Butler proves why Xfactor players need to be backed in long formats

[maniac]

Just now, zen said:

Pandya is a very good batsman with the ability to bowl at 140+. Ind does not produce such cricketers frequently. What is needed is to support such cricketers find feet at the international level. 

Look if I am picking a current World LOI X1 especially T20 2 names in the X1 would undoubtedly be Pandya and Andre Russell. Both are dangerous bats and can bowl 140+ but I don’t think they have the temperament to play test cricket, just because they are great in specific situations and roles.

 

Vihari may not be good enough then we need to find another talented batsman who can roll his arm over a bit who has played long knocks and is seasoned to that level and temperament to replace him but trying to make Pandya a test cricketer we might lose out on a potential Yuvraj/Raina level LOI great for India. 

[Ankit_sharma03]

2 minutes ago, maniac said:

especially T20 2 names in the X1 would undoubtedly be Pandya and Andre Russell

wow this must be the 1st time when ur sure of picking pandya in a lineup n im sure i wont be picking him 

[maniac]

1 minute ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

wow this must be the 1st time when ur sure of picking pandya in a lineup n im sure i wont be picking him 

May be X1 will be stretching it in but sure why not in the squad. He is probably the best replacement for Russell if there is place for only 1.

[zen]

3 minutes ago, maniac said:

Look if I am picking a current World LOI X1 especially T20 2 names in the X1 would undoubtedly be Pandya and Andre Russell. Both are dangerous bats and can bowl 140+ but I don’t think they have the temperament to play test cricket, just because they are great in specific situations and roles.

 

Vihari may not be good enough then we need to find another talented batsman who can roll his arm over a bit who has played long knocks and is seasoned to that level and temperament to replace him but trying to make Pandya a test cricketer we might lose out on a potential Yuvraj/Raina level LOI great for India. 

Pandya's has the batting potential to match those considered for #6-7 slots. Also the bowling provides advantages esp. when he gets a hard ball - won a test for Ind in Eng. In LOIs, he can bat anywhere including the relatively easier top order. 

 

Refer to this: 

 

[Ankit_sharma03]

1 minute ago, maniac said:

May be X1 will be stretching it in but sure why not in the squad. He is probably the best replacement for Russell if there is place for only 1.

yea agreed on that 

[sandeep]

24 minutes ago, zen said:

Pandya is a very good batsman with the ability to bowl at 140+. Ind does not produce such cricketers frequently. What is needed is to support such cricketers find feet at the international level. 

 

19 minutes ago, maniac said:

Look if I am picking a current World LOI X1 especially T20 2 names in the X1 would undoubtedly be Pandya and Andre Russell. Both are dangerous bats and can bowl 140+ but I don’t think they have the temperament to play test cricket, just because they are great in specific situations and roles.

 

Vihari may not be good enough then we need to find another talented batsman who can roll his arm over a bit who has played long knocks and is seasoned to that level and temperament to replace him but trying to make Pandya a test cricketer we might lose out on a potential Yuvraj/Raina level LOI great for India. 

You don't know that, and you're assuming he can't succeed in tests.  Not only are you assuming based on minimal evidence, you are willing to dismiss the possibility of a test match allrounder -a *ing unicorn for Indian test team, supposedly because we'd somehow "lose" a handy LOI player.  Thats a lot of nonsense. Look at what Australia tried to make out of Shane Watson.  Now I'm not claiming that Pandya is going to be as successful, but after decades of Sanjay Bangar, Laxmi ratan Shukla, Abhishek Nayyar, Binny, and such "non-rounders", we finally have a viable prospect.  And its obvious to try and allow a young player like him find his ceiling.  Maybe it turns out to be lower than what Zen thinks, or what I think.  But its worth a shot.  He's shown enough glimpses in SA and in England, that the possibility of him providing the test team with a valuable option in the squad if not XI, for key away tours, exists.

[zen]

For a young cricketer with potential, there are advantages to playing test cricket as:

 

a) You can improve your overall game which helps in other formats as well 

b) Pandya is an excellent fielder too

c) Provides a good 5th bowling option. Now if he gets to bowl more with a relatively new ball, he can even graduate to the 3rd seamers' role where India can play 2 seamers + 2 spinners esp. in certain conditions overseas

d) On rank turners, he can be used to bowl the new ball as well to allow playing 3 spinners 

e) etc. 

 

I think India owes itself to groom such talents better. If I were India's captain such players, esp. when the hit their peak, are a delight 

Edited August 8, 2020 by zen

[sandeep]

47 minutes ago, maniac said:

Look if I am picking a current World LOI X1 especially T20 2 names in the X1 would undoubtedly be Pandya and Andre Russell.

So you would pick Pandya ahead of whiteboi barpuncher?

[Khota]

Rohit deserves to play all formats for India. People who think otherwise need help.

[maniac]

56 minutes ago, sandeep said:

So you would pick Pandya ahead of whiteboi barpuncher?

In T20s personally yes. In odis and tests obviously not. I mean why would you pick Pandya over a guy who has been MVP in IPL, Man of the Match in a World Cup final and a guy who has singlehandedly won a lot of test matches with his bat or crucial moments with the ball.

 

Why do you get offended if Stokes is better lol, neither does it make Pandya a useless player or Stokes ahead of Pandya in every single aspect of the game.

 

If I needed a batsman in the last 5 overs of the slog, I would pick Yuvraj over Sachin or Kohli. Doesn’t make him better than them nor it doesn’t mean Yuvraj has his strengths where he might be better equipped than Sachin or Kohli.

 

If I need 50 runs in 4 overs,Pandya is my guy but if I need 120-140 runs in 20 overs than Stokes is the guy. I brushed off your dumb argument of Pandya  being a better white ball bowler because that’s such a foolish premise. Ashwin is a better bowler than Andre Russell and a better test match quality allrounder,what exactly does it prove?

Edited August 8, 2020 by maniac

[maniac]

@zen @sandeep @Ankit_sharma03 First let’s be clear we are on the same page when it comes to LOI’s with regards to Pandya. 
 

Now coming to tests, Does Pandya merit to play as the 3rd seamer in tests abroad ahead of Bhuvi because Shami/Ishant/Bumrah who will you replace. Now let’s say 1 spinner will play.

 

Do you think given how fragile our batting is overseas does it add to the side having a batsman like Pandya start at no.6? Given 7 is either Pant or Saha or potentially another rookie keeper.

 

I still think a player in the package of Vihari if Vihari is not good enough that is a 6th specialist bat who can bowl 5-10 overs if required. You need your 5th bowler only for 5-10 overs max anyways because if 4 bowlers cannot get the job done 5th bowler won’t do much. Back in the day we had VVS or Dada at 6 but we still had Viru and Sachin and even Dada himself who can bowl.

 

Now let’s say you play Pandya at 6 in home tests, Now first thing at home 2 spinners will eat the opposition or as seen at times our fast bowlers, so do we really need a 5th bowler at home. Now as a 6th bat, do you think it’s fair on all those guys waiting in line and scoring and trying to stand out at every opportunity to lose out to a guy just based on his IPL or LOI cameos?

 

Think rationally

[zen]

54 minutes ago, maniac said:

@zen @sandeep @Ankit_sharma03 First let’s be clear we are on the same page when it comes to LOI’s with regards to Pandya. 
 

Now coming to tests, Does Pandya merit to play as the 3rd seamer in tests abroad ahead of Bhuvi because Shami/Ishant/Bumrah who will you replace. Now let’s say 1 spinner will play.

 

Do you think given how fragile our batting is overseas does it add to the side having a batsman like Pandya start at no.6? Given 7 is either Pant or Saha or potentially another rookie keeper.

 

I still think a player in the package of Vihari if Vihari is not good enough that is a 6th specialist bat who can bowl 5-10 overs if required. You need your 5th bowler only for 5-10 overs max anyways because if 4 bowlers cannot get the job done 5th bowler won’t do much. Back in the day we had VVS or Dada at 6 but we still had Viru and Sachin and even Dada himself who can bowl.

 

Now let’s say you play Pandya at 6 in home tests, Now first thing at home 2 spinners will eat the opposition or as seen at times our fast bowlers, so do we really need a 5th bowler at home. Now as a 6th bat, do you think it’s fair on all those guys waiting in line and scoring and trying to stand out at every opportunity to lose out to a guy just based on his IPL or LOI cameos?

 

Think rationally

 

Already posted below:

 

For a young cricketer with potential, there are advantages to playing test cricket as:

 

a) You can improve your overall game which helps in other formats as well 

b) Pandya is an excellent fielder too

c) Provides a good 5th bowling option. Now if he gets to bowl more with a relatively new ball, he can even graduate to the 3rd seamers' role where India can play 2 seamers + 2 spinners esp. in certain conditions overseas

d) On rank turners, he can be used to bowl the new ball as well to allow playing 3 spinners 

e) etc. 

 

I think India owes itself to groom such talents better. If I were India's captain such players, esp. when the hit their peak, are a delight 

 

 

Even on green surfaces, Pandya can be the 4th seamer, which can allow for an additional batsman. Overseas, Pandya has already played some excellent knocks. With time, he will gain consistency.  

 

 

[coffee_rules]

Pandya can be the x-factor in LOIs, but in Test cricket he is a huge liability, bits and pieces player. He can’t be relied upon as a batsmen nor as a bowler, he has to be able to fit in in either dept to be risked upon

[Ankit_sharma03]

3 hours ago, maniac said:

@zen @sandeep @Ankit_sharma03 First let’s be clear we are on the same page when it comes to LOI’s with regards to Pandya. 
 

Now coming to tests, Does Pandya merit to play as the 3rd seamer in tests abroad ahead of Bhuvi because Shami/Ishant/Bumrah who will you replace. Now let’s say 1 spinner will play.

 

Do you think given how fragile our batting is overseas does it add to the side having a batsman like Pandya start at no.6? Given 7 is either Pant or Saha or potentially another rookie keeper.

 

I still think a player in the package of Vihari if Vihari is not good enough that is a 6th specialist bat who can bowl 5-10 overs if required. You need your 5th bowler only for 5-10 overs max anyways because if 4 bowlers cannot get the job done 5th bowler won’t do much. Back in the day we had VVS or Dada at 6 but we still had Viru and Sachin and even Dada himself who can bowl.

 

Now let’s say you play Pandya at 6 in home tests, Now first thing at home 2 spinners will eat the opposition or as seen at times our fast bowlers, so do we really need a 5th bowler at home. Now as a 6th bat, do you think it’s fair on all those guys waiting in line and scoring and trying to stand out at every opportunity to lose out to a guy just based on his IPL or LOI cameos?

 

Think rationally

Kitni baar same baat ka jawab dena hoga

 

Ok let clear where i stand on pandya in test

 

Also stop repeating can he played ahead of bhuvi or bowler coz no one here asked to play him ahead of one. 

 

Does he deserve a place as batsman or bowler ? No 

Then why do i want him ?

 

Team balance - in this day n age u cant play just 4 bowlers overseas coz ue overburdening ur fast bowlers among which

Bumrah who plays  all format

Shami end of his career , can get injured any time also plays all formats

Bhuvi - is getting injured all time, plays all format

 

Subcontinet is diff as 2 spinners bowls buld so u can easily play 6 batsman.

Now coming to england n sa examples well wkts were so spicy that most times he didnt get to bowl but when he did he got wkts. 

But u cannot go in a match thinking ull get spicy wkts, as we did same in england 5th test and our bowlers got over worked. 

 

Dont forget 2013-14 Sa, nz tour when opp made 500-600 runs and our bowlers were dead tired. 

2014 eng tour when we were doing well with binny and dhoni got extra batsman rohit which changed momentum of series. Their batsman stuck 600 runs and again fast bowlers got over worked. 

 

Look around the world every team has done that for balance

 

Wi - chase coz they play 4 fast bowlers and they cant be burneded with 90 overs a day. Before u hype him just look at his stats.

 

Aus - they also played mitch marsh in ashes. But they have head n marnus to bowl overs we have none

 

Nz - cdgh, doing the job

 

Eng- stokes, curran , woakes, ali

 

Pak - shadab , faheem

 

 

Why do u think every team is doing it

Simple - u cant overburden ur fast bowlers im this day n age. 

 

Coming to indian team - do we have part timers like before - NO 

 

So just to satisfy people ego for specialist word shud team needs be thrown out of window, now dont tell me team dont need it coz that a captain knws better and if every captain is doing it there has to be a reason.

 

Now ull say holder n stokes are quality well all rounders develop over a time, these also did if u have doubt go check their early career stats and even kallis or shakib they were absolute ****

 

Most players numbers improve when they play at home, pandya hardly has. Play pujara n rohit just overseas and then show me their stats. 

 

Batsman vs pandya debate -

No batsman has owned 6 number spot so what are we missing if anyone isnt even able to grab that spot. Question shud be asked our top 5 doing job if its fragile....and if fragile is logic then my frend ur specialist arent doing their job so lets look at their position 1st. 

 

Do u think its fair on guys sitting out to sit out for specialist batsman being inconsistent and who has no use once they get out. 

If batting is fragile well ur 5 specialist batsman is at fault not just ur all rounder. Adding one wont help as many arent even able to grab that spot.

Do u think its fair to bowlers to get overworked just becoz batsman cant bowl n bat so they need extra cushion.

 

About his perfomance - he has done decently well. 

 

Contribution of 6th batsman 

In aus - 1 50

In nz - 1 50

Pandya also scored 1 50 in eng n almost a 100 in sa

 

So what diff did it make

We lost in nz when we played 6 batsman

We won in aus when one of 5 batsman scored , 6th contribution was just a 50

 

May be u need to look beyond the ego fulfilling word specialist. 

 

I have even said to take shankar along with Pandya overseas as his batting is far solid.

For me its not about pandya , its about team combination. If given a choice ill take shankar n pandya both overseas.

When i said i wnt select pandya in current world xi t20 the reason was also team combination , as ill prefer a spin all rounder like nabi if i have russell already then add another seaming allrounder  in pandya .

 

Its all about team combination and its always been 5 batsman 1 keeper 1 all rounder and 4 bowler. 

Edited August 9, 2020 by Ankit_sharma03

[Ankit_sharma03]

@maniac

 

About pandya future in test -he recently said in an interview post thsi injury he might just wanna concentrate on LOI, which shud be his call considering a person body.

If possible acc me he shud play cost test cricket develops players which is most of these wi all rounder dont develop beyond a point like russell but watson developed even bravo. 

 

About coming aussie tour - i dont want him to go coz he hasnt played cricket in long and test cricket all of sudden can cause and injury. Also this debate of extra batsman will also settle lets see how much that extra contributes and how much of ours bowlers get burdened on those flat aussie tracks

[Ankit_sharma03]

@maniac - forget one india needs to look for 2 semi all rounder or develop them..

 

One a batsman who can bowl - which means 10 overs a day min not like kohli who can roll arm for 1-2 overs

 

One bowler who can bat - who can be relied to hang around at 8 and atleast capable to score 50-60. 

 

Jadeja can do one role but need one more. Teams around world have 2 -2 now

 

Aus - marsh , head, cummins

Nz - cdgh , santner

Wi - chase , holder

Eng - stokes , curran, woakes 

 

 

 

[kohli]

7 minutes ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

@maniac - forget one india needs to look for 2 semi all rounder or develop them..

 

One a batsman who can bowl - which means 10 overs a day min not like kohli who can roll arm for 1-2 overs

 

One bowler who can bat - who can be relied to hang around at 8 and atleast capable to score 50-60. 

 

Jadeja can do one role but need one more. Teams around world have 2 -2 now

 

Aus - marsh , head, cummins

Nz - cdgh , santner

Wi - chase , holder

Eng - stokes , curran, woakes 

 

 

 

Vihari & jadeja 

[Ankit_sharma03]

7 hours ago, maniac said:

Trust me If Shadab Khan was Indian and it was the Indian team playing him, I would have thrown a virtual hissy fit.

 

Not sure why it’s so hard for you to grasp this simple concept.

Why is it so hard for u to get

Both india and pakistan dont have batsman who can bowl. Till pak had hafeez they didnt play anyone like shadab. Its azhar ali who has been failing with bat so thats the problem.

 

Now we have vihari so are looking at him

 

U cant overwork ur bowlers coz ur batsman are incapable n inconsistent. 

Dont u think are better batsman then cdgh in nz setup yet they play him .

 

Here also shadab did more then batsman. He also scored on previous UK tour. 

In sa,  apart from kohli only 2 batsman had a 50 pujara n pandya

 

Dont u think are better batsman then cdgh in nz setup yet they play him .

 

Naam ke batsman jab kaam nhin karenge to specialist kahe ke 

 

Edited August 9, 2020 by Ankit_sharma03

[Ankit_sharma03]

4 minutes ago, kohli said:

Vihari & jadeja 

Hold the jury on vihari - yet to fully own the spot. 

It wont easy for him as we play him only overseas, do that to any player their stats wont look good and soon it starts affect players confidence .

[sandeep]

4 hours ago, maniac said:

Why do you get offended if Stokes is better lol, neither does it make Pandya a useless player or Stokes ahead of Pandya in every single aspect of the game.

I don't get offended if "Stokes is better" or similar opinions.  What I detest is the desi foolishness and crab mentality of badmouthing Indian players unfairly, and being dismissive without an objective consideration of the facts and data.  

 

3 hours ago, maniac said:

Do you think given how fragile our batting is overseas does it add to the side having a batsman like Pandya start at no.6? Given 7 is either Pant or Saha or potentially another rookie keeper.

 

I still think a player in the package of Vihari if Vihari is not good enough that is a 6th specialist bat who can bowl 5-10 overs if required. You need your 5th bowler only for 5-10 overs max anyways because if 4 bowlers cannot get the job done 5th bowler won’t do much. Back in the day we had VVS or Dada at 6 but we still had Viru and Sachin and even Dada himself who can bowl.

 

Now let’s say you play Pandya at 6 in home tests, Now first thing at home 2 spinners will eat the opposition or as seen at times our fast bowlers, so do we really need a 5th bowler at home. Now as a 6th bat, do you think it’s fair on all those guys waiting in line and scoring and trying to stand out at every opportunity to lose out to a guy just based on his IPL or LOI cameos?

 

Think rationally

It all depends on the context - Pandya has already demonstrated that he offers value in certain specific scenarios - say, a greentop in NZ, SA or England.  In Pandya, you have a guy who has taken a 5-fer in England, a match-winning one.  He is comfortably a much more viable bowling option than Vihari ever can be, who's an honest part-timer in the best of helpful conditions.  In specific scenarios, where you need more than 3 seamers, but don't want to weaken the batting much, and don't want to drop the spinner, Pandya would make a great choice for a 4th seamer who can  bat 6 or 7.  

 

And the question of "fairness" to other guys waiting in line is secondary to the primary and overriding objective of making the Indian team the strongest possible, especially away.  If that means that a Vihari or some other bat sits out a game or 2, I think there's absolutely nothing "unfair" about it. And this has nothing to do with Pandya's "IPL or LOI" cameos.  The guy has scored a test century in SL, and put up a big 70+ score in SA - in challenging conditions.  He has taken a match-winning 5-fer in England, with top order wickets, not cheap ones.  You are being blatantly biased by trying to claim that his selection consideration is based on white ball "cameos".