck with jadhav.....he was dropped from playing XI by captain. Selectors select squad ...captain selects playing XI

jadhav is still persisted knowing he ll be on a very wrong side of age by 2023 Wc

Captain needs to be faulted for that. As far as age is concerned you know my views well. I am not too mesmerized by young ones. I think experience brings a lot to the table. 

 

Both CT and WC were very winnable. Kohli also needs to go.

Link to comment
4 hours ago, maniac said:

I have criticized MSK many times here for being a Wuss. In fact I am still saying he was a wuss for giving in to the axis of evil.

 

However he also did select and give break to a lot of youngsters. How they were handled in the squad and what opportunities were given to them is not on him.

 

Apart from Mavi and Nagarkotti who were injured, every youngster hyped on ICF was picked in the team. sometimes not a good thing obviously in case of guys like Dube etc.

 

Tell me one guy who missed out from not being selected in his tenure?

 

Also sometimes I played along with the Rayudu thing but you missed the part when I criticized when he came back into the team on the basis of IPL and even after he flunked the initial yoyo test. However he did get unfairly dropped right before the WC event after being in the scheme of things for over a year and that too for Vijay Shankar of all people despite being adequate during his run and not having anyone even remotely ready to fill in.

 

In fact funny thing is I have seen you have more or less similar opinions on the above but obviously you lose all subjectivity or is it objectivity when it comes from me :giggle:

There's no doubt that Prasad's actual clout as Selector was limited.  And we will never know who ultimately made the decisions that led to the middle order batting problems keep rotting and festering in the Indian team in the 2 years leading up to the WC.  

 

But an argument can be made that Rayudu was given a far longer rope than someone like say, a Shreyas Iyer, who was jettisoned from the ODI team in spite of doing quite well.  Did regionalism play a role in that? 

 

At the end of the day, I don't think that its regionalism that leads you to support Prasad, nor do I care if it is.  I wanted to give you a taste of your own medicine - throwing around accusations of bias as a "joke".  Didn't quite like the taste when it was flipped around on you did you? Felt the need to write multiple paragraphs defending yourself, including a 2 fisted Bharat Sipahi.  :laugh:

 

But I expect you to never learn and keep throwing trash at me.  What's that they say in "Naarth India" about dog's tails and 7 years in steel pipes...

Link to comment
5 hours ago, express bowling said:

---- Mixing up formats. 

Dhawan, Shami, Pandey etc. picked for T20Is. ( They are good in ODIs but not in T20s )

Siraj introduced via T20I route despite being good primarily in the 5 day format. 

---- No new batsman had been successfully introduced in ODIs before the World Cup, despite glaring gaps in the middle order. Iyer has been the only successful introduction in recent times. 

+1.  

 

Siraj could have been something special. Still can be.  But he has spent his last couple of seasons chasing "control" with the white ball instead of being the best he can be with the red ball.  

 

On the "senioritis" regarding T20 batsmen, I'm not sure we can blame Prasad for that, its a consistent policy implemented by the team before and after him.  

 

Prasad was well-intentioned, but his priorities were 'fairness' in selection, not building the best possible team, or identifying and supporting the brightest talents around. 

 

And of course hindsight is 20-20, but a look back to the years leading up the ODI WC, and one wonders exactly why it was that Rayudu and his 75 SR got chance after chance after chance as the spare middle order batsman, while Shreyas Iyer was given a couple of games against SA and then chucked aside.  Would it have made a difference if Shreyas was from Andhra instead of Ambati?  I don't know.  Maybe it was Virat and his documented historical preference for "experienced" players.  Maybe it was a selfish $-driven instinct to throw up higher barriers for younger batsmen who could quickly become advertising favorites in a market pre-disposed to chase younger and and younger stars.  We'll never know.

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...