multi-format players

[Vk1]

increasingly its becoming clear that cricket cannot have  too many multi-format players.. playing one format is bound to impact another.. just look at Ishant's performance against Shami/ Bumrah.. Rahane top scoring and surviving while Kohli is out poking... its time we understand who does well where and why

[Stan AF]

This is the biggest scam that is bestowed upon the average Indian fan. 

[rtmohanlal]

SRT,Dravid,Ganguly, Gambhir, Sehwag ,Dhoni all were multi format players who performed far better than some of the current lot.So what is your point?

 

on the other hand look at Pujara.. can't even be up to the mark in the lone format he plays in & kills the entire flow of the innings.

Edited February 23, 2020 by rtmohanlal

[Vk1]

25 minutes ago, rtmohanlal said:

SRT,Dravid,Ganguly, Gambhir, Sehwag ,Dhoni all were multi format players who performed far better than some of the current lot.So what is your point?

 

on the other hand look at Pujara.. can't even be up to the mark in the lone format he plays in & kills the entire flow of the innings.

none of those played T20s and tests equally well..  pujara never had the game for eng/nz conditions.. im sure that our current bowlers / kohli would have performed better if not for those meaningless LOI games before an all important test series 

[rtmohanlal]

Just check the records of the 6 i mentioned.. . All of them  except Gambhir  were  great in one format and at least  good in other format. And Gambhir averaged  39.5+ in both formats he played in  with some clutch   performances and with reasonable longevity. That is the benefit of allowing players to prosper in both main formats. Under this dumb ass  insecure captain only he was allowed  long stretches in both formats and the results are there for all to see. No 2 format batsman other tha him  .

[Vk1]

19 minutes ago, rtmohanlal said:

Just check the records of the 6 i mentioned.. . All of them  except Gambhir  were  great in one format and at least  good in other format. And Gambhir averaged  39.5+ in both formats he played in  with some clutch   performances and with reasonable longevity. That is the benefit of allowing players to prosper in both main formats. Under this dumb ass  insecure captain only he was allowed  long stretches in both formats and the results are there for all to see. No 2 format batsman other tha him  .

you are forgetting T20s.. it has changed  the nuances of batting in a long way.. unless you play on flat pitches like in Australia you simply cannot do well.. freaks like Kohli/ Bumrah are also getting found out

Edited February 23, 2020 by Vk1

[rtmohanlal]

then what is the reason for Pujara under performing? As far as I know he   has not played that much T20s  let alone  T20 internationals. Similarly Murali vijay. He too has a very modest T20 record.As per you logic Vijay should have got an extraordinary T20 RECORD .Isn't it?  The reason for me is simple.

 batsmen  like Rohit/Dhawan etc were given far more chances in tests despite their repeated failure in SENA. Batsmen like Pujara is still playing tests despite once in a blue moon performances.Identify talent at  very young age .Give them chances in both main formats. If  far off from adequate discard them and try others. That is the solution.   

[rtmohanlal]

15 minutes ago, Vk1 said:

you are forgetting T20s.. it has changed  the nuances of batting in a long way.. unless you play on flat pitches like in Australia you simply cannot do well.. freaks like Kohli/ Bumrah is also getting found out

then what is the reason for Pujara under performing? As far as I know he   has not played that much T20s  let alone  T20 internationals. Similarly Murali vijay. He too has a very modest T20 record.As per you logic Vijay should have got an extraordinary T20 RECORD .Isn't it?  The reason for me is simple.

 batsmen  like Rohit/Dhawan etc were given far more chances in tests despite their repeated failure in SENA. Batsmen like Pujara is still playing tests despite once in a blue moon performances.Identify talent at  very young age .Give them chances in both main formats. If  far off from adequate discard them and try others. That is the solution.   

[Vk1]

6 minutes ago, rtmohanlal said:

then what is the reason for Pujara under performing? As far as I know he   has not played that much T20s  let alone  T20 internationals. Similarly Murali vijay. He too has a very modest T20 record.As per you logic Vijay should have got an extraordinary T20 RECORD .Isn't it?  The reason for me is simple.

 batsmen  like Rohit/Dhawan etc were given far more chances in tests despite their repeated failure in SENA. Batsmen like Pujara is still playing tests despite once in a blue moon performances.Identify talent at  very young age .Give them chances in both main formats. If  far off from adequate discard them and try others. That is the solution.   

Pujara has never done well in such conditions so it was expected.. you are right about Rohit / Dhawan... its time we become serious about tests in overseas.. if need be we should pick different squads for overseas tests in SENA vs domestic/other tests.. purely on merit of conditons.. Shah shouldn't have opened.. Priyank Panchal / Gill should have.. Shami/Bumrah shouldn't have played LOIs.. Ranjis / A tours were probably ideal for their rhythm...etc etc 

[zen]

After Pujara became a regular, he hit a 100 in Eng (132 not out?),  and hit 3 100s in Aus! We are not even talking about 50s (in SENA)

 

If above is a once in a blue moon performance, I ll take it

Edited February 23, 2020 by zen

[rtmohanlal]

6 minutes ago, Vk1 said:

Pujara has never done well in such conditions so it was expected.. you are right about Rohit / Dhawan... its time we become serious about tests in overseas.. if need be we should pick different squads for overseas tests in SENA vs domestic/other tests.. purely on merit of conditons.. Shah shouldn't have opened.. Priyank Panchal / Gill should have.. Shami/Bumrah shouldn't have played LOIs.. Ranjis / A tours were probably ideal for their rhythm...etc etc 

just wait ...he has only started ..,,, only 20 years of age  ... give him a few matches in both formats and allows him to settle in. Even after that   if he is still mediocre then drop him.That is the way.Youngsters can develop only around experienced  performing seniors.    

[rtmohanlal]

8 minutes ago, zen said:

After Pujara became a regular, he hit a 100 in Eng (132 not out?),  and hit 3 100s in Aus! We are not even talking about 50s 

 

If above is a once in a blue moon performance, I ll take it

every body knows about that 132 not out. Despite that 132*  he averaged  a mere 39 in that series  tells the whole story.  After that came his once in a blue moon till date  lone series winning performance . On either side of that series, there are only failures after failures in SENA +WI , And he has played  11 series in SENA +WI. All these for a test specialist and that tells a lot about his calibre.

[zen]

13 minutes ago, rtmohanlal said:

every body knows about that 132 not out. Despite that 132*  he averaged  a mere 39 in that series  tells the whole story.  After that came his once in a blue moon till date  lone series winning performance . On either side of that series, there are only failures after failures in SENA +WI , And he has played  11 series in SENA +WI. All these for a test specialist and that tells a lot about his calibre.

That 39 is still a good avg relative to others .... it appears as if your habit of writing against Pujara has not gone yet 

[zen]

Since Pujara's 132 .... In SENA:

 

View overall figures [change view]

Primary team India

Opposition team Australia  or England  or New Zealand  or South Africa

Home or away away (home of opposition)

Start of match date greater than or equal to 30 Aug 2018

Qualifications runs scored greater than or equal to 100

Ordered by batting average (descending)

Page 1 of 1

Showing 1 - 9 of 9

First Previous

Next  Last

Return to query menu Cleared query menu

Overall figures

Player	Mat	Inns	NO	Runs	HS	Ave	BF	SR	100	50	0	4s	6s
CA Pujara	7	13	1	717	193	59.75	1756	40.83	4	1	2	72	2
MA Agarwal	3	5	0	287	77	57.40	558	51.43	0	3	0	31	6
RA Jadeja	3	5	1	189	86*	47.25	325	58.15	0	2	0	22	2
RR Pant	7	12	1	506	159*	46.00	721	70.18	2	0	1	50	11
RG Sharma	2	4	1	106	63*	35.33	199	53.26	0	1	0	7	3
V Kohli	7	13	0	456	123	35.07	1006	45.32	1	2	2	50	1
AM Rahane	7	13	1	387	70	32.25	955	40.52	0	3	1	34	3
KL Rahul	5	9	0	262	149	29.11	410	63.90	1	0	2	31	2
GH Vihari	5	9	1	189	56	23.62	548	34.48	0	1	1	22	1

 

One test in NZ, where he got out to a peach of a ball and one bad leave, we have some folks ....

 

 

 

 

[rtmohanlal]

8 minutes ago, zen said:

That 39 is still a good avg relative to others .... it appears as if your habit of writing against Pujara has not gone yet 

that is not the criteria for being an adequate member of the team. If  being above mediocrities in tests like  Rohit  Dhawan  Rahul etc etc is the basic criteria  , then I am afraid we can never become a great SENA performing team with all the so called  talent pool available.

 

I do not have any prejudiced mentality against any player. It is all about performance. 

[Ankit_sharma03]

40 minutes ago, zen said:

After Pujara became a regular, he hit a 100 in Eng (132 not out?),  and hit 3 100s in Aus! We are not even talking about 50s (in SENA)

 

If above is a once in a blue moon performance, I ll take it

Pujara was always a regular....dropping once or twice for few games doesnt put his place in doubt. When he was intially dropped under kohli he himself was also to be blamed as runs werent coming. 

[zen]

5 minutes ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

Pujara was always a regular....dropping once or twice for few games doesnt put his place in doubt. When he was intially dropped under kohli he himself was also to be blamed as runs werent coming. 

the point? .... as i remember him being under pressure and even running himself out (not playing his natural game) .... once he felt settled, he is the best performing batsman in SENA avg 60 since his 132 .... while Kohli avgs 35 in that period 

 

PS stats are posted as well on this thread

Edited February 23, 2020 by zen

[Ankit_sharma03]

2 minutes ago, zen said:

the point? .... as i remember him being under pressure and even running himself out .... once he felt settled, he is the best performing batsman in SENA avg 60 since his 132 .... whille Kohli avgs 35 in that period 

then u remeber wrongly

the 1st time pujara was dropped under kohli was in Australia 2014-15...when pujara failed in NZ, ENG, AUS and most matches were under dhoni. so cant blame kohli for that . Infact pujara in his 1st cycle of overseas didnt score anywhere - Sa, NZ, WI, AUS, ENG and apart from 1-2 test all were under dhoni . Kohli in his 1st cycle of overseas scored in NZ, SA, AUS

 

He was very much settled under dhoni 

Edited February 23, 2020 by Ankit_sharma03

[rtmohanlal]

9 minutes ago, zen said:

Since Pujara's 132 .... In SENA:

 

View overall figures [change view]

Primary team India

Opposition team Australia  or England  or New Zealand  or South Africa

Home or away away (home of opposition)

Start of match date greater than or equal to 30 Aug 2018

Qualifications runs scored greater than or equal to 100

Ordered by batting average (descending)

Page 1 of 1

Showing 1 - 9 of 9

First Previous

Next  Last

Return to query menu Cleared query menu

Overall figures

Player	Mat	Inns	NO	Runs	HS	Ave	BF	SR	100	50	0	4s	6s
CA Pujara	7	13	1	717	193	59.75	1756	40.83	4	1	2	72	2
MA Agarwal	3	5	0	287	77	57.40	558	51.43	0	3	0	31	6
RA Jadeja	3	5	1	189	86*	47.25	325	58.15	0	2	0	22	2
RR Pant	7	12	1	506	159*	46.00	721	70.18	2	0	1	50	11
RG Sharma	2	4	1	106	63*	35.33	199	53.26	0	1	0	7	3
V Kohli	7	13	0	456	123	35.07	1006	45.32	1	2	2	50	1
AM Rahane	7	13	1	387	70	32.25	955	40.52	0	3	1	34	3
KL Rahul	5	9	0	262	149	29.11	410	63.90	1	0	2	31	2
GH Vihari	5	9	1	189	56	23.62	548	34.48	0	1	1	22	1

 

One test in NZ, where he got out to a peach of a ball and one bad leave, we have some folks ....

 

 

 

 

you are conveniently forgetting his whole data  of 11 SENA +WI test series.

[zen]

3 minutes ago, rtmohanlal said:

you are conveniently forgetting his whole data  of 11 SENA +WI test series.

Why would I rate WI? .... and why would I go back in time? Are we picking players based on how they did in 2015 for e.g? 

 

the idea is to show how a player is doing once he found his stride

Edited February 23, 2020 by zen