Would you take Rizwan or Pant?

[Try_Ball]

Just now, sandeep said:

Past performances don't bear this out.  Pant has shown effectiveness in T20s in the middle order, Ishan has failed to do so, and only done well at the top of the order.  Pant's T20 and First-class body of work is much better than Ishan.  Which is why Pant made it to the national team ahead of him.  

Pant has been in the system much much longer than Kishan and even with a smaller window of opportunity  , I don't know if Pant has done more for DC than Kishan has done for MI.  and if Quinton goes away, I'm sure with more games and the primary mainstay in the team,  He'd definitely do a lot better as well 

[Adi_91]

Just now, Try_Ball said:

It isn't about being woefully out of form .   I am talking about his batting style more than number of runs scored here.  

MSD played proper cricketing shots - no blind slogs ,   Rizwan is opening and playing the strike bowlers with proper cricketing shots - He's got his limitations as well but his shots don't look like bling slogs , Pant's shots look like slogs 90% of the time , either its the very awkward scoop or half way running down the pitch pre meditated.  When I see Pant - It reminds me of Afridi -  It should remind me of MSD but I see more Afridi than MSD but when I see Rizwan - I feel like I'm seeing a proper bat.

 

Tests are better than T20 ofcourse but isn't there why we have specialist players for specific formats now?   Pujara and Rahane are test batsman but they aren't necessarily better than Sharma as a batsman  - Red ball players vs White ball players - Different skill sets.  This isn't about which team wins what and what's bigger - Based on the T20 format at present -  I definitely see a higher skillset on display from Rizwan than Pant and when you see Kishan in the mix - I don't see what Pant is offering more than Kishan atleast in T20 for now. 

 

 

 

I agree that Ishan Kishan is a worthy rival to Pant's place in this team. Ofc, you are well within your rights to be critical of Pant and his batting. I have seen him throw away his wicket.

 

However, he is a match winner too. He has the potential to turn it around and win you games. There is a reason for that, self belief. Yes, he will play some stupid shots and look silly from time to time, but he is definitely no Afridi. The other good thing, his career has a long way to go. So if he improves from where he is today, he is certain to be playing for a long time. Ofc, if he is failing more often, we can replace him as we have options.

[sandeep]

12 minutes ago, Try_Ball said:

Pant has been in the system much much longer than Kishan and even with a smaller window of opportunity  , I don't know if Pant has done more for DC than Kishan has done for MI.  and if Quinton goes away, I'm sure with more games and the primary mainstay in the team,  He'd definitely do a lot better as well 

Both Pant and Kishan were in the same u19 team - in fact, Kishan was captain.  Both made their FC debut in the same timeframe.  Both got IPL contracts at the same time.  Pant simply has outperformed Kishan until now.  

 

So I dont know where you are coming from with this "smaller window of opportunity".  Pant earned his window of opportunity - Kishan has taken longer to earn his.  

[cricketfan28]

 I will go with pant. He did play a decent innings last Sunday. Just need to get rid of the Afridi in him.

Edited October 27, 2021 by cricketfan28

[Try_Ball]

23 minutes ago, sandeep said:

Both Pant and Kishan were in the same u19 team - in fact, Kishan was captain.  Both made their FC debut in the same timeframe.  Both got IPL contracts at the same time.  Pant simply has outperformed Kishan until now.  

 

So I dont know where you are coming from with this "smaller window of opportunity".  Pant earned his window of opportunity - Kishan has taken longer to earn his.  

 

I've just seen Pant more visible than Kishan - That's all. I haven't seen them in domestic

At present,  I am not sure if Pant is necessarily better than Kishan is the crux of what I'm trying to say 

Edited October 27, 2021 by Try_Ball

[vvvslaxman]

30 minutes ago, sandeep said:

 

"fancy 30".   ok.  Would you be saying the same thing if he had scored 60 odd and taken us to 170, which likely would have won us the game?  No.  That means you are judging a player by outcome, not by his method or skill or capacity potential.  T20 batting is all about risk-reward, and different players have different approaches to that equation.  Some will feel that Virat's method is too risk-averse, and costs India more games than it wins for the team.  Mind you, there's some serious cricket analytics folks that make this claim.  

 

Ultimately this is all subjective and we are all entitled to feel our opinion is the correct one.  

 

 

This I can agree with.  Pant has no ordained right to his spot, and guys like Kishan are rightly his competitors.  If he slips up and competitors outperform him, then they replace him.  

 

But considering OP's question, personally my opinion is that Rizwan is having his moment in the sun right now, but is not in Pant's category. 

 

 

  My biggest issue is his strike rotation. He is simply unable to place the ball and run.  Rizwan 55 balls played 14 dot balls. Pant 30 balls played 10 dot balls. Apart from few a matches most of his past matches also had high percentage of dots.  Gilchrist, Sehwag, Warner for all their explosive batting never ignored the importance of singles.  This often triggers the brain fart. Since world cup match i have seen quiet a lot of times where he simply threw his wicket away despite being in control of the situation. He is an extremely high risk batsman. coming in at no.5 or 6 , if he gets out he probably opens up the tail.  If they really want to get the best out of him he should bat up the order.  

[kepler37b]

38 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

 

 

  My biggest issue is his strike rotation. He is simply unable to place the ball and run.  Rizwan 55 balls played 14 dot balls. Pant 30 balls played 10 dot balls. Apart from few a matches most of his past matches also had high percentage of dots.  Gilchrist, Sehwag, Warner for all their explosive batting never ignored the importance of singles.  This often triggers the brain fart. Since world cup match i have seen quiet a lot of times where he simply threw his wicket away despite being in control of the situation. He is an extremely high risk batsman. coming in at no.5 or 6 , if he gets out he probably opens up the tail.  If they really want to get the best out of him he should bat up the order.  

Top class analysis 

[jf1gp_1]

Pant. Will consider Rizwan once he wins a couple of test in Australia and England. All the above analysis between and opener and late order batsman who can when team was in trouble are non sense.

[ShoonyaSifar]

1 hour ago, vvvslaxman said:

 

 

  My biggest issue is his strike rotation. He is simply unable to place the ball and run.  Rizwan 55 balls played 14 dot balls. Pant 30 balls played 10 dot balls. Apart from few a matches most of his past matches also had high percentage of dots.  Gilchrist, Sehwag, Warner for all their explosive batting never ignored the importance of singles.  This often triggers the brain fart. Since world cup match i have seen quiet a lot of times where he simply threw his wicket away despite being in control of the situation. He is an extremely high risk batsman. coming in at no.5 or 6 , if he gets out he probably opens up the tail.  If they really want to get the best out of him he should bat up the order.  

Rizwan played 15 dot balls out of 34 deliveries he faced vs NZ. 

 

vs Pakistan, Pant came in at 20/3, naturally he will have a higher dot ball %. Even Rizwan was 38*(34) at one point of time in his innings before making full use of the dew assistance. Both his innings on any other days could well have been  match losing innings, which I sense will be the case most likely during the knockouts.

 

Edited October 27, 2021 by ShoonyaSifar

[vvvslaxman]

5 minutes ago, ShoonyaSifar said:

Rizwan played 15 dot balls out of 34 deliveries he faced vs NZ. 

 

vs Pakistan, Pant came in at 20/3, naturally he will have a higher dot ball %. Even Rizwan was 38*(34) at one point of time in his innings before making full use of the dew assistance. Both his innings on any other days could well have been  match losing innings, which I sense will be the case most likely during the knockouts.

 

 

You are missing the point. He was constantly on the look out for singles. It is not just Rizwan. Most of the top hitters i have mentioned do that.  Pant has this issue in all formats which invariably results in  a brain fart.  Rizwan is probably having a purple patch. May be a bang average player while chasing bigger total. Does it matter. My point is he showed intent in taking singles.  Pant lacks that compared to many international players. Dhoni does that too in one dayers. But he will make it up in the end somehow.  A reason why we never wanted Dhoni in T20. Dot balls. 

[Majestic]

Pant because we have players who can do the job that Rizwan does. He is an anchor and a clutch one. Iyer can do that job.

 

But what Pant does is not something that India have in abundance.

 

We have enough anchors but what we need is proper hitters which is why we are keeping Pandya.

Edited October 27, 2021 by Majestic

[nevada]

Send Pant for opening and then we can compare. 

[ShoonyaSifar]

Just now, vvvslaxman said:

 

You are missing the point. He was constantly on the look out for singles. It is not just Rizwan. Most of the top hitters i have mentioned do that.  Pant has this issue in all formats which invariably results in  a brain fart.  Rizwan is probably having a purple patch. May be a bang average player while chasing bigger total. Does it matter. My point is he showed intent in taking singles.  Pant lacks that compared to many international players. Dhoni does that too in one dayers. But he will make it up in the end somehow.  A reason why we never wanted Dhoni in T20. Dot balls. 

So now it's about 'intent' to look for singles? What use is all the intent and the strike rate rotation if you still are 37*(34) and 33(34). 

 

Why would you even expect your power hitter to be great at strike rotation? Pant (or for that matter SKY, Jadeja, Pandya or Kishan) should be given the complete freedom to play their natural game, which is to see the ball hit the ball. That will get the best out of them not forcing them to become great at strike rotation or at least showing intent for strike rotation.

 

And no Rizwan isn't a bang average player, he does have certain limitations but has maximised his abilities in the last 12-14 months plus he is an excellent keeper, perhaps the best in the world with the gloves.

[rkt.india]

3 hours ago, vvvslaxman said:

Pant looks amateurish sometimes. Even Isan Kishan looks better in that regard. Picking the right ball to go after is an art.  I don't think Pant is anywhere close to mastering it. He does this even in Test matches. In the TC final he absolutely had no problem in the middle. Out of the blue he played a brainless hoick.  This afridi style batting  is his biggest enemy. He is not even 20% of how good Adam Gilchrist was in the limited overs.  Gilchrist doesn't lose his balance like this guy does. One-handed six might look good. That means he didn't get the timing right just relied on power. Most of his attempted slogs are like that.  First and foremost thing he has to develop is taking quick singles. He is extremely poor in rotating the strike which indirectly contributes to brainless slogging. 

 

 

Gilchrist made his ODI debut at 25, test debut at 28. Pant has already done things at such a young age that other wk can only dream of. 

[rkt.india]

20 minutes ago, ShoonyaSifar said:

So now it's about 'intent' to look for singles? What use is all the intent and the strike rate rotation if you still are 37*(34) and 33(34). 

 

Why would you even expect your power hitter to be great at strike rotation? Pant (or for that matter SKY, Jadeja, Pandya or Kishan) should be given the complete freedom to play their natural game, which is to see the ball hit the ball. That will get the best out of them not forcing them to become great at strike rotation or at least showing intent for strike rotation.

 

And no Rizwan isn't a bang average player, he does have certain limitations but has maximised his abilities in the last 12-14 months plus he is an excellent keeper, perhaps the best in the world with the gloves.

Rizwan is 29 years old, pant has just turned 24. Both are at completely different stages of their development. Pant is a completely different batsman than Rizwan and what Pant has already done in test cricket is stuff of dreams for a wk/batsman.

[vvvslaxman]

4 minutes ago, ShoonyaSifar said:

So now it's about 'intent' to look for singles? What use is all the intent and the strike rate rotation if you still are 37*(34) and 33(34). 

 

Why would you even expect your power hitter to be great at strike rotation? Pant (or for that matter SKY, Jadeja, Pandya or Kishan) should be given the complete freedom to play their natural game, which is to see the ball hit the ball. That will get the best out of them not forcing them to become great at strike rotation or at least showing intent for strike rotation.

 

And no Rizwan isn't a bang average player, he does have certain limitations but has maximised his abilities in the last 12-14 months plus he is an excellent keeper, perhaps the best in the world with the gloves.

 

He does have freedom from the beginning.  Strike rotation > dot balls.  Dot balls eventually lead to brain farts.

 

World cup semi final.

 

 

 

 

[vvvslaxman]

14 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

Gilchrist made his ODI debut at 25, test debut at 28. Pant has already done things at such a young age that other wk can only dream of. 

 

GIlchrist at 35 would still be fitter than Current Pant who has put on a lot of weight. Anyway do you suggest Pant has zero room for improvement and you will be okay with his career T20 strike rate of 123 (less than Dhoni) based on the two test knocks?

[ShoonyaSifar]

14 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

 

He does have freedom from the beginning.  Strike rotation > dot balls.  Dot balls eventually lead to brain farts.

 

World cup semi final.

 

 

 

 

Dude do you. even understand context of the match? 

 

5/2, 5/3, 24/4, took us to 72/4 in 23 overs, all big stars back in pavillion, asking rate over 6.5, young batsman tried to take a risk which didn't come off. That is all it was. It's not called brainfade

 

Now that you have jumped to ODIs, do tell us how Gilchrist performed in his first WC in '99 at the age of 28. And you mentioned WTC final. How did Gilchrist do in his first high pressure match away from home in India in the series decider at Chennai (final frontier, closest to WTC final). Let's keep shifting goalposts same way you have been doing.

Edited October 27, 2021 by ShoonyaSifar

[vvvslaxman]

4 minutes ago, ShoonyaSifar said:

Dude do you. even understand context of the match? 

 

5/2, 5/3, 24/4, took us to 72/4 in 23 overs, all big stars back in pavillion, asking rate over 6.5, young batsman tried to take a risk which didn't come off. That is all it was. It's not called brainfade

 

Now that you have jumped to ODIs, do tell us how Gilchrist performed in his first WC in '99 at the age of 28. And you mentioned WTC final. How did Gilchrist do in his first high pressure match away from home in India in the series decider at Chennai (final frontier, closest to WTC final). Let's keep shifting goalposts same way you have been doing.

 

I didn't shift any goal post. I always talked about all 3 formats. Not just T20. Give me a simple explanation why the dasher pant's strike rate is a mere 123. Give me a convincing explanation.

[ShoonyaSifar]

2 hours ago, vvvslaxman said:

 

I didn't shift any goal post. I always talked about all 3 formats. Not just T20. Give me a simple explanation why the dasher pant's strike rate is a mere 123. Give me a convincing explanation.

From Rizwan you have brought in Gilchrist, now moved to Dhoni!

 

On Pant's T20 SR, of course it is poor. He was messed up by the TM in 2018-20getting no support at all, being publicly rebuked by the captain, coach, batting coach, chairman of selection committee. No wonder he was poor in the LOIs. Has only had a revival since the Australia tour. 

 

Now back to Rizwan, how did the 'intent to rotate strike' help him when he was 38*(34) and 33(34)?

 

Rizwan's overall T20 SR is 126, Pant's is 146. That tells you everything about both of them as batsmen. Once he's settled in, Pant will make Rizwan look like an average batsman (may even happen in this WC itself).