Rishabh Pant blasts second fastest century in T20 history

[raki05]

3 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Ok. If you think Pant/Kishan should play a dead rubber T20/LOI for like 2-3 international matches per year for the next 3-4 years, i have no problems with that. Anything more than that, and its too much too soon from a nation that has ZERO credibility in nurturing talent and not overwhelming them too early.

 

Most of the time we play dead rubber only,few times whe we play imp final or semi final such as ct17 or wc 15 our experience cool also become fool.

[Tattieboy]

1 minute ago, Muloghonto said:

Show me how many keeper-bats debut at 19-21 years of age in history fo cricket. 

If his body isn't ready, it isn't ready. Indians like you specialize in breaking young talents like we have over the past 20 years, its time to think like the Aussies and not rush our kids.

I am interested how you know his body is not ready to keep wicket in test matches.  How many overs to they play in Ranji trophy? 

[Muloghonto]

5 minutes ago, Tattieboy said:

I am interested how you know his body is not ready to keep wicket in test matches.  How many overs to they play in Ranji trophy? 

because he is 19 and nobody is ready at 19. Human physiology. Which is why we don't have 19 year old regular keepers in international cricket...like ever.

 

[Muloghonto]

11 minutes ago, raki05 said:

And you expect that anyone who ll ever debut should have same skill set which a 15 year ecperience grown ass man have? What a logic.

I expect them to have the basic foundation of being a successful test player before they debut. Which is why keepers dont debut till they are 21-24 for the most part.

[Tattieboy]

Just now, Muloghonto said:

because he is 19 and nobody is ready at 19. Human physiology. Which is why we don't have 19 year old regular keepers in international cricket...like ever.

 

You are quite happy to play in Ranji Trophy keeping the same number of overs with this fragile back that  he is s risking perminent injury but not test matches . Other test nations had very good keepers better than the rest,  whatever age they were. 

 

[Muloghonto]

1 minute ago, Tattieboy said:

You are quite happy to play in Ranji Trophy keeping the same number of overs with this fragile back that  he is s risking perminent injury but not test matches . Other test nations had very good keepers better than the rest,  whatever age they were. 

 

Not at the age of 19. 

Yes, Ranji is development ground, he can marinate there for a few more years. No problems with that.

[Tattieboy]

1 minute ago, Muloghonto said:

Not at the age of 19. 

Yes, Ranji is development ground, he can marinate there for a few more years. No problems with that.

I haven't been in India for a year so I don't know if he is  the best wicketkeeper / batsman but as an ex cricketer from an other country I hope you never play him but as a coach my moto is if they are good enough then they are old enough , so will just have to disagree 

[Muloghonto]

6 minutes ago, Tattieboy said:

I haven't been in India for a year so I don't know if he is  the best wicketkeeper / batsman but as an ex cricketer from an other country I hope you never play him but as a coach my moto is if they are good enough then they are old enough , so will just have to disagree 

They are not old enough for a physical job like keeping or fast bowling , no-matter how good they are. They are old enough, when their bodies are 22-24 years old. 

[Tattieboy]

9 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

They are not old enough for a physical job like keeping or fast bowling , no-matter how good they are. They are old enough, when their bodies are 22-24 years old. 

Rabada

[Muloghonto]

6 minutes ago, Tattieboy said:

Rabada

Remains to be seen how well Rabada pans out with injuries. 

For every one Rabada, you have Pattinson, Cummins, etc. 

And we certainly never have had a full-time keeper in ANY format that debuted younger than 21 in history of cricket.

[Tattieboy]

19 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

They are not old enough for a physical job like keeping or fast bowling , no-matter how good they are. They are old enough, when their bodies are 22-24 years old. 

Budhi Kunderan, 21

P Patel                   17

D Karthik.              19 

[Muloghonto]

3 minutes ago, Tattieboy said:

Budhi Kunderan, 21

P Patel                   17

D Karthik.              19 

Yeah and how did the last two turn out again ? Proves my point. Debut before 21 = gonna get overwhelmed with too much workload, pressure etc. and end up as a 30+ year old with less than 50 matches under the name. Not exactly recipe for success.

 

[lamellavig]

6 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Remains to be seen how well Rabada pans out with injuries. 

For every one Rabada, you have Pattinson, Cummins, etc. 

And we certainly never have had a full-time keeper in ANY format that debuted younger than 21 in history of cricket.

What an utterly stupid post. Cricket is a game of the mind, not muscles. Do you remember Glenn Mcgrath? He was a master of philosophy, along with Steve Waugh. Together they designed the ideals of the greatest cricketing team of all time (e.g. no nightwatchmen, 6 slips etc.)

In Australia, meritocracy rules. the batting + wicketkeeping cofactors rank Pant higher than Dhoni or Saha, and if he fails, he fails. Move on to the next young option. Simple as. 

[Muloghonto]

1 minute ago, lamellavig said:

What an utterly stupid post. Cricket is a game of the mind, not muscles. Do you remember Glenn Mcgrath? He was a master of philosophy, along with Steve Waugh. Together they designed the ideals of the greatest cricketing team of all time (e.g. no nightwatchmen, 6 slips etc.)

In Australia, meritocracy rules. the batting + wicketkeeping cofactors rank Pant higher than Dhoni or Saha, and if he fails, he fails. Move on to the next young option. Simple as. 

Glenn McGrath was a Sampras-esque physical freak. 

Bowling, especially fast bowling and wicketkeeping are physical jobs. Try squatting 500 times per day over 8 hours to see if its physical or not. 

Meritocracy rules in Australia, but so does player development. Which is why they hardly, if ever, give players below 23-24 years of age their debuts and almost NEVER have they given debut to teenagers in the last 25-30 years.

 

batting is irrelevant to picking a wicketkeeper, as Pappu is proving in this match. To replace a wicketkeeper, the new keeper needs equal to or better wicketkeeping skills. Especially if keeping to a mediocre attack that doesnt generate 30-40 chances per match.

[raki05]

19 minutes ago, Tattieboy said:

Rabada

Decock as well

[lamellavig]

3 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Glenn McGrath was a Sampras-esque physical freak. 

Bowling, especially fast bowling and wicketkeeping are physical jobs. Try squatting 500 times per day over 8 hours to see if its physical or not. 

Meritocracy rules in Australia, but so does player development. Which is why they hardly, if ever, give players below 23-24 years of age their debuts and almost NEVER have they given debut to teenagers in the last 25-30 years.

 

batting is irrelevant to picking a wicketkeeper, as Pappu is proving in this match. To replace a wicketkeeper, the new keeper needs equal to or better wicketkeeping skills. Especially if keeping to a mediocre attack that doesnt generate 30-40 chances per match.

Batting is definitely relevant. Otherwise Australia would have picked Haddin over Gilchrist.

1) Saha is 33 or 34, and shows no sign of improving the batting strength which is India's weak point.

2) Bin Saha, and get Pant. However, this should not be the only change. Bin Umesh and Ishant. Give Saini and Nagarkoti a chance (ie Bumrah/Bhuvneshwar/Saini/Nagarkoti/Hardik pace attack). 

3) Bin Vijay and Dhawan. Pujara and Lokesh as openers, then Shreyas Iyer/Kohli/Prithvi Shaw/Pant is the batting order.

 

This bins those who don't have requisite skills to be a great team, and promotes those who do. 

[Muloghonto]

2 minutes ago, lamellavig said:

Batting is definitely relevant. Otherwise Australia would have picked Haddin over Gilchrist.

No, because Haddin isn't a better gloveman than Gillchrist. We saw this back in the day when Haddin kept to Warne and he was worse.

2 minutes ago, lamellavig said:

1) Saha is 33 or 34, and shows no sign of improving the batting strength which is India's weak point.

He still has 3-4 years left in the tank due to late start. Plenty of time to groom Kishan or Pant.

2 minutes ago, lamellavig said:

2) Bin Saha, and get Pant. However, this should not be the only change. Bin Umesh and Ishant. Give Saini and Nagarkoti a chance (ie Bumrah/Bhuvneshwar/Saini/Nagarkoti/Hardik pace attack). 

Sure. in 3-4 years when Pant is ready. Otherwise we'd be repeating the same mistake we did with Pappu's debut. Same with Nagarkoti or Saini. As i said, look at Australia, England, RSA develop their talent, not just throw kids into the deep end like we do and continuously fail.

2 minutes ago, lamellavig said:

3) Bin Vijay and Dhawan. Pujara and Lokesh as openers, then Shreyas Iyer/Kohli/Prithvi Shaw/Pant is the batting order.

 

This bins those who don't have requisite skills to be a great team, and promotes those who do. 

You are clearly like the majority of Indians who have 0% knowledge of professional sports development. That is why a country of 1.2 billion cannot get more than 2 medals in the Olympics.Because people think like you.

[lamellavig]

Just now, Muloghonto said:

No, because Haddin isn't a better gloveman than Gillchrist. We saw this back in the day when Haddin kept to Warne and he was worse.

He still has 3-4 years left in the tank due to late start. Plenty of time to groom Kishan or Pant.

Sure. in 3-4 years when Pant is ready. Otherwise we'd be repeating the same mistake we did with Pappu's debut. Same with Nagarkoti or Saini. As i said, look at Australia, England, RSA develop their talent, not just throw kids into the deep end like we do and continuously fail.

You are clearly like the majority of Indians who have 0% knowledge of professional sports development. That is why a country of 1.2 billion cannot get more than 2 medals in the Olympics.Because people think like you.

Clearly, the Indian selectors do not think like me. After all, when was the last time the BCCI showed any cricketing vision in promoting young players?

 

Do you even know of the scientific methods of Johan Cruijff, Pep Guardiola, and Steve Waugh?

[Muloghonto]

Just now, lamellavig said:

Clearly, the Indian selectors do not think like me. After all, when was the last time the BCCI showed any cricketing vision in promoting young players?

 

Do you even know of the scientific methods of Johan Cruijff, Pep Guardiola, and Steve Waugh?

Cricketing vision is in player development. Not throwing any teenager into the international stage the moment they look good for a day or two.

 

The scientific methods of player development in almsot every single sport barring gymnastics, is about nurturig the teens and early tweens and letting them hit their ceilings (in terms of workloads) begininng in their mid 20s.

[lamellavig]

Just now, Muloghonto said:

Cricketing vision is in player development. Not throwing any teenager into the international stage the moment they look good for a day or two.

 

The scientific methods of player development in almsot every single sport barring gymnastics, is about nurturig the teens and early tweens and letting them hit their ceilings (in terms of workloads) begininng in their mid 20s.

Clearly you are content with a cricket team that merely wins. You don't care whether it is attacking or defensive cricket. Just winning cricket. You don't worry about beautiful cricket: after all, that is why you want young players to become 23 before they debut, right? Because you don't want a single team which can grow together to peak at the same time? 

 

I want a cricket team that plays beautiful cricket and dominates. Not a team that can just win.