Count Dracula Pujara (CDP)

[vvvslaxman]

36 minutes ago, raki05 said:

He is one big C**t who played 100 test inspite of being such mediocre player who only played single format.

 

I hate sussex :(

[Lord]

left a straight ball. Does tuk tuk when connects

[vvvslaxman]

4 minutes ago, Lord said:

left a straight ball. Does tuk tuk when connects

 

Looked fish out of water against Taijul islam, Shakib, Mehidy in the 2nd test.

[Frustrated]

The only batsman in our line up who had the advantage of county cricket experience all these years.    Yet he registers scores of 13 & 27  @ Avg: 20.  That too on a flat pitch batting at the most crucial no.3 slot.    

[Vijy]

3 hours ago, Frustrated said:

The only batsman in our line up who had the advantage of county cricket experience all these years.    Yet he registers scores of 13 & 27  @ Avg: 20.  That too on a flat pitch batting at the most crucial no.3 slot.    

He should be booted, but so should rest of top 5 (gill may be moved into MO).

[vvvslaxman]

3 hours ago, Frustrated said:

The only batsman in our line up who had the advantage of county cricket experience all these years.    Yet he registers scores of 13 & 27  @ Avg: 20.  That too on a flat pitch batting at the most crucial no.3 slot.    

 

Someone shared the video of Pujara batting against Michael Neser. Reserve bowler for Australia. He was clueless. Almost late on every ball lol. 

[Frustrated]

https://crictoday.com/cricket/news/cheteshwar-pujara-becomes-the-third-worst-batter-in-wtc-history/

[Gollum]

Bringing him back was a corrupt decision. Glad he failed, should have been permanently booted out 18 months ago. Just a leech now. 

[Vijy]

17 hours ago, Gollum said:

Bringing him back was a corrupt decision. Glad he failed, should have been permanently booted out 18 months ago. Just a leech now. 

I expect him to still play for a couple more years

[Majestic]

Averages 32 in SENA..Dravid averaged 50 in those conditions. If you include Windies( because I remember Dravid played some quality knocks in tough batting conditions there), the difference will be even bigger.

 

He is an underperformer because he dominated only one overseas test series in his entire career.

[zen]

17 minutes ago, Majestic said:

Averages 32 in SENA..Dravid averaged 50 in those conditions. If you include Windies( because I remember Dravid played some quality knocks in tough batting conditions there), the difference will be even bigger.

 

He is an underperformer because he dominated only one overseas test series in his entire career.

FYI, he redeemed himself with those history making performances in a couple of series. PS as there is the saying “sau soonar ki, ek loohar ki”
 

In 2018, Ind won for the first time in OZ after 11 series and 70 years so that carries a very high weightage. It can be like winning multiple overseas series (which not many Indian batsmen have done in SENA) so extremely high on impact. 

By taking averages at face value, you are assuming that every inning, every match, and every whatever is similar, which may not the case in the real world scenario (In LOIs, ppl rate knock outs / final high for e.g.)
 

Dravid, of course, is a legend too. 

Edited June 12, 2023 by zen

[Majestic]

11 minutes ago, zen said:

FYI, he redeemed himself with those history making performances in a couple of series. PS as there is the saying “sau soonar ki, ek loohar ki”
 

In 2018, Ind won for the first time in OZ after 11 series and 70 years so that carries a very high weightage. It can be like winning multiple overseas series (which not many Indian batsmen have done in SENA) so extremely high on impact. 

By taking averages at face value, you are assuming that every inning, every match, and every whatever is similar, which may not the case in the real world scenario (In LOIs, ppl rate knock outs / final high for e.g.)
 

Dravid, of course, is a legend too. 

I am not taking averages as a factor here. It's impact. Pujara didn't had much impact in 2020 let's be honest.

 

In first two tests, he was a complete failure.

 

In fourth test, he was third best batsman after Pant and Gill. In the first inning of 4th test, Sundar and Thakur saved India from collapse and brought back in the game.

 

In 3rd test, he was the second best performer after Pant. 

 

Overall, as a pure batsman, his impact wasn't much because he didn't had a singl standout knock( in that regard, Rahane in Melbourne was at another level given the circumstances in the test just before) and Pujara himself got out at wrong time too leaving his team in trouble. Both the games would have been lost if not for Ashwin-Vihari blockathons in Sydney and Pant's majestic batting in Gabba. 

Edited June 12, 2023 by Majestic

[zen]

1 minute ago, Majestic said:

I am not taking averages as a factor here. It's impact. Pujara didn't had much impact in 2020 let's be honest.

 

In first two tests, he was a complete failure.

 

In fourth test, he was third best batsman after Pant and Gill. In the first inning of 4th test, Sundar and Thakur saved India from collapse and brought back in the game.

 

In 3rd test, he was the second best performer after Pant. 

 

Overall, as a pure batsman, his impact wasn't much because he didn't had a singl standout knock( in that regard, Rahane in Melbourne was at another level given the circumstances in the test just before) and got out at wrong time too leaving his team in trouble. Both the games would have been lost if not for Ashwin-Vihari blockathons in Sydney and Pant's majestic batting in Gabba. 

Pujara did have impact in 2020 too  (it could be that because you have got into a habit of writing against him, not that I care, you could be looking past it). 
 

A batsman does not need to do well in every test of a series. After 1-1, he helped India to draw at Sydney and win at Melbourne. He was the most consistent batsman in the last two tests scoring 3 50s in 4 innings. Enough has been already written about his heroics in the media. If Pant or whoever did well, it does not mean Pujara did not. 

 

Even in the first two tests, at Melbourne, he played like 70 balls in the 1st inning to counter the new ball after India lost a wicket at 0. If he had got out, it would have exposed the middle order to the new ball. 
 

And he is the player who has done it twice, one time single handedly and other time collectively. He is the common factor in the two series wins.
 

I am not interested in debate but only attempting to provide insights. I don’t plan to engage with you further on this topic so feel free to believe whatever you want!

 

[Lord]

11 hours ago, zen said:

FYI, he redeemed himself with those history making performances in a couple of series. PS as there is the saying “sau soonar ki, ek loohar ki”
 

In 2018, Ind won for the first time in OZ after 11 series and 70 years so that carries a very high weightage. It can be like winning multiple overseas series (which not many Indian batsmen have done in SENA) so extremely high on impact. 

By taking averages at face value, you are assuming that every inning, every match, and every whatever is similar, which may not the case in the real world scenario (In LOIs, ppl rate knock outs / final high for e.g.)
 

Dravid, of course, is a legend too. 

Winning Test or series is a team effort which mainly depends on bowlers to take 20 wickets cheaply.

 

By your logic Damien Martyn was more impactful than perhaps Lara

[cricspirit]

11 hours ago, Majestic said:

Averages 32 in SENA..Dravid averaged 50 in those conditions. If you include Windies( because I remember Dravid played some quality knocks in tough batting conditions there), the difference will be even bigger.

 

He is an underperformer because he dominated only one overseas test series in his entire career.

 

I shake my head when people on this forum compare Pujara with Dravid and throw some custom stats at it to justify. Even claiming Pujara is ahead for no.3 slot on all time list. 

 

Ignoring everything else, I can watch Dravid play his shots with style and elegance all day while Pujara is yuk ugly to watch even while scoring. hell the way he holds the bat before taking strike also is boring. 

[zen]

4 minutes ago, Lord said:

Winning Test or series is a team effort which mainly depends on bowlers to take 20 wickets cheaply.

 

By your logic Damien Martyn was more impactful than perhaps Lara

 

That is your logic.  

 

There is usually a key player and in 2018 e.g. it was Pujara. He failed at Perth, where India lost and bowlers picked up 20 wickets too. 

 

Don't generalize. People who know, know what happened. Btw, Lara too is credited with winning tests such as w/ the 153*

 

It should not be like if Pujara does well and India wins, it becomes a team effort. If X does well, X is great! 

 

 

 

[Lord]

33 minutes ago, zen said:

 

That is your logic.  

 

There is usually a key player and in 2018 e.g. it was Pujara. He failed at Perth, where India lost and bowlers picked up 20 wickets too. 

 

Don't generalize. People who know, know what happened. Btw, Lara too is credited with winning tests such as w/ the 153*

 

It should not be like if Pujara does well and India wins, it becomes a team effort. If X does well, X is great! 

 

 

 

Exactly. Irrespective of team result.

 

Batsman's job is to score runs and he hasn't done enough times specially compared to Dravid.

 

In 2018 Aus tour he was brilliant and bowlers capitalized on it. But hasn't done much else.

[zen]

Just now, Lord said:

Exactly. Irrespective of team result.

 

Batsman's job is to score runs and he hasn't done enough times specially compared to Dravid.

 

In 2018 Aus tour he was brilliant and bowlers capitalized on it. But hasn't done much else.

 

A contribution in a win in a knockout game or important series, etc. is usually rated higher with the top performer(s) getting the credit. Sehwag is credited with winning the series in Pak. Dravid himself is credited for winning a test in Aus. 

 

Btw, why is Dravid in this (I know Dravid fans tend to write against Pujara)? 

 

Overall, Pujara has scored tons of runs. Like many Indian top-order batsmen, he has struggled in SENA (esp. early on in his career) but his average is not inferior to his peers (Warner tends to struggle too in Eng. Dhawan, KL, Vijay, Sehwag, etc. have struggled too). 

 

The good thing about Pujara is that he redeemed himself in SENA by giving exceptional performances (already written about Hillary & Norgay Stuff). 

 

 

What you are attempting is appearing like a sore loser stuff (for whatever reasons including being a Dravid fan. I saw your post on Coach Dravid's thread where you were upset at his being targeted for criticism. And I agree with you on that that the coach should not be the sole target). 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Lord]

15 minutes ago, zen said:

 

A contribution in a win in a knockout game or important series, etc. is usually rated higher with the top performer(s) getting the credit. Sehwag is credited with winning the series in Pak. Dravid himself is credited for winning a test in Aus. 

 

Btw, why is Dravid in this (I know Dravid fans tend to write against Pujara)? 

 

Overall, Pujara has scored tons of runs. Like many Indian top-order batsmen, he has struggled in SENA (esp. early on in his career) but his average is not inferior to his peers (Warner tends to struggle too in Eng. Dhawan, KL, Vijay, Sehwag, etc. have struggled too). 

 

The good thing about Pujara is that he redeemed himself in SENA by giving exceptional performances (already written about Hillary & Norgay Stuff). 

 

 

What you are attempting is appearing like a sore loser stuff (for whatever reasons including being a Dravid fan. I saw your post on Coach Dravid's thread where you were upset at his being targeted for criticism. And I agree with you on that that the coach should not be the sole target). 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

no I was replying to your post in which you quoted @Majestic and he was talking about Dravid. So that;s the context.

 

And yes I am okay with Dravid being sacked as long as its with Rohit too. Both are equally to be blamed. 

 

I don't think coaches have that much influence anyway compared to a powerful captain in India.

[vvvslaxman]

12 hours ago, zen said:

Pujara did have impact in 2020 too  (it could be that because you have got into a habit of writing against him, not that I care, you could be looking past it). 
 

A batsman does not need to do well in every test of a series. After 1-1, he helped India to draw at Sydney and win at Melbourne. He was the most consistent batsman in the last two tests scoring 3 50s in 4 innings. Enough has been already written about his heroics in the media. If Pant or whoever did well, it does not mean Pujara did not. 

 

Even in the first two tests, at Melbourne, he played like 70 balls in the 1st inning to counter the new ball after India lost a wicket at 0. If he had got out, it would have exposed the middle order to the new ball. 
 

And he is the player who has done it twice, one time single handedly and other time collectively. He is the common factor in the two series wins.
 

I am not interested in debate but only attempting to provide insights. I don’t plan to engage with you further on this topic so feel free to believe whatever you want!

 

If Gill had batted like pujara Gabba test would have been lost. He was freaking 6 runs in 94 balls