BCCI's Cricket Advisory Committee used a five-parameter rating system while picking Ravi Shastri. Tough questions were asked of Shastri, including why India could not win a few tough series or any world tournaments under his watch.

[NameGoesHere]

Quote

CCI's Cricket Advisory Committee used a five-parameter rating system while picking Ravi Shastri.

 

What a coincidence I am presently going through the five stages of grief after he was picked.

 

Quote

Tough questions were asked of Shastri

1. Describe, compare and contrast the fermentation processes of scotch and bourbon.

 

2. When something goes like a tracer bullet, how long before it turns to go up and tickle your own backside?

 

and the toughest of all, 

 

3.  Can you please, a few times, stay sober until the game finishes?

  

 

Edited August 21, 2019 by NameGoesHere

[Chandan]

On 8/18/2019 at 7:12 PM, Vijy said:

his batting was quite useless for ODIs, but alright for tests. had an avg of 40+ as opener, which very few indians had while opening. besides, I wasn't claiming that he was a "good" cricketer. it's just that, in relative terms, his cricket was better than his so-called coaching.

Sorry to act as a spoiler but out of 80 matches, he played only 17 as an opener. But in those 17 he had a healthy avr I agree. Still too small a sample and spread over too long a period:

https://tinyurl.com/y3z4vw58

[Vijy]

1 hour ago, Chandan said:

Sorry to act as a spoiler but out of 80 matches, he played only 17 as an opener. But in those 17 he had a healthy avr I agree. Still too small a sample and spread over too long a period:

https://tinyurl.com/y3z4vw58

17 tests is not too few. for someone who started out at 11, it was pretty impressive

[putrevus]

On 8/18/2019 at 12:41 PM, rkt.india said:

Tuchiye. What is the use of so many interviews if you have to chose the incumbent.  Incumbent should not be in choice list when you are holding fresh interviews. 

Why?  what wrong has incumbent done for him not to deserve to be in choice list.

[maniac]

16 minutes ago, putrevus said:

Why?  what wrong has incumbent done for him not to deserve to be in choice list.

This is not the elections. It’s a contract. If the panel thought he did a good job they should have extended his contract without the drama.

 

If they thought he should be replaced and organized interviews, he should have been cast aside.

 

With all this farce it implies 2 things

 

A) There is no alternative to Shastri because others are not good enough

 

and

 

B) the fact that they thought Shastri has to go through the grind of interviewing after 2 years with the team, there are questions  on his performance.

 

Either ways a big drama and farce

[putrevus]

Just now, maniac said:

This is not the elections. It’s a contract. If the panel thought he did a good job they should have extended his contract without the drama.

 

If they thought he should be replaced and organized interviews, he should have been cast aside.

 

With all this farce it implies 2 things

 

A) There is no alternative to Shastri because others are not good enough

 

and

 

B) the fact that they thought Shastri has to go through the grind of interviewing after 2 years with the team, there are questions  on his performance.

 

Either ways a big drama and farce

No contracts when they are extended also get fresh bids , unless they don't have any options.Nothing wrong in seeing what options are available.They felt Shastri was best option , how does it become a farce.

 

They have every right to question Shastri on his performance too which they did and also talked to other candidates.

[maniac]

12 minutes ago, putrevus said:

No contracts when they are extended also get fresh bids , unless they don't have any options.Nothing wrong in seeing what options are available.They felt Shastri was best option , how does it become a farce.

 

They have every right to question Shastri on his performance too which they did and also talked to other candidates.

If you are working as a contractor and your contract is up, you don’t go through the interview process again. They either extend it if they see results or say thank you bye bye. Atleast that’s how contracting works everywhere else.

 

It’s dumb that they have to question Shastri again. Either you liked his performance or not. That’s what the panel is paid to do. What do you except Shastri to say? You think he is going to say he sucks at his job or not make excuses for his failures?

 

 

Edited August 26, 2019 by maniac

[putrevus]

56 minutes ago, maniac said:

If you are working as a contractor and your contract is up, you don’t go through the interview process again. They either extend it if they see results or say thank you bye bye. Atleast that’s how contracting works everywhere else.

 

It’s dumb that they have to question Shastri again. Either you liked his performance or not. That’s what the panel is paid to do. What do you except Shastri to say? You think he is going to say he sucks at his job or not make excuses for his failures?

 

 

They liked his performance and only asked why they have not won more and how is he going to improve on it.It was a review for Shastri and interview for others.

 

They reserved the right to axe Shastri based on how he he fared during their review.If he failed , they would have been left without a coach so they interviewed others.

 

 

Edited August 26, 2019 by putrevus

[maniac]

5 minutes ago, putrevus said:

They liked his performance and only asked why they have not won more and how is he going to improve on it.It was a review for Shastri and interview for others.

 

They reserved the right to axe Shastri based on how he he fared during their review.If he failed , they would have been left without a coach so they interviewed others.

 

 

Review and interviews are not part of the same processes. They should have reviewd him first and then if they found him not satisfactory then conducted interviews. It’s a waste of everyone’s time and hence I called it a farce

[putrevus]

32 minutes ago, maniac said:

Review and interviews are not part of the same processes. They should have reviewd him first and then if they found him not satisfactory then conducted interviews. It’s a waste of everyone’s time and hence I called it a farce

Why not while during the interview process if they found another candidate who they think is better option they could select him. I don't think they did anything wrong, Mind you if they just extended Shastri then also people would blame them.

[velu]

80% weight age given to alcohol tolerance 

[Real McCoy]

19 hours ago, velu said:

80% weight age given to alcohol tolerance 

The remaining 20% for asskissing ability

[Laaloo]

On 8/18/2019 at 5:54 AM, New guy said:

WHere is the bridge? I can’t see any.

[maniac]

9 minutes ago, Laaloo said:

WHere is the bridge? I can’t see any.

@putrevus already bought it

[Turning_track]

 

[maniac]

On 8/26/2019 at 12:37 PM, putrevus said:

Why not while during the interview process if they found another candidate who they think is better option they could select him. I don't think they did anything wrong, Mind you if they just extended Shastri then also people would blame them.

That would have been relatively better

[nitinbwj]

Tough Questions asked about Daru and it’s consumption levels..Bewda topped the exams..

[putrevus]

On 8/27/2019 at 1:47 PM, maniac said:

That would have been relatively better

Better for who??