Looking forward to seeing Pujara in Eng

[zen]

36 minutes ago, Real McCoy said:

 

Don't overcook it. SRT, RD, VVS, SG would also have more success if they had the bowling lineup we have today. Cricket is a team sport and hopefully Pujara will be a vital cog in the wheel for another few years.

 

Note that I am not judging batsmen based on bowlers in their team but what they achieved as batsmen and while playing as a group ... Fab 4 were good but also benefited from playing with each other & then had Sehwag as an opener too 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Laaloo]

1 minute ago, zen said:

 

Note that I am not judging batsmen based on bowlers in their team but what they achieved as batsmen and while playing as a group ... Fab 4 were good but also benefited from playing with each other & then had Sehwag as an opener too 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You’re right. Pujara didn’t benefit from batting with pant at all at Sydney or Gabba. Great analysis.

[Real McCoy]

58 minutes ago, zen said:

 

Note that I am not judging batsmen based on bowlers in their team but what they achieved as batsmen and while playing as a group ... Fab 4 were good but also benefited from playing with each other & then had Sehwag as an opener too 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You're bigging up Pujara while he is only a cog in the wheel. Rahane allowed him to flourish. Ashwin and Bumrah not only picked wickets but also helped Sundar and Siraj when they weren't playing in Gabba. Without Pant and Gill, we wouldn't have won at gabba. The back to the wall partnership between Sundar and Thakur in the first innings, Thakur and Siraj shining taking wickets, Sundar's cameo were all important. There was no such team performance in the 90s. Pujara by himself wouldn't have won the match. He needs an aggressive batter like Kohli, Gill or Pant to work around him.

 

[zen]

27 minutes ago, Real McCoy said:

You're bigging up Pujara while he is only a cog in the wheel. Rahane allowed him to flourish. Ashwin and Bumrah not only picked wickets but also helped Sundar and Siraj when they weren't playing in Gabba. Without Pant and Gill, we wouldn't have won at gabba. The back to the wall partnership between Sundar and Thakur in the first innings, Thakur and Siraj shining taking wickets, Sundar's cameo were all important. There was no such team performance in the 90s. Pujara by himself wouldn't have won the match. He needs an aggressive batter like Kohli, Gill or Pant to work around him.

 

 

Let's not rely on strawman.  First of all, the support of Fab 4 for each other over a period is greater than some random combinations which varies from one test to another. 2nd, we are talking over a period of time. Now if we want to talk about performance in Aus, for e.g., who was the most common influential batsman in 2 back to back series there - Pujara (see his 100 at Adelaide in 2018 for e.g. esp. important in a first test of a series, which Ind tends to do badly in). Who did relatively well in tough conditions in NZ batting in the difficult top order slot? Who got the most 50+ scores in the recent series in Aus ( 3 in the last 4 innings, while serving as an virtual opener handling the pressure with bowlers on top at the fall of Shaw and Mayank's wkts in the first two)?

 

PS As a fun exercise, pick your best batsman from the Fab 4 and I will give you the pros and cons v Pujara's. 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 1, 2021 by zen

[Real McCoy]

8 minutes ago, zen said:

 

Let's not rely on strawman.  First of all, the support of Fab 4 for each other over a period is greater than some random combinations which varies from one test to another. 2nd, we are talking over a period of time. Now if we want to talk about performance in Aus, for e.g., who was the most common influential batsman in 2 back to back series there - Pujara (see his 100 at Adelaide in 2018 for e.g. esp. important in a first test of a series, which Ind does badly). Who did relatively well in tough conditions in NZ batting in the difficult top order slot? Who got the most 50+ scores in the recent series in Aus ( 3 in the last 4 innings, while serving as an virtual opener handling the pressure with bowlers on top at the fall of Shaw and Mayank's wkts in the first two). 

 

PS As a fun exercise, pick your best batsman from the Fab 4 and I will give you the pros and cons v Pujara's. 

 

 

 

 

Why dont you do it vs all fab 4. whats stopping you. That adelaide hundred would be useless if our bowling lineup didnt pick 20 wickets for cheap. Its the bowlers who win you matches not the batting. Fab 4 had weak bowling with maybe 2 bowlers doing the heavy lifting. There's a reason why they were part of a lot of draws.

[zen]

Just now, Real McCoy said:

Why dont you do it vs all fab 4. whats stopping you. That adelaide hundred would be useless if our bowling lineup didnt pick 20 wickets for cheap. Its the bowlers who win you matches not the batting. Fab 4 had weak bowling with maybe 2 bowlers doing the heavy lifting. There's a reason why they were part of a lot of draws.

 

Again, list your best batsman from Fab 4, and I will try to include those questions in a comparison. 

[Real McCoy]

26 minutes ago, zen said:

 

Let's not rely on strawman.  First of all, the support of Fab 4 for each other over a period is greater than some random combinations which varies from one test to another. 2nd, we are talking over a period of time. Now if we want to talk about performance in Aus, for e.g., who was the most common influential batsman in 2 back to back series there - Pujara (see his 100 at Adelaide in 2018 for e.g. esp. important in a first test of a series, which Ind tends to do badly in). Who did relatively well in tough conditions in NZ batting in the difficult top order slot? Who got the most 50+ scores in the recent series in Aus ( 3 in the last 4 innings, while serving as an virtual opener handling the pressure with bowlers on top at the fall of Shaw and Mayank's wkts in the first two)?

 

PS As a fun exercise, pick your best batsman from the Fab 4 and I will give you the pros and cons v Pujara's. 

 

 

 

 

Ok tell me what strawman I'm using. you just respond like this when cornered. Do you even know what a strawman is

[zen]

14 minutes ago, Real McCoy said:

Ok tell me what strawman I'm using. you just respond like this when cornered. Do you even know what a strawman is

 

Strawman: an intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is easier to defeat than an opponent's real argument.

 

Point 1: Pujara was a HTB but has turned it around through recent performances

Strawman: Posting career avgs to the point when it has already been acknowledged that Pujara was ordinary overseas earlier (HTB) 

 

Point 2: Not judging batsmen based on the bowling attack they had but how they performed to the challenges as batsmen and the group that they are playing with (consistently, over a period of time)

Strawman: That adelaide hundred would be useless if our bowling lineup didn't pick 20 wickets for cheap.

Random combinations used in different games.

 

 

Now can I have name your of best batsman from the Fab 4

Edited March 1, 2021 by zen

[Real McCoy]

11 hours ago, zen said:

Now can I have name your of best batsman from the Fab 4

I already said post for each of fab 4. you are too hesitant to do it

[zen]

3 hours ago, Real McCoy said:

I already said post for each of fab 4. you are too hesitant to do it

 
What’s the need? Your point is that Pujara is not the most impactful batsman since 1990 (someone from Fab 4 is), Now if you tell me who your best pick is from the Fab 4, we can examine pros and cons v Pujara’s. If Pujara has more pros than your best pick, he has more pros than the other 3. It is a simple question on a cricket forum.  
 

If you do not have the answer to a simple cricketing question or see that all of the Fab 4 together have to compete with Pujara, the answer to who is more impactful in tests is already given. 

[Real McCoy]

[raki05]

17 minutes ago, sarchasm said:

Ignoring the boring spammer and his annoying simping for Pujara/Pandya everywhere. But it's easy to see Pujara is once again going to be key in both seeing off the new ball and tiring the ageing Anderson and fragile Archer in England. His contribution would be far more than the runs he'd score.

That's a very valid assessment  and i hope that he show same resilience which he has show in Aus inspite of all his struggle against spinner and cummins lately.

[Real McCoy]

Since the OP likes stats, he will enjoy (or not ) this one. Ever since the legendary Pujara avatar of 2018-19 where he became Count Dracula Pujara all of a sudden, this is the stat on averages. It has been 2 years since that series ended and I thought top order batsmen would have scored at least 1000 by this point. So I set the runs scored over 1000 and this came up. Apparently, Rohit and Rahane are the only ones among Indian batsmen to have scored above 1000 runs. Ro has an average of 64 with a sr of 64 probably due to that SA series where he scored heavily.

 

 

So I set the qualifications to 500 runs and above and I found this stat

 

 

 

Pujara is all the way at the bottom amongst legends like Mmoinul haq, Paine, etc. Even in the balls faced category which Pujara is famous for by tiring out the bowlers and capitalizing later on, he is not in the top 5 which are occupied by English batters like Root, Stokes, Burns, Sibley and Aussies like Labu and Smith. Rahane has faced more deliveries than Pujara

 

 

It seems Pujara is resting on the past laurels of that Aussie tour a couple of years ago. In a "what have you done for me now" world, 2 years is huge for a player to escape criticism

[Real McCoy]

13 minutes ago, raki05 said:

That's a very valid assessment  and i hope that he show same resilience which he has show in Aus inspite of all his struggle against spinner and cummins lately.

His resilience is appreciable but performance also needs to be taken into account, no? OP has been hyper critical of Ashwin's performance (count me as guilty as well. Only @Gollum has supported Ashwin totally) but doesn't apply the same rules to Pujara

[Real McCoy]

Not to mention Pujara hasn't scored a century in 2 years which a newb like Pant did it today in style

[zen]

2 minutes ago, Real McCoy said:

It seems Pujara is resting on the past laurels of that Aussie tour a couple of years ago. In a "what have you done for me now" world, 2 years is huge for a player to escape criticism

The greatness of Pujara is that even when not in purple patch, he can carve out great performances including the win in the recent series in Aus

 

From your stats for a guy not in best of form, 9 50s in 28 innings, which is 1 in 3 in the top order, serving as virtual opener in many of the games including in tough series 

 

Good effort but ability to gain insights from stats is not everyone’s forte! 

 

[raki05]

3 minutes ago, Real McCoy said:

His resilience is appreciable but performance also needs to be taken into account, no? OP has been hyper critical of Ashwin's performance (count me as guilty as well. Only @Gollum has supported Ashwin totally) but doesn't apply the same rules to Pujara

Absolutely . Performance is what matter and as i said on many occasion Ashwin is the biggest match winner we have since 2013-14 in Asia when his dominance started and lately he has turned the tide in overseas condition as well. Pujara has shown resilience in aus but he is very limited in his approach and looks like he can only do that, expecting anything more from him would be sheer disappointment especially lately when he looks so ugly  against spin or pace inspite of showing resilience.

[Real McCoy]

Just now, zen said:

The greatness of Pujara is that even when not in purple patch, he can carve out great performances including the win in the recent series in Aus

 

From your stats for a guy not in best of form, 9 50s in 28 innings, which is 1 in 3 in the top order, serving as virtual opener in many of the games including in tough series 

 

Good effort but ability to gain insights from stats is not everyone’s forte! 

 

Wait you pulled out all stats but now you're saying interpretation is not everybody's forte Its plain and simple. You can't keep someone not in a purple patch for 2 years. He is no Smith, Root, Kohli, Williamson. FFS he is not even a Cook or Dravid type wearing opposition out. His last great series was in Aus 18-19

[Real McCoy]

1 minute ago, raki05 said:

Absolutely . Performance is what matter and as i said on many occasion Ashwin is the biggest match winner we have since 2013-14 in Asia when his dominance started and lately he has turned the tide in overseas condition as well. Pujara has shown resilience in aus but he is very limited in his approach and looks like he can only do that, expecting anything more from him would be sheer disappointment especially lately when he looks so ugly  against spin or pace inspite of showing resilience.

I can make some excuses against pace in foreign conditions but spin come on. Spin to any Indian player should be bread and butter. Even if you put out of form Mayank in, he will show how to play spin. Getting lbw to Leach and becoming his bunny

On the other hand, Ashwin has made Stokes his bunny who is a prolific scorer in the last 2 years will get no marks from OP because he has the perspective of a zen master pardon the pun

[raki05]

4 minutes ago, Real McCoy said:

His last great series was in Aus 18-19

And that's the only good series in any SENA country or even in WI.