All Rounders Do Not Exist Part - II

[maniac]

4 minutes ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

 

and those 7 games that teamw ill score big u wnt need pandya to score quickly , ofcourse u will 

 

Even rohit hit ratio is 5 out of times with less risk so 3.5 out of 10 when a guy hasnt even hit a peak isnt bad then add 1-2 with bowling as well so he goes past 5 now 

 

 

 

You are contradicting yourself. You are saying Pandyas utility is to take a good score and make it to a great one. So in that scenario we need Rohit or Kohli/Dhawan to score big with the approach that works for them. However the problem statement here is what if they don’t perform, what is Pandya’s utility?

 

So not sure why you keep bringing Rohit in this discussion

[zen]

11 minutes ago, maniac said:

However the problem statement here is what if they don’t perform, what is Pandya’s utility?

 
If top orders players do not perform, they should be replaced. Are we going to play batsmen instead of bowlers too to account fo “usual” failures of likes of Rohit (his utility questioned)

 

Also ppl know what the avgs are for those who bat at 6-7 (Rohit avg 24, SR 77 .... 0 6s), SDP is much better than “such” guys  and can play super knocks as well 

Edited November 23, 2020 by zen

[Ankit_sharma03]

7 minutes ago, maniac said:

You are contradicting yourself. You are saying Pandyas utility is to take a good score and make it to a great one. So in that scenario we need Rohit or Kohli/Dhawan to score big with the approach that works for them. However the problem statement here is what if they don’t perform, what is Pandya’s utility?

 

didnt i already answer that the last 2 times those guys failed he scored 

So pandya has to score when those guys score and also when they dont ....hmmm 

 

7 minutes ago, maniac said:

So not sure why you keep bringing Rohit in this discussion

 

 

ha kyunki same harqaten to bhul jaate ho 

inhi ka raita saaf krna padta hai , and this high risk theory also doesnt work all time coz this is why he has 29 -100s in 229 games 

[maniac]

51 minutes ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

 

didnt i already answer that the last 2 times those guys failed he scored 

So pandya has to score when those guys score and also when they dont ....hmmm 

 

 

 

 

of course he does, if he is playing as a specialist batsman. If Bumrah and co don’t pick up wickets that would be the expectation from him as a bowler. You seem to have some low standards for SDP  at least Zen thinks he is Bradman + Marshall reincarnation 

[Ankit_sharma03]

Just now, maniac said:

of course he does, if he is playing as a specialist batsman. If Bumrah and co don’t pick up wickets that would be the expectation from him as a bowler. You seem to have some low standards for SDP  at least Zen thinks he is Bradman + Marshall reincarnation 

 

i hve expectation for everyone to do their role

Rohit cant do what pandya can , so pandya shud be expected same as rohit n kohli

Pandya has a role and thats what he is in - now his role is high risk which is why he has more free hand like even rest of players who do that role.....look at MI how much free hand has a pollard had before pandya and that guy was might inconsistent atleast pandya last 2 seasons were outstanding , this yr also he ended up being india high s/r batsman. 

 

 

[Khota]

3 hours ago, Straight Drive said:

We did have Irfan Pathan, Prabhakar, Robin Singh and Hardik Pandya in between. Although none of them are certain starters in all formats and not in class of Dev, they were handy payers to an extent .

To win you need the best. Handy is correct description and that is not what the team needs.

 

 

[Khota]

3 hours ago, maniac said:

You are contradicting yourself. You are saying Pandyas utility is to take a good score and make it to a great one. So in that scenario we need Rohit or Kohli/Dhawan to score big with the approach that works for them. However the problem statement here is what if they don’t perform, what is Pandya’s utility?

 

So not sure why you keep bringing Rohit in this discussion

 

This is like a movie. When there is place for a player they come up with a make belive spot of hitting sixes to justify his selection.

 

I thought Dhoni fans were blind but now I am realizing they were very reasonable.

[bowl_out]

2 hours ago, Khota said:

To win you need the best. Handy is correct description and that is not what the team needs.

 

 

There are so many situations where you need handy more than "best" with the skillset irrelevant for the situation.

In a 197/5 situation with 240 as the target, I'd rather have Hardik or Krunal or even Jadeja walk in than have the best bowler in the world walk in to bat

[Khota]

4 hours ago, bowl_out said:

 

There are so many situations where you need handy more than "best" with the skillset irrelevant for the situation.

In a 197/5 situation with 240 as the target, I'd rather have Hardik or Krunal or even Jadeja walk in than have the best bowler in the world walk in to bat

Maybe Hardik and Krunal were the reason the target was 240.

[rkt.india]

8 hours ago, Khota said:

To win you need the best. Handy is correct description and that is not what the team needs.

 

 

Pandya is arguably the best hitter in India.

[Khota]

9 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

Pandya is arguably the best hitter in India.

So can we agree that he does not bowl. And what does best hitter mean? What does it do for the team?

[Straight Drive]

9 hours ago, Khota said:

To win you need the best. Handy is correct description and that is not what the team needs.

 

 

You don't need the best always to win matches. Madan Lal took 3 wickets in 1983 WC final match and scored few runs,  but he wasn't the best bowler or batsman in the team. His contribution in winning was important though.

 

Srinath and Kumble were bowlers but they won is onr match in chase against Australia.

 

There are many more examples which I can give to point out that the best may not be needed to win a match.

 

I do agree though that it is more important to have a Kohli in a team who is consistent and big scorer than some other low profile batsman in the hope that he will score when Kohli or Rohit Sharma fails. But there are not many Kohli's or Rohit Sharma's around. It is not tough to get into India's middle order as the competition isn't strong, and Pandya has managed to do just that. So far Pandya has done well than some other batsmen in LOI. He deserves a spot as a batsman alone in shorter formats only, but like every player his batting performance should be reviewed periodically as well.

 

 

Yusuf Pathan who was renowned for hitting and batting position in lower middle order like Pandya was not the best. But Yusuf Pathan too did win India few matches. Players like Yusuf Pathan and Pandya cannot be Sobers or  Kapil Dev or Botham or Imran or Hadlee or some other lesser all rounders, but they certainly can win few matches even with their peak performance with support from others.

 

Edited November 24, 2020 by Straight Drive

[Khota]

48 minutes ago, Straight Drive said:

You don't need the best always to win matches. Madan Lal took 3 wickets in 1983 WC final match and scored few runs,  but he wasn't the best bowler or batsman in the team. His contribution in winning was important though.

 

Srinath and Kumble were bowlers but they won is onr match in chase against Australia.

 

There are many more examples which I can give to point out that the best may not be needed to win a match.

 

I do agree though that it is more important to have a Kohli in a team who is consistent and big scorer than some other low profile batsman in the hope that he will score when Kohli or Rohit Sharma fails. But there are not many Kohli's or Rohit Sharma's around. It is not tough to get into India's middle order as the competition isn't strong, and Pandya has managed to do just that. So far Pandya has done well than some other batsmen in LOI. He deserves a spot as a batsman alone in shorter formats only, but like every player his batting performance should be reviewed periodically as well.

 

 

Yusuf Pathan who was renowned for hitting and batting position in lower middle order like Pandya was not the best. But Yusuf Pathan too did win India few matches. Players like Yusuf Pathan and Pandya cannot be Sobers or  Kapil Dev or Botham or Imran or Hadlee or some other lesser all rounders, but they certainly can win few matches even with their peak performance with support from others.

 

Madan Lal was the best pace bowler for the team after Kapil. Madan Lal played minor counties and honed his bowling skills. Madan Lal used to bowl to single wkt for countless hours at National Stadium in Delhi. Madan Lal was very good.

 

Pandya does not have time to learn the skills needed to become a  pace bowler. Pace bowling is not a part time profession.

[Khota]

14 hours ago, zen said:

 

"big hitter" rohit has hit zero 6s at #6-7

Someone who is comparing Pandya with Rohit in batting skills cannot be taken seriously. If I have to pick a bat at any position I will blindly pick Rohit over Pandya. Maybe dozen others before Pandya.

[Straight Drive]

Just now, Khota said:

Madan Lal was the best pace bowler for the team after Kapil. Madan Lal played minor counties and honed his bowling skills. Madan Lal used to bowl to single wkt for countless hours at National Stadium in Delhi. Madan Lal was very good.

 

Pandya does not have time to learn the skills needed to become a  pace bowler. Pace bowling is not a part time profession.

You mentioned need for  "Best" in initial posts and now you are mentioning "Best after Kapil".  It is better if you would let know what you actually mean - "Best" or "Best after Kapil" or something else. That would be helpful to interpret your post correctly.

[Khota]

2 minutes ago, Straight Drive said:

You mentioned need for  "Best" in initial posts and now you are mentioning "Best after Kapil".  It is better if you would let know what you actually mean - "Best" or "Best after Kapil" or something else. That would be helpful to interpret your post correctly.

Let me explain again. Pandya is not top ten bowler or top ten bat. Madan lal was number two.

[Straight Drive]

1 hour ago, Khota said:

Let me explain again. Pandya is not top ten bowler or top ten bat. Madan lal was number two.

Pandya has not bowled for more than one year now due to injury. Hence, the question arises, whether his batting is enough for him to merit a spot in ODI and T20i. Can he be one of the six best short format batsman? Given his performances in LOI he has done well enough to justify a spot imo. Apart from Dhawan, Sharma and Kohli the batting order was unsettled an year back with spots yet to be cemented by specialist bats and all the hire and fire tactics of Kohli. Since then Rahul has improved upon his weakness by starting to score runs at a faster rate in recent past. Iyer has won few matches but that's a recent acheivement. Pandya meanwhile was performing better as a batsman than both of them if we consider overall LOI matches played by them. Can you name any other batsman who is better than Pandya. We have to consider Pandya has proven performances at international level. The names which may be suggested would be on hopes that a player may do good. In such a scenario why do we need to chuck out a proven short format player. He can be discarded if his batting degrades but that is something for the future if at all it happens.

 

If we notice, Pandya was dropped from playing 11 in Australia test series last year. Now he is dropped altogether from the test squad itself. It will mean that Pandya can play more domestic LOI tournaments rather than being on bench in test squad. This might actually improve his batting in LOI.

[bowl_out]

5 hours ago, Khota said:

Maybe Hardik and Krunal were the reason the target was 240.

 

You can write a 1000 maybes.

If your best was to always deliver better, you wouldn't be 190/5 in the first place. What's your point

[bowl_out]

1 hour ago, Khota said:

Let me explain again. Pandya is not top ten bowler or top ten bat. Madan lal was number two.

Top x doesn't mean anything in LOIs. It means a lot in Tests..

 

For LOIs, every batting position requires a different skill. Now list down the top 10 batsmen for a no. 6 and no 7 position. I don't care if it is Pandya or not. But I don't want an Iyer batting there. Nor do I want a Bumrah or Chahal batting there

[rkt.india]

4 hours ago, Khota said:

So can we agree that he does not bowl. And what does best hitter mean? What does it do for the team?

In a team of accumulators, what he does is try to score quickly in slog overs.  He is a batsman who can bowl. Bowling is his secondary skill. As an all-rounder, you must be good enough in one aspect to be picked on that. Pandya is good enough to be picked as a batsman alone. Yuvraj played with average of 29 for years and lesser strike rate and at the number Pandya usually bats, he averages 29 with over 100 SR, so, he is a must.