Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Runs

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

  • Time Online

    123d 16h 4m 37s

Posts posted by sandeep

  1. 1 hour ago, Shaz1 said:

    I am more of a outsider than a actual Pakistani who lives here. I have come enough to know about life of a person here. I am willing to admit this country is not perfect. But that is not why I come here. I come here because this is where my roots are. At the same time I understand India used to be a country my grandparents came from. I hope when we move forward in life we learn to leave the past behind and leave this War talk to our governments. Because hatred never brings peace


  2. 2 hours ago, express bowling said:


    What is " grit " according to you  ?


    Iyer has a 200+ against a  full strength Australian XI   and Pant has a 300+ in Ranji


    and they average 55 and 62 in FC   ..... and the type of  " grit "   Sehwag had. these 2 have too.

    I think Shreyas Iyer for one, definitely needs to learn to put a price on his wicket in certain situations, and not just go for his shots all the time.   He's too good a player to not do that.  

  3. 3 minutes ago, express bowling said:


    sandeep .... it is a very valid observation which I respect.


    I just want to channel it towards the experienced batters and not the new ones.


    I would also like to observe the " innings building "  4-day A-team batters to find a suitable candidate, and not the dashers  .... but alas ! , the A-team games are not being  televised.

    Respect is mutual EB!  


    And I don't think that the likes of Iyer, Samson, Nair can claim inexperience for much longer.   Pant and Shaw, of course can.  


    Personally I have high hopes for Iyer and Samson, and I feel like they haven't done justice to their talent and skillsets at this point.  Indian cricket is a brutally competitive arena, especially for batsmen.  With a bit of bad luck, even the best of prospects can spend an entire career waiting for opportunities that never materialize.  I don't want to see potential talents "miss the bus" and turn into the next Manoj Tiwary.   Although that's a bit harsh - But I'm sure you get what I'm saying.  

  4. 3 minutes ago, express bowling said:


    The bold part is the issue I want and wanted to stress on.


    It is important to identify young players who can succeed at international level .... and stick with them through successes and failures.


    Pant is one of them.   2nd season blues is a common and good test from which top players are identified  (  eventually, they emerge successful from this issue ).



    Bhau, we are on the same page on this - See this in my first post on this subject: 



     he's sure to get plenty of chances.  He's still barely in his twenties.  Time is on his side.  At least in the real world. 

    In the ICF world, wait for the FanBois to dump him and start jizzing on the next u-19 Keeper who smacks a few sixes.  


  5. 8 minutes ago, fineleg said:

    Sehwag and Warner both have grit. Their flamboyance notwithstanding.

    +1.   One of my favorite Veeru innings is his away hundred in the 2007-08 series in Australia.  It wasn't his usual slam-bang stuff.  It was a "You shall not Pass" effort.   And one of his finest.  Veeru had an under-rated defensive game.  And he drew the right lessons from his 195 at Melbourne.   He was quoted after getting caught off fulltoss, saying that he was satisfied with the runs he scored.  And a few years later, he was quoted as saying that he later realized that his dismissal ended up causing India to lose that match - he had the Aussies on the mat before he went for that hoick, and it would have been a very different game, if he had batted on for even another 30-40 minutes or so.  


    Even Warner is not a guy who throws it away.   He is a Sehwag shishya in the truest sense of the word.  Especially in test cricket.  

  6. 34 minutes ago, express bowling said:

    Young batters like Pant and Iyer may take some time to learn how to adjust to different situations.

    Of course younger players should be given a long rope to learn to adapt etc. I have no qualms if a Rishabh Pant fails a few times.  But like you said, a Manish Pandey getting himself out in a crucial situation, trying to run the ball to third-man is atrocious shot selection from a guy who's been "around" for a bit.  I mean, even experienced players can have brain-farts once in a while, but Manish got himself out playing that stupid dab twice in the handful of games against Australia.  Shreyas Iyer is a guy that I will expect to show improvement on this front - again, no issues if he fails a few times.  That's cricket.  But if he keeps throwing away his wicket with poor shot selection, in this silly quest to maintain his self-image as a batsman who "dominates" bowlers, then its a problem that needs to be addressed.   In any event, I posted my thoughts in this thread not to single out an Iyer or a Pandey.   Just more of a general observation of a fan on the developing trends in Indian cricket.  


    1 hour ago, gattaca said:

    IPL skills for bat are well payed but depends on skills on batsman and willing to learn. IPL is a shortcut for fame and money but playing for India is ultimate goal for a pure cricketer. If someone is  only interested in money then IPL makes sense. This is actually better since now we will have people who are only really interested in cricket playing for India. Also op forgot to all shubham gill.

    I don't know much about Shubham Gill apart from the fact that he did well on the u19 series against England, home and away.  And saw a nice little 2 min promotional video made by Cricinfo.  


    Armaan Jaffer is one young kid, who is supposedly old school in his batting approach, and is considered to have potential.   And I'm sure there are others out there.  



  7. 4 minutes ago, express bowling said:


    Interest in Pant was because he averaged 80+ with a SR of 100+  last  Ranji season.  I don't think this has ever happened in Ranji history before    ( this average + SR combo  )


    The other reason is because he did well in the IPL and played and hit top international pacers with ease. 


     " u-19 Keeper who smacks a few sixes "  is not the reason why he became popular.  Fans, generally, don't have much interest in the keeping aspect.

    I wasn't talking about you.  And I agree that Pant should not be written off.   That was kindof my point.  But there are plenty here who will move on to the next "name".  

  8. 31 minutes ago, sarchasm said:

    Those are some big words from David. I mean all he did for the first half of his odi career was stall the momentum no matter how comfortably placed the team was. He should probably go easy on his wards in public. 

    And yet, its the Delhi IPL team, that on Dravid's advice, has shelled out big $$$ to all of these young guns - Iyer, Karun, Samson.   


    Dravid has his limitations as an LOI bat, even as a test bat.  But I don't think anyone can honestly cast aspersions on his motives, or his insights on Indian cricket or the young batsmen whose development he's currently overseeing.  

  9. 20 minutes ago, maniac said:

    Also I have seen a certain section of ICF always mocking the failures of new comer or a youngster  and suggesting there are no alternatives to the oldies...now @sandeep I don't know if you fall in that category or not but nitpicking on youngsters without having seen anything bugs me.



    So you started with a theory, that may not apply to me (and fyi, it really doesn't).  Accused me of it, without any basis, just because its a pet peeve of yours.  Lahori logic.  You can do better than that.  

  10. 18 minutes ago, maniac said:

    Again your question doesn't make any sense-how can they have stellar domestic records if they do not care enough about being  gritty?

    Overall numbers can still be maintained at a high level, even if a batsman is unwilling to buckle down when needed.   For me, I have been following Shreyas Iyer a bit, since he burst onto the scene in his first Ranji season.  He is a prime example of a talent that is at risk of not maxmizing his potential.   I still want to see him in the Indian team sooner rather than later, but I want to see him 'finish' games more often than he has.   He has a troubling pattern of scoring attractive 40s, 50s.   But getting out instead of finishing the job.  Because he wants to "dominate" the bowlers, as his "natural game". He's clearly a capable bat, but to me, is underachieving.   And Dravid's words on him have the unmistakeable ring of truth.  


  11. 2 hours ago, speedheat said:

    Nop he is quality, he has that ability to surprise the batsmen with pace, line and length is spot on too, pace is good can crank it up to 147kph, he will survive but had to keep on his hard work.

    He's a quality bowler.  Only risk for him is durability.  Seems to be a bit on the shorter side, and doesn't look to be super-strong.  Hope he stays fit and keeps performing at the high level he has so far.   He's a quintessential 110 percenter.  I always like guys who put in genuine effort in the game.    Don't like his silly celebrations though.  

  12. This is a thoroughly incorrect reading of my post.  

    13 minutes ago, maniac said:

    You said the current lot lack grit- they have stellar domestic records just like the previous era and have more adaptability across all formats-which is a upgrade 


    You were clamoring for the next Sunil Gavaskar and Rahul Dravid :laugh: when there is no place for them in the modern era may be a 2006 Rahul Dravid but that's about it.

    I didn't say they lack grit, I'm asking whether they care enough about being gritty.   My point is that the economic incentives and the current "fashion" of natural game etc is changing the definition of what a successful batsman should be.   And guess what?  I'm agreeing with Rahul Dravid - a giant of the game, in deed as well as thought.    Forget my words.  Scroll back up and read the direct quote of what Dravid said, in the first post.  


    By the way, asking to prioritize grit, and placing a value on your wicket, doesn't automatically mean I want them to stonewall away at a scoring rate of 1960s cricket.   That's an extrapolation you made without any basis.   And please, get your head out of your ass while you are on a hiding to nothing in terms of just being contrarian for the sake of it.   I mean, in one post you claim that Gavaskar had all the shots and was forced to play defensive, while in another you claim there is no place for a Gavaskar in the modern era? Which one is it?  


    13 minutes ago, maniac said:

    Sachin Tendulkar type player comes once in a generation but then Sachin was a flashy cricketer when he started as well,so were most ATG batsmen so that is a good start rather than a concern which is what I addressed

    Sachin may have been aggressive in his scoring approach, but you could never, ever accuse him of being flashy at the cost of giving his wicket away.  Especially while he was coming through the ranks in domestic cricket.  IIRC he scored hundreds on debut in Ranji, Duleep and Irani trophy.  And he would never say something like what Shreyas Iyer said after getting out for 80-odd in a crucial game - "Oh I have scored enough runs this season, with my 'natural game', I got out.  Its ok".   Tendy is a batsman from the Ramakant Achrekar school of batting.  Apocryphal story of the one rupee coin and all. 


    13 minutes ago, maniac said:

    I have never explained the dame thing written in the same language 3 times before-congratulations !!!!

    Repeating nonsense x number of times doesn't really convert it into sense.   You keep missing the forest for the trees in this thread.  I guess the fact that I mentioned tailunt's failure as a test player probably got your panties all twisted up into knots.   

  13. 1 minute ago, maniac said:

    Is there anything I misinterpreted...all those points have been debunked

    :laugh:  Debunked? How so? 


    And yes, you have completely misinterpreted my words.  How you came to the conclusion that this post is somehow a justification for selecting Nehra or Yuvi etc only a psychiatrist can decipher, maybe after a few sessions of electro-shock therapy.   



  14. 2 hours ago, CommonMan said:

    Pant has been poor, but icf keeps backing him. dont know why.

    ummeed pe dunya qaayam hai, mere dost.   Plus he's the new shiny toy.  And a big chunk of ICF is tired of Dhoni's old greybeard face.   Kuch nayaa lao.  


    In the NFL, its a touchstone aphorism that there is no player more popular on the 50 man roster, than the 2nd choice quarterback.  Especially if he's a young player yet to get a proper chance.  He's widely viewed with a halo - almost a sure-shot to "make the team great again".   


    Given Pant's skill-set - he's, at a minimum, a decent keeper, and possesses the ability to thwack the ball - he's sure to get plenty of chances.  He's still barely in his twenties.  Time is on his side.  At least in the real world.  In the ICF world, wait for the FanBois to dump him and start jizzing on the next u-19 Keeper who smacks a few sixes.  

  15. 17 minutes ago, maniac said:

    What Garbage!!!


    What is the basis for this gibberish?


    Let us see

    None of the guys you mentioned bar Karun Nair have played international test cricket and infact the guy got a 300 in one of the matches.There was nothing flashy about how he got out in the remainder games. It was a certain weakness against pace that got exploited and hopefully he will improve on it.


    The rest like Iyer,Samson,Pant most of us have seen for the most part which is IPL which last time I checked is hit and miss cricket


    Now if you are basing this on their domestic performances,most of these guys have stellar domestic records which you only get due to "consistency" ....you don't get consistency of you don't have temperament...and all the guys can score at a fast rate shows the improvement over previous era.


    Sachin evolved to become a consistent run machine after a couple of years of experience and before that he did play a lot of flashy innings.


    Gavaskar was a flashy cricketer who for the sake of the team became a super defensive batsman...he did have a arsenal of shots as well.


    Rahul Dravid another name you bring up upped his scoring rate in all forms of the games as he evolved and adjusted to the needs of the modern game which makes him a great.


    This thread reminds me of something a man from

    old city Hyderabad once said  -dehleez pe thook dena which in English translates to premature ejaculation

    As usual.  Reading comprehension fail.   Ek kaam kar.  Thodi coffee pee le.   Phir shaant ho jaa.  Phir dheere se read kar.  A couple of times if you need to.  Slowly.   Then you might start to understand the point being made.   



  16. 2 hours ago, bsriharsha said:

    Previous Pakistani players (upto 2000) had the liberty of playing in County teams. Imran Khan in his autobiography(cricketing one) made it clear on the importance playing in the counties had on his cricketing career. The top Pakistani cricketers playing in the counties negated the idiotic first class cricket structure in Pakistan to a large extent. The English Counties are right now not as strong as what they were in the 70's , 80's and 90's. Also the focus of the English Counties has shifted from overseas players to domestic/kolpak players who are eligible to play for England. This has led to lesser numbers of Pakistani players playing in the Counties. And most of the cricketers playing for Pakistan (post 2000) were raw and didn't have the coaching to become the finished articles. 



    Its not just a lack of coaching - its an exposure to high level competitive cricket that provides the fire needed to forge int'l class talent.  This is why Pakistan is down in the dumps struggling for the #6 rank with the likes of SL etc.     The PSL is a step in the right direction, and will help them improve on the LOI front, but the lack of test class batting talent in the Pak squad is a direct result of their shoddy FC cricket.  I think there' s a journalist who tweeted a damning list of issues with domestic cricket, Abbasi something - it was a bunch of serialized tweets, documenting how the PCB has randomly chopped and changed their domestic structure around, year after year, and none of the changes make any sense.  This is not rocket science.  A few minor tweaks could result in Pakistan having a decent FC circuit in a very short amount of time.   But I guess there are a lot of vested interests who wouldn't really allow the needed changes to occur without a fight.  

  17. Shreyas Iyer.   Sanju Samson.  Rishabh Pant.   Karun Nair.   Sarfraz Khan.  And the latest addition to the mix, chota packet promising to be the next big dhamaka - Prithvi Shaw.


    All of these guys seem to have that 'it' factor when it comes to their batting.  That certain something that jumps out when you watch them bat - plenty of timing, a plethora of strokes, and a willingness to take the attack to the bowlers.   But take a bit of a closer look, and you can start to see telltale signs of inconsistency - a tendency to "live hard or die trying".   Given the way the economic and 'popularity' incentives are stacked in favor of "modern" bats who are capable of exciting stroke-play, its not hard to see why the teenyboppers of Indian batting are all out to emulate the ABDVs and Rohit Sharmas of the world, as opposed to the Gavaskars and dare I say, even the great Sachin Tendulkar.   


    Gone are the days where the domestic circuit prioritized, taught and honed the ability of a young batsman's ability to put a premium price on his wicket.  These days, all you hear in terms of "cutting edge conventional wisdom" is the tiresome cliche of "expressing yourself" and "playing your natural game".  So widespread is the epidemic in India's young ranks,, that even the normally reticent Rahul Dravid felt compelled to publicly call out some of his wards.    An annoyed Dravid was quoted as dismissing all this emphasis on "natural game" as "frustrating".   Dravid chose to make his point with an unusually strong choice of words.


    This concept of 'play your natural game', which I hear all the time, frustrates me because there's no such thing in my belief as 'natural game.'

    "It's only about how you play different situations. Are you good enough to play when the score is 30 for 3, or 250 for 3? Are you good enough to bat when you go in first over or are you good enough to go in first ball after lunch? You have to learn to bat differently in different conditions, and if you can do that like Hardik is showing at the moment, those would be signs of a developing cricketer, someone who can make consistent contributions and not someone who is a one-off, who can produce brilliance once in a while. The aspiration and challenges set for a lot of India A players is to be all-weather players, all-situation players, all-condition players."


    Strong words they might be, but I feel that it will be inevitably swamped by the tsunami of $$$$ that has flooded cricket since the inception of the IPL.  After all, what will a young Indian cricketer aspire to be, considering the cricket circuit today - Why should he devote his energies to building his skills like say, a Murali Vijay, Che Pujara, or even an Ajinkya Rahane?  When a test cricket 'failure' like Rohit Sharma is a multi-millionaire superstar IPL team captain, and gets to be a glory hogging ODI opener for the national team because of his ability to hit sixes?  


    To some extent, this evolution of incentives and the corresponding evolution in batting is not restricted to India alone.   One look at the young batsmen coming through the ranks in England and Australia will show you a markedly 'same-ness' in the ranks.  James Vince.   Marcus Stoinis.   Chris Lynn.  Glenn Maxwell.   


    I wonder where the next Rahul Dravid will come from.  Or if he will show up at all.   Cricket will be poorer for it, if he doesn't.  

  18. 4 minutes ago, Shaz1 said:

    Naw I just pick and choose who I debate with because many people on the internet just waste your time. Anyone who respondes by reading my posts is who I debate with. I have been on forums long enough to find those good debates.


    When it comes to India and Pakistan my views are far more different. I don't think hatered of one another is the best defence. Which is why I get dismissive of such thinking. And don't indulge myself in such finger pointing.



    If you are looking for "good debates" then you need to bring a bit of intellectual honesty to the table.   Agree that hatred is useless.  But pointing out facts, especially those are relevant, even critical to the question and subject at hand, cannot be dismissed as "fingerpointing".    That's just a self-serving attempt at superficially claiming the "high road" while taking the low one in actuality. 


    You presented a perspective that claims that Cricket should be played between India & Pakistan.  When presented with opposing opinions, you choose to dismiss them as hatred, instead of arguing against the logic.   And threw out strawman arguments claiming that posters are calling Pakistanis as terrorists - when overwhelming majority, if not all the posts on this thead, simply don't do that. 


    That doesn't reflect someone "looking for a good debate", it reflects a close-minded person unable to stomach reality checks from differing perspectives.   Colloquially known as Kuwey ka mendhak in the sub-continent.  I.e. Frog in the well syndrome.  

  19. 8 minutes ago, Shaz1 said:

    I am a firm believer Pakistan is its own enemy. But what you said up there is a bunch of who-ha! Its something I avoid cause its nothing but pointing fingers at one another. And by the way I will do what ever the hell I want. If you disagree with my points thats fine with me but don't go off that personal.


    I am hardly getting any debates here worth a read. All are either conspracies or toungue to the cheek humor. Makes it awkward for a outsider. ICF needs improvements on that.



    Not sure where I got "personal".  And while I agree that ICF certainly has a lot of improvement in terms of discussion quality, on this particular subject, and in this thread, sorry I have to disagree with you.  You seem to be dismissive of perspectives that don't mirror your own.   Your loss IMO.   

  20. 2 hours ago, maniac said:

    Comparing a stone pelting incident which was done probably by a drunk idiot to trained blood thirsty militants who are ready to kill and die in the process :hail: Pakistanis are a true breed.


    In Australia there are incidents when streakers run on the ground as well....it is still a security lapse but it is not the same as a suicide bomber running around shouting jalalalalalalalalalalalalala which you associate with Pakistan 

    38 minutes ago, maniac said:

    Well all  black people are thugs is also a horrible racial stereotype but doesn't mean that you will walk without a worry in the world in South Chicago  at midnight

    Froggy on absolute fire in this thread.  :laugh:

Guest, sign in to access all features.