Jump to content
vvvslaxman

Karthik reveals why Chahal wasn't picked in India XI

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Vilander said:

They are talking and paving way for support staff work what's your problem ? Pls first ignore yourself when you have such thoughts.

Dravid /Rohit should be questioned and should be held accountable for failures. Saw two threads where they are clarifying for Dravid and Rohit.
 

Note to self:  Don’t respond to  every post

Link to comment
On 11/19/2022 at 2:08 AM, vvvslaxman said:

https://www.hindustantimes.com/cricket/at-start-of-t20-world-cup-rohit-sharma-and-rahul-dravid-made-it-clear-that-dibesh-karthik-reveals-why-yuzvendra-chahal-wasn-t-picked-in-india-xi-101668765027618.html

'At start of T20 WC, Rohit and Dravid made it clear that...': Karthik reveals why Chahal wasn't picked in India XI

Updated on Nov 18, 2022 05:51 PM ISTCaptain Rohit Sharma and head coach Rahul Dravid was immensely criticised for not getting Chahal in theOne of the big concerns veterans and experts had made after India's disappointing T20 World Cup exit in the semi-final was the absence of Yuzvendra Chahal in the team's playing XI. Unlike the 2021 edition, India had picked him in the squad, but this time missed out on the XI. He was among the only two players in the Indian team to not get a game time, along with Harshal Patel. Captain Rohit Sharma and head coach Rahul Dravid was immensely criticised for not getting Chahal in the XI and teammate Dinesh Karthik revealed why. XI and teammate Dinesh Karthik revealed why.

 

13 of India's 15-man squad had appeared in at least one of the matches for India in the T20 World Cup. But Chahal was not picked. Despite veterans and experts making his case ahead of every match, the management went ahead of Ashwin as their lead spinner owing to his batting abilities and Axar Patel as the second choice.

While Rohit and Dravid was slammed for picking Ashwin over Chahal, Karthik, during his conversation with Cricbuzz revealed that both the leggie and Harshal were made clear at the start of the tournament that they would make the XI only if conditions favoured their presence or else they might have to sit out the entire tournament.

 

“They didn't sulk once or get upset once because they were very sure. At the start of the tournament they were said that under these conditions we would be playing you otherwise it might be hard. So they were very aware and were preparing in such a way that when get an opportunity they will try and do their best but there might be a chance that they end up not playing. So when that clarity is there from the coach and captain it makes the job easier for the player because you just start looking inward and think okay what do I do to start preparing better. That is what they were doing and had they been given a chance they would have given their best. This is a very high intensity tournament. As mentioned, he played a lot of matches for India and he knows the feeling of being dropped,” he said.

 

 

Than why these chutiyas carried him for an year in all biletrals. This TM are even bigger joker than selectors. They played Harshal, Avesh and chahal fir an year and none of them played wt20. Same chutiyapa they have started again by playing Bhu-Chal.

 

Link to comment
20 hours ago, putrevus said:

If you are alluding to BEDI  and co , then you are mistaken. They would have never worded with these  heavy bats. 
 

I would not call tem great by any means. 

if they were born in this era, they would adapt accordingly. this is just the kind of foolishness I see from people who dismiss bradman, sobers, etc. if these people had played today with today's training, techniques, etc. they would most likely have been fine.

 

Go look at chandra's record of Aus in Aus, WI in WI, etc. much better than all our modern darters.

 

you are even more mistaken, because you are spouting off random comments on players that you have not seen firsthand, I am 99% confident of that. I won't be discussing this further since you seem to have a strange (and wrong) opinion that only cricketers post-2000s are great.

Edited by Vijy
Link to comment
4 hours ago, Vijy said:

if they were born in this era, they would adapt accordingly. 

 

Chandra's record of Aus in Aus, WI in WI, etc. much better than all our modern darters.

 

 

 

 

I agree with what you said in that post. 

 

I have just 2 questions regarding these spinners, as I have never seen them bowl live. 

 

Why did they have bowling averages in the high 20s  ?  

 

Did they turn the ball on neutral pitches ?  Asking as I want to know this aspect. 

 

 

Link to comment
11 hours ago, Vijy said:

if they were born in this era, they would adapt accordingly. this is just the kind of foolishness I see from people who dismiss bradman, sobers, etc. if these people had played today with today's training, techniques, etc. they would most likely have been fine.

 

Go look at chandra's record of Aus in Aus, WI in WI, etc. much better than all our modern darters.

 

you are even more mistaken, because you are spouting off random comments on players that you have not seen firsthand, I am 99% confident of that. I won't be discussing this further since you seem to have a strange (and wrong) opinion that only cricketers post-2000s are great.

They were never great to begin with so question of them adapting does not arise.Were they best option India had in late 60s and 70s answer would be yes.So your perception of them being great does not make them great.

 

They were the only bowlers bowling everywhere away from home too as India had no new ball bowlers so they were bound to pickup wickets. So don't make them into some great bowlers .

 

Fact is post 2000 teams were best Indian teams. All time eleven for India will feature mostly players mostly post 1996 with some exception of Kapil, Kumble, Sunil Gavaskar and Sachin. 

Link to comment
8 hours ago, express bowling said:

 

 

I agree with what you said in that post. 

 

I have just 2 questions regarding these spinners, as I have never seen them bowl live. 

 

Why did they have bowling averages in the high 20s  ?  

 

Did they turn the ball on neutral pitches ?  Asking as I want to know this aspect. 

 

 


They did not bowl on rank turners, which became wide spread from the 90s.

 

Many of these spinners have exceptional performances overseas (Mankad Test, Chandra winning a test in Eng, and so on). 

 

Edited by zen
Link to comment

Theres no leg-spinner who can bat in domestic circuit, which makes Chahal a default choice. Bishnoi is more of a quick off-spinner if he can develop into someone like Rashid khan then he will be an asset.

 

Do not think Kuldeep Yadav can succeeded at intl. level any more unless he brings a v.good zip into his bowls after pitching.

Its no-more a news in world cricket that batters can easily manage Kuldeep Yadav from  back-foot, teams like Eng, Aus, NZ,SA who have players who can hit sixes on back foot or can play spinner from crease will never have an issue against him.  He can only trouble sub continent players who tries to play on from foot and get beaten in the flight.

 

 

 

Edited by tapandrun
Link to comment
On 11/21/2022 at 5:03 AM, express bowling said:

 

 

I agree with what you said in that post. 

 

I have just 2 questions regarding these spinners, as I have never seen them bowl live. 

 

Why did they have bowling averages in the high 20s  ?  

 

Did they turn the ball on neutral pitches ?  Asking as I want to know this aspect. 

 

 

@express bowling - both very good questions, and constructive ones at that. thank you for raising them sincerely; I know all of us are guilty of acting like know-it-alls at times (myself included), but some of the arrogance of the newer posters here is quite something to see.

 

1. Ind tracks, and in general world tracks, were a graveyard for spinners in 60s to 80s. this is why genuinely good bowlers like Gibbs, Gupte, Indian spin quartet, Abdul Qadir, etc. all have mediocre records by modern standards. from 90s onward, likes of kumble, raju (he was arguably even better than kumble at home), ashwin, jaddu feasted on turners apart from a ~5-10 yr period where bhajji + anil played on pattas. basically, the mid 2000s pitches in Ind were akin to what we got in the 70s and 80s. they were slow and low, did not break up much, did not have variable bounce, etc. In fact, these pitches were so bad that some of our spinners of that era have better records overseas where they could extract some bounce at least.

 

if chandra played on the type of pitches we gave SA around 2015 and Eng in 2021, I am sure he would have an avg < 10 in those pitches. his home avg would be < 20 and his away avg around 30. therefore, he would prove to be a much better all-round bowler than ashwin or any other spinner post-kumble.

 

2. The amount of revs + turn that chandra and pras (prasanna) put were quite top-tier, and also gupte from an earlier period - I didn't see him live, but watched some full match recordings shown in early 80s and such. IMO, chandra and pras were genuinely world class, and would be at a level higher than any current spinner, albeit of course not the same level as warne, murali. chandra also got some much needed zip - he was actually a bit slower than kumble, but his arm action made his balls harder to read.

I must say that I don't rate Bedi as highly as others do - Shivalkar could have been more of a match winner. Venkat was merely an above avg spinner; dilip doshi and several others was better than venkat.

Edited by Vijy
Link to comment

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...