Jump to content
shychipmunk

Cheteshwar Pujara : Myth v/s Reality

Recommended Posts

Pujara isnt really a classically Dravid-esque batsman.

We do both him and Dravid a disservice to consider him a Dravid-esque batsman. He is much more of an Andy Flower type. He isnt classically correct, like Dravid was, has more technical weaknesses, but like Andy Flower, he deals with the short stuff well by not dealing with it ( he is very very good at not attacking but also evading short pitched stuff without being hit or always playing with his bat). 


In fact, much like Andy flower, he was a single-stealer kind of batsman when he first burst out. Not a hare between the wickets like Flower, but with the same intent and marginally slower. Then his knee injuries happened- both of which robbed him of noticable speed but most importantly, the confidence he had in his legs to twist and turn with full abandon as required when stealing singles and twos. 

So he became more circumspect, like Dravid was and in effect has become an Allan Border type tuktuk batsman who is extremely difficult to get out most of the time.  Pujara very rarely lasts less than 30 balls.

 

Ultimately it is unfair to compare them both, because Dravid was better than his stats for his era and also played against way more quality bowlers than Pujara. That is not to undersell Pujara - he is in the list of batsmen like Clive Lloyd, Rohan Kanhai, Martin Crowe or such .

 

One important thing to remember about Pujara is this - many a great batsmen- even most alltime greats- they usually DONT last 30 balls more than 50% of the innings they play. Pujara however, mostly DOES last 30 balls per innings he plays. 

Link to post

Pujara is lucky he plays in india/asia where his slow reactions are not exposed ,he would have never made it in these conditions .Having said that credit to him for making the most out of himself.

 

Ps Asian conditions too have been difficult for batting with those extra spin friendly tracks a few years back, till Icc cracked down.

Link to post
1 hour ago, Muloghonto said:

Pujara isnt really a classically Dravid-esque batsman.

We do both him and Dravid a disservice to consider him a Dravid-esque batsman. He is much more of an Andy Flower type. He isnt classically correct, like Dravid was, has more technical weaknesses, but like Andy Flower, he deals with the short stuff well by not dealing with it ( he is very very good at not attacking but also evading short pitched stuff without being hit or always playing with his bat). 


In fact, much like Andy flower, he was a single-stealer kind of batsman when he first burst out. Not a hare between the wickets like Flower, but with the same intent and marginally slower. Then his knee injuries happened- both of which robbed him of noticable speed but most importantly, the confidence he had in his legs to twist and turn with full abandon as required when stealing singles and twos. 

So he became more circumspect, like Dravid was and in effect has become an Allan Border type tuktuk batsman who is extremely difficult to get out most of the time.  Pujara very rarely lasts less than 30 balls.

 

Ultimately it is unfair to compare them both, because Dravid was better than his stats for his era and also played against way more quality bowlers than Pujara. That is not to undersell Pujara - he is in the list of batsmen like Clive Lloyd, Rohan Kanhai, Martin Crowe or such .

 

One important thing to remember about Pujara is this - many a great batsmen- even most alltime greats- they usually DONT last 30 balls more than 50% of the innings they play. Pujara however, mostly DOES last 30 balls per innings he plays. 

Welcome back mulo. 

Link to post
1 hour ago, MultiB48 said:

Pujara is lucky he plays in india/asia where his slow reactions are not exposed ,he would have never made it in these conditions .Having said that credit to him for making the most out of himself.

 

Ps Asian conditions too have been difficult for batting with those extra spin friendly tracks a few years back, till Icc cracked down.

He's perhaps the best batsman on the turning tracks in the world, only behind Younis, but he was never tested on square turners. And for someone who hasn't had the luxury of too many good opening partnerships, esp away from home, he's done fairly okay. Also add the fact that most away pitches in the 2010s ave been extremely bowling friendly compared to the tracks we had in 2000s, I'd say only SA pitches have remained similar. Aus, Eng, NZ all have become far more bowling friendly.

Link to post
33 minutes ago, ShoonyaSifar said:

He's perhaps the best batsman on the turning tracks in the world, only behind Younis, but he was never tested on square turners. And for someone who hasn't had the luxury of too many good opening partnerships, esp away from home, he's done fairly okay. Also add the fact that most away pitches in the 2010s ave been extremely bowling friendly compared to the tracks we had in 2000s, I'd say only SA pitches have remained similar. Aus, Eng, NZ all have become far more bowling friendly.

He is a 1st inning batsman and no one can bat on a proper turner ,he is a dogged character who gives it his all and is better than many others who are more gifted than him .

Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...