Pant is not a good T20 player.

[cowboysfan]

1 hour ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

he has taken bumrah,rashid, bhuvi, archer all to cleaners who have been good t20 bowlers 

we have see many times IPL fireworks dont translate to international matches,the pressure is too much.MY problem with Pant is his technique is so bad he will never be able to contribute consistently and his scores so far reflect that.now in Tests he has no score pressure and he can pickthe ball to hit and i feel its his best format.

[Global.Baba]

The point I am making is our problem is middle order hitting not opening. We have been getting big scores even now if our top order fires. However we have not been able to convert a 180 score to 200 or 200 score to 225 due to lack of firepower. Pant needs to fire in the middle order.

[Prabhdeep Singh]

The openers should complement each other:

 

As a template:

 

You need a Sehwag type opener (less consistent but more impact in 20 over inning) + Rohit Sharma.

 

In current scenario that is R Pant & R Sharma.

 

India have not won world T20 since 2007.

 

They need try something the opposition will fear.

 

At the moment, the combination of R Sharma/S Dhawan or R Sharma/KL Rahul is not that threatening.

 

Although I do believe KL Rahul has the potential but has been messed around by Team Management by interchanging him with S Dhawan.

 

 

 

[zen]

9 minutes ago, Global.Baba said:

Pandya has been walking into the X1 pretty much in every format as long as he was fit for the last 3 years. 

Needs to be more consistent .... however, we have had many high risk, high reward players in the past, who due to unnecessary pressure, focused on hitting a 50 first (even at the cost of team's RR) to secure their averages (and place) and then went after the attack .... we don't want to turn such unique talents into such players and step away from that culture by allowing failures for such players (as we would have steady ones in the 11 too who are focused on relatively high consistency). The USP of such players is the ability to take risk so Ind gets high rewards (w/o worrying about their averages) 

Edited January 23, 2020 by zen

[Global.Baba]

Just now, zen said:

Needs to be more consistent .... however, we have had many high risk, high reward players in the past, who due to unnecessary pressure, focused on hitting a 50 first (even at the cost of team's RR) to secure their averages (and place) and then go after the attack .... we don't to turn such talents into such players and step away from such a culture by allowing failures for such players (we would have steady ones in the 11 too to do that). Their USP is to take high risk and go after the bowlers 

That is not an excuse for inconsistency.

 

For example Sehwag's greatest success came when he made use of compact defense and picked his battles even though his natural instinct is to attack.

 

Someone like ABD who is a special talent played out an entire day to draw a test.

 

You need to play according to situation. that's the way he plays or oh he is attacking and entertaining is an Afridi type excuse.

 

 

[zen]

3 minutes ago, Global.Baba said:

That is not an excuse for inconsistency.

 

For example Sehwag's greatest success came when he made use of compact defense and picked his battles even though his natural instinct is to attack.

 

Someone like ABD who is a special talent played out an entire day to draw a test.

 

You need to play according to situation. that's the way he plays or oh he is attacking and entertaining is an Afridi type excuse.

 

Once they evolve as cricketers, they can be expected to get better .... but note that you can play in a variety of ways in a situation. one of the best ways is to play your natural game and back yourself 

[Global.Baba]

8 minutes ago, zen said:

Once they evolve as cricketers, they can be expected to get better .... but note that you can play in a variety of ways in a situation. one of the best ways is to play your natural game and back yourself 

You think purely on talent as batsmen someone like Iyer/Pandey are less talented than Pant/Pandya.

 

The way I look at it is among all the aspirants who want to be cricketers there is an elite pool that make the cut to domestics. they have the same basic foundation and technique which is leagues ahead of others.

 

Then the players who make internationals are a cut above the other domestic players in terms of skill.

 

Once you reach international cricket it becomes about match awareness and temperament with everything else almost being more or less equal.

 

I judge a player on how well he has made of opportunities and played according to the situation.

 

If you show brief glimpses of Steve Smith's batting to a cricket fan who woke up from a coma after 30 years  he will think it is a tail ender batting. What sets Smith apart from the rest is his temperament and awareness.

Edited January 23, 2020 by Global.Baba

[zen]

7 minutes ago, Global.Baba said:

You think purely on talent as batsmen someone like Iyer/Pandey are less talented than Pant/Pandya.

 

The way I look at it is among all the aspirants who want to be cricketers there is an elite pool that make the cut to domestics. they have the same basic foundation and technique which is leagues ahead of others.

 

Then the players who make internationals are a cut above the other domestic players in terms of skill.

 

Once you reach international cricket it becomes about match awareness and temperament with everything else almost being more or less equal.

 

I judge a player on how well he has made of opportunities and played according to the situation.

 

If you show brief glimpses of Steve Smith's batting to a cricket fan who woke up from a coma after 30 years  he will think it is a tail ender batting. What sets Smith apart from the rest is his temperament and awareness.

Pant-Pandya have been fast tracked though based on their talent/uniqueness (one can keep, the other can bowl quick) and requirements of the team ....  and there are other unidimensional players who compete with Iyer/Pandey such as Gill, Shaw, Agarwal, etc.  Iyer is still a youngster so is developing too 

Edited January 23, 2020 by zen

[sandeep]

43 minutes ago, Global.Baba said:

Pandya has been walking into the X1 pretty much in every format as long as he was fit for the last 3 years. 

Yet plenty of "questions" were being asked on this forum lb whether he shou be.  

[Global.Baba]

14 minutes ago, sandeep said:

Yet plenty of "questions" were being asked on this forum lb whether he shou be.  

That’s not the debate. The point was about not getting consistent chances 

[The Dark Horse]

DK is better than Pant in T20s. Pant had enough opportunities to make a mark but failed. That said this Rahul option should be limited to T20s.

[SK_IH]

India can afford to play someone like Pant in T20 setup. T20 is about six hitting, he has the ability and skill, should be backed in this format. He definitely has the ability to strike from the first ball as well, which many even in this team do not have. Top 4 are similar type players, need but of eccentricity lower down.

[New guy]

This is why we haven't won a t20 wc since 2007 and never will. Both fans and management have this stupid safe mentality with t20. Heck even WI won one in that time

 

The only teams which win are the ones who have youngsters and play non stop attacking cricket. Teams who play safe in t20 and have 0 X factor will always  lose  tournaments 

 

Even in 2007 we won with a completely young team, with seniors stepping aside and youngsters like Yuvraj going berserk. Now we prefer to carry dinosaurs like dhawan

 

Heck even in ODIs the world is changing and the team which wins tournaments are those with X factor. England understood this and won their first world cup with an attacking mentality. Pakistan's young player fakhar Zaman, a hack, took the CT 17 final away from india single handedly 

 

While we continue to play safe with safe players (while lambasting attacking talents). I have seen commentators speak badly about our young t20 batsmen like Pant or Iyer hitting their first or second t20 ball for 6. And this is in the t20 format. While England or Australian commentators dont bat an eyelid when their young players play attacking shits from ball one

 

IMO, currently our bias against attacking young players is very similar to our 90s bias against fast bowling. Last ODI match bumrah started with a lot of wides. Shami also bowled wides. Today we understand that pace bowlers strive for bowling all out and sometimes this happens. In the 90s such bowlers would be abused and be forced to cut down on pace and bowl line and length. They would be dropped and pressure put on them if they had even one bad match where they went for run. In the first ODI Shami and Bummrah didnt take a single wicket. In the 90s we wild say, it's because they strive for pace, if they stick to line and length they wont be hammered. We need line and length bowlers

 

We are doing the same thing with our attacking batsmen. Everyone should bat like kohli or dhoni and carry things deep. Frack that. Every team needs a few X factors who can go berserk. Playing safe is just going to see us lose another world series 

Edited January 24, 2020 by New guy

[Ankit_sharma03]

7 hours ago, cowboysfan said:

we have see many times IPL fireworks dont translate to international matches,the pressure is too much.MY problem with Pant is his technique is so bad he will never be able to contribute consistently and his scores so far reflect that.now in Tests he has no score pressure and he can pickthe ball to hit and i feel its his best format.

there is nothing wrong with his technique 

if he can score in test overseas means nothing wrong .

Pressure or no pressure in test ur technique gets tested

 

ur expecting results very soon it takes time....its a player not instant maggi

[Ajju]

You just cant replace legend player like Dhoni

thats the expectation he has set and he can win you any game from any situation with take into the deep

[Suhaan]

This TM hasn't defined certain roles for players,they want everyone of them play same brand of cricket like the poster above stated

Sameness, pragmatic,robotic approach will only carry us to SFs( eventual loss)at best, winning icc tournies demand much more than that,atleast define r oles,

You won't have a Pant playing like Dhoni in t20s,we want an upgrade on that for sure

Bragging about bilateral wins is self ridiculing

[New guy]

58 minutes ago, Ajju said:

You just cant replace legend player like Dhoni

thats the expectation he has set and he can win you any game from any situation with take into the deep

Not in t20s though. Dhoni's international t20 record is very, very average and he played so long only based on IPL reputation. He hardly has any match winning innings in T20. Even a fool wont consider Dhoni a legend in international t20, not even great. 

 

P.S> I know you are just trolling but just putting this out there

Edited January 24, 2020 by New guy

[Rasgulla]

54 minutes ago, New guy said:

Not in t20s though. Dhoni's international t20 record is very, very average and he played so long only based on IPL reputation. He hardly has any match winning innings in T20. Even a fool wont consider Dhoni a legend in international t20, not even great. 

 

P.S> I know you are just trolling but just putting this out there

 Says mohilla sachin chamcha

[Rasgulla]

2 hours ago, New guy said:

Even in 2007 we won with a completely young team, with seniors stepping aside

 Seniors like sachin was thrown aside from t20 side because they know he can't hack it