Please drop Pandya to maintain Test cricket’s sanctity.

[putrevus]

5 minutes ago, zen said:

That shows specialists have been a problem 

It has been a problem and Pandya is also problem too.

[zen]

6 minutes ago, putrevus said:

There is no slot as an AR. AR is a luxury which player provides with his other skill.

When you say "I would play x as he bowls better and can bat too", you are in a way creating that AR spot

 

6 minutes ago, putrevus said:

It has been a problem and Pandya is also problem too.

Pandya has won us a test in SENA. That is enough considering that specialists have failed big time 

[putrevus]

3 minutes ago, zen said:

When you say "I would play x as he bowls better and can bat too", you are in a way creating that AR spot

 

Pandya has won us a test in SENA. That is enough considering that specialists have failed big time 

No first rule of thumb for any test selection is a player should walk in to team either a batsman or a bowler.The other skills are complementary and should only be used when judging players with comparable ability.

Pandya's performances should be overlooked just becuase specialists failed is a silly.

[UrmiSinhaRay]

Bhuvi is a good pace bowling AR for Tests
Hardik is costing more games with his fixed place than winning them

Sent from my CPH1609 using Tapatalk

[zen]

15 minutes ago, UrmiSinhaRay said:

Bhuvi is a good pace bowling AR for Tests
Hardik is costing more games with his fixed place than winning them

Sent from my CPH1609 using Tapatalk
 

Bhuvi can be played as a specialist bowler in SENA. Do you think he can bat at #7 and has potential to hit test 100s?

[UrmiSinhaRay]

Bhuvi can be played as a specialist bowler in SENA. Do you think he can bat at #7 and has potential to hit test 100s?

Not yet but he'll reach there if he tries hard.
Pandya is definitely not the solution we are searching right now.

Sent from my CPH1609 using Tapatalk

[zen]

23 minutes ago, putrevus said:

No first rule of thumb for any test selection is a player should walk in to team either a batsman or a bowler.The other skills are complementary and should only be used when judging players with comparable ability.

Those rule of thumbs are for those who are still learning about cricket. Times have changed too. How you select a 11 depends up on strengths and weaknesses of a team and the reserves available. Where benefits of a strategy outweigh its costs and when the law of diminishing returns is not in play 

 

Quote

Pandya's performances should be overlooked just becuase specialists failed is a silly.

Pandya has performed relatively well including winning Ind a game for Ind. The performances of the series have been posted on this thread as well. No need to keep repeating the things that have already been addressed  

 

 

[zen]

4 minutes ago, UrmiSinhaRay said:

Not yet but he'll reach there if he tries hard.

Sent from my CPH1609 using Tapatalk
 

Let him be there first. Test cricket is the hardest format.  Pandya already plays as an AR in other formats so would get a run 

 

If not for Pandya's performance, Ind would not have won the 3rd test 

Edited September 5, 2018 by zen

[putrevus]

If they want five bowlers all the time which I think is right approach even though it has cost India two series. We need players who are consistent.Pandya scored 50 in third test where his score made no difference.Other than 90 in first SA test, I have not seen any under-pressure knock from Pandya, all his other knocks have mostly come when team was winning without his score.

 

More than stats his batting looks so much suspect,he has no clear mind on what he wants to do at the crease.He is very weak facing fast bowlers to begin with and with his confused state of mind he is looking worse.

 

Stokes may not have scored many runs but he has shown ability to stay at the crease , that ability is missing from Pandya.

 

There is a reason why England stinks when they tour subcontinent and Australia, players like Curran, Woakes and to some extent Stokes are totally rendered useless.

 

Big four in 80s worked becuase all four were leading bowlers for their teams , their batting was a bonus.Kallis worked for SA becuase he was their best batsman his bowling was a bonus.

 

Pandya is an allrounder so he does not have to be either bowler nor a batsman is ridiculous.

 

Some one was comparing Akash Chopra's stats with Pandya.How many tests did Akash Chopra play again??? there is a reason why he played that few tests.

[putrevus]

11 minutes ago, zen said:

Those rule of thumbs are for those who are still learning about cricket. Times have changed too. How you select a 11 depends up on strengths and weaknesses of a team and the reserves available. Where benefits of a strategy outweigh its costs and when the law of diminishing returns is not in play 

 

Pandya has performed relatively well including winning Ind a game for Ind. The performances of the series have been posted on this thread as well. No need to keep repeating the things that have already been addressed  

 

 

Times have not changed as far as test matches go.Tests are the same since WG Grace played them and it requires same thing, 20 wickets to win the match.

 

Main strategy involved in tests is how to get those 20 wickets and score more than opposition.For that to happen bits and pieces players cannot be part of the team.Pandya should not be part of this test team going forward.He will help this team lose more matches than he will win for this team.

 

Bhuvi with his grit and determination to hang around the crease serves far more for this team.

Edited September 5, 2018 by putrevus

[Kothili]

Nagaraj Gollapudi (Cricinfo) on the other hand is evangelizing Pandya as if he were the best thing since Jesus Christ that happened to Indian Test Cricket. 

 

 

[zen]

A strange post, when most of the points have been addressed by various posters:

 

6 minutes ago, putrevus said:

If they want five bowlers all the time which I think is right approach even though it has cost India two series. We need players who are consistent.Pandya scored 50 in third test where his score made no difference.Other than 90 in first SA test, I have not seen any under-pressure knock from Pandya, all his other knocks have mostly come when team was winning without his score.

That is a biased opinion - focusing on failures and accounting good performances as fluke 

 

8 minutes ago, putrevus said:

More than stats his batting looks so much suspect,he has no clear mind on what he wants to do at the crease.He is very weak facing fast bowlers to begin with and with his confused state of mind he is looking worse.

And is still scoring runs 

 

9 minutes ago, putrevus said:

Stokes may not have scored many runs but he has shown ability to stay at the crease , that ability is missing from Pandya.

Many posters have pointed out stats from Stokes first 10-15 tests 

 

9 minutes ago, putrevus said:

There is a reason why England stinks when they tour subcontinent and Australia, players like Curran, Woakes and to some extent Stokes are totally rendered useless.

Pandya has actually won India a test. And performed with the bat too 

 

10 minutes ago, putrevus said:

Big four in 80s worked becuase all four were leading bowlers for their teams , their batting was a bonus.Kallis worked for SA becuase he was their best batsman his bowling was a bonus.

These players are of ATG level. Are you suggesting only ATG level play as AR?

 

10 minutes ago, putrevus said:

Pandya is an allrounder so he does not have to be either bowler nor a batsman is ridiculous.

The point is that Pandya position is 1/11. While specialists (4 bowlers+5 bowlers) = 82% of the team. Basically, haters are trying to suggest that 1/11 position has to perform 100% of the time, while the 82% can perform as a group 

 

12 minutes ago, putrevus said:

Some one was comparing Akash Chopra's stats with Pandya.How many tests did Akash Chopra play again??? there is a reason why he played that few tests.

Again the point is that Pandya has done better than specialists so specialists have to be extremely good at what they do to come in place of someone like Pandya 

[zen]

21 minutes ago, putrevus said:

Times have not changed as far as test matches go.Tests are the same since WG Grace played them and it requires same thing, 20 wickets to win the match.

 

Main strategy involved in tests is how to get those 20 wickets and score more than opposition.For that to happen bits and pieces players cannot be part of the team.Pandya should not be part of this test team going forward.He will help this team lose more matches than he will win for this team.

Again your post display a lack of understanding / unidimensional views of cricket. Teams can lose even by picking up 20 wkts. You have to score adequate runs too to win 

 

21 minutes ago, putrevus said:

Bhuvi with his grit and determination to hang around the crease serves far more for this team.

Atm, Bhuvi cannot play as an AR as he does not have the ability to hit 100s. You don't play players as AR for 10-15 consistent runs ... Neither we have consistent bowlers in the line up so Bhuvi can come in as a specialist bowler if he is in better form relatively speaking 

 

 

Edited September 5, 2018 by zen

[coffee_rules]

We don't need an all-rounder in India. Ashwin/Jadeja can fulfill that role. We desperately need one in away matches. Need a true one. Not a bits-n-pieces player like Pandya/Binny. Otherwise with consisent bowling from Bhuvi and mild batting from Bhuvi is good enough. With no openers, after 3 MO batsman, we can't have players like Pandya/Pant following as batsman. He can't hold bat to ball in tough pitches or match conditions. We will end up chasing sub-250 in away matches, this is the 4th failure with a team which has Pandya. With our seam-bowling faring well, we need to bolster batting with proper MO and Lower MO. India seriously lacks in this area which is the difference between the two side.

Edited September 5, 2018 by coffee_rules

[putrevus]

9 minutes ago, zen said:

A strange post, when most of the points have been addressed by various posters:

 

That is a biased opinion - focusing on failures and accounting good performances as fluke 

 

And is still scoring runs 

 

Many posters have pointed out stats from Stokes first 10-15 tests 

 

Pandya has actually won India a test. And performed with the bat too 

 

These players are of ATG level. Are you suggesting only ATG level play as AR?

 

The point is that Pandya position is 1/11. While specialists (4 bowlers+5 bowlers) = 82% of the team. Basically, haters are trying to suggest that 1/11 position has to perform 100% of the time, while the 82% can perform as a group 

 

Again the point is that Pandya has done better than specialists so specialists have to be extremely good at what they do to come in place of someone like Pandya 

Just becuase someone has opinion which is different from yours, he/they are not haters. Bowlers along with Kohli have done their jobs that is why this has been a close series unlike 2014 where they were blown out.

 

If you think Pandya and Stokes have same ability then we are watching different game and we better not discuss this further.Stokes is fundamentally very organized batsmen, he will walk into his team as batsman alone.

 

Don't bring other players performances to justify Pandya's position.Lot of players will not play again after this series.

[rtmohanlal]

Pandya is yet to prove  the tag of  genuine all rounder for sure.For that he needs to be more consistant,need to harden for those tough situations  etc etc. Having said that, for a rookie of just 11 tests his record is okay.He needs to be provided with his chances. If a Pujara is given chances even after playing 58+ tests and yet to prove in SENA, then why can't Pandya. As for me, Pandya has peformed far better than Pujara when it comes to what is required of them. Pandya avg:s 31 each wiith bat and ball that too after playing 7 tough tests in SENA . That indicates he has ability for sure.What he needs is to develop  big occasion temperament which can only come with time and experience.Even the great Kapil dev avg:ed in digits in his first tours to AUS,ENG & NZL in batting.  Pujara in comparison is still mediocre in all of SENA.

[zen]

3 minutes ago, putrevus said:

Just becuase someone has opinion which is different from yours, he/they are not haters. Bowlers along with Kohli have done their jobs that is why this has been a close series unlike 2014 where they were blown out.

 

If you think Pandya and Stokes have same ability then we are watching different game and we better not discuss this further.Stokes is fundamentally very organized batsmen, he will walk into his team as batsman alone.

 

Don't bring other players performances to justify Pandya's position.Lot of players will not play again after this series.

Hardik has played 10 tests away of which Ind have won 5. Below are the stats those wins:

 

View overall figures [change view]

Primary team India

Home or away away (home of opposition)

Start of match date greater than or equal to 1 Jul 2017

Match result won match

Ordered by matches played (descending)

Page 1 of 1

Showing 1 - 19 of 19

First Previous

Next  Last

Return to query menu Cleared query menu

Overall figures

Player	Mat	Runs	HS	Bat Av	100	Wkts	BBI	Bowl Av	5	Ct	St	Ave Diff
V Kohli	5	456	103*	65.14	2	-	-	-	-	4	0	-
Mohammed Shami	5	98	30	14.00	0	18	5/28	21.38	1	1	0	-7.38
HH Pandya	5	252	108	42.00	1	10	5/28	16.30	1	6	0	25.70
CA Pujara	5	446	153	55.75	2	-	-	-	-	4	0	-
AM Rahane	5	396	132	56.57	1	-	-	-	-	11	0	-
R Ashwin	4	147	54	36.75	0	18	5/69	27.05	1	0	0	9.69
S Dhawan	4	437	190	72.83	2	-	-	-	-	4	0	-
KL Rahul	4	217	85	36.16	0	-	-	-	-	9	0	-
WP Saha	3	99	67	33.00	0	-	-	-	-	8	2	-
UT Yadav	3	22	11*	-	0	6	2/21	35.83	0	0	0	-
JJ Bumrah	2	0	0*	0.00	0	14	5/54	16.64	2	1	0	-16.64
RA Jadeja	2	85	70*	85.00	0	13	5/152	28.76	1	0	0	56.23
I Sharma	2	8	7*	8.00	0	7	2/31	23.71	0	0	0	-15.71
Kuldeep Yadav	1	26	26	26.00	0	5	4/40	19.20	0	0	0	6.80
B Kumar	1	63	33	31.50	0	4	3/44	20.75	0	0	0	10.75
A Mukund	1	93	81	46.50	0	-	-	-	-	1	0	-
RR Pant	1	25	24	12.50	0	-	-	-	-	7	0	-
PA Patel	1	18	16	9.00	0	-	-	-	-	5	0	-
M Vijay	1	33	25	16.50	0	-	-	-	-	0	0	-

 

 

The avg difference is 26. Thank you! 

[putrevus]

21 minutes ago, zen said:

Again your post display a lack of understanding / unidimensional views of cricket. Teams can lose even by picking up 20 wkts. You have to score adequate runs too to win 

 

Atm, Bhuvi cannot play as an AR as he does not have the ability to hit 100s. You don't play players as AR for 10-15 consistent runs ... Neither we have consistent bowlers in the line up so Bhuvi can come in as a specialist bowler if he is in better form relatively speaking 

 

 

There is nothing unidimensional about my views, teams have pick 20 wickets and score more than other team to win that is the basic premise of Test cricket which has not changed since it was invented.

 

Pandya is not just good enough in either deperatment.

 

You think Pandya has ability to score 100s.Bhuvi will be consistent with ball and bat , he will add more value as an allrounder than Pandya.

 

[zen]

Just now, putrevus said:

 

You think Pandya has ability to score 100s.Bhuvi will be consistent with ball and bat , he will add more value as an allrounder than Pandya.

 

Playing 5 bowlers could be impacted by law of diminishing returns esp if bowlers are selected based on form and conditions 

[putrevus]

11 minutes ago, zen said:

Hardik has played 10 tests away of which Ind have won 5. Below are the stats those wins:

 

View overall figures [change view]

Primary team India

Home or away away (home of opposition)

Start of match date greater than or equal to 1 Jul 2017

Match result won match

Ordered by matches played (descending)

Page 1 of 1

Showing 1 - 19 of 19

First Previous

Next  Last

Return to query menu Cleared query menu

Overall figures

Player	Mat	Runs	HS	Bat Av	100	Wkts	BBI	Bowl Av	5	Ct	St	Ave Diff
V Kohli	5	456	103*	65.14	2	-	-	-	-	4	0	-
Mohammed Shami	5	98	30	14.00	0	18	5/28	21.38	1	1	0	-7.38
HH Pandya	5	252	108	42.00	1	10	5/28	16.30	1	6	0	25.70
CA Pujara	5	446	153	55.75	2	-	-	-	-	4	0	-
AM Rahane	5	396	132	56.57	1	-	-	-	-	11	0	-
R Ashwin	4	147	54	36.75	0	18	5/69	27.05	1	0	0	9.69
S Dhawan	4	437	190	72.83	2	-	-	-	-	4	0	-
KL Rahul	4	217	85	36.16	0	-	-	-	-	9	0	-
WP Saha	3	99	67	33.00	0	-	-	-	-	8	2	-
UT Yadav	3	22	11*	-	0	6	2/21	35.83	0	0	0	-
JJ Bumrah	2	0	0*	0.00	0	14	5/54	16.64	2	1	0	-16.64
RA Jadeja	2	85	70*	85.00	0	13	5/152	28.76	1	0	0	56.23
I Sharma	2	8	7*	8.00	0	7	2/31	23.71	0	0	0	-15.71
Kuldeep Yadav	1	26	26	26.00	0	5	4/40	19.20	0	0	0	6.80
B Kumar	1	63	33	31.50	0	4	3/44	20.75	0	0	0	10.75
A Mukund	1	93	81	46.50	0	-	-	-	-	1	0	-
RR Pant	1	25	24	12.50	0	-	-	-	-	7	0	-
PA Patel	1	18	16	9.00	0	-	-	-	-	5	0	-
M Vijay	1	33	25	16.50	0	-	-	-	-	0	0	-

 

 

The avg difference is 26. Thank you! 

So how do these stats justify Pandya as allrounder, his one hundred scored was when SL was bowling just spinners and scoreboard pressure was zero.

 

In the same stats you showed Dhawan is averaging 72 with same hundreds as Kohli in wins, do you want Dhawan to open for India ever? 

 

Shami and Yadav were averaging better than Anderson and Broad when England played in India, did you think they were better bowler than them???

Edited September 5, 2018 by putrevus