Jump to content

Venky declares Jihad against KL Rahul !!!


Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, sandeep said:

source? what sort of "source" do you want? The guy in his own defense that he wasn't as 'focused' as Kumble etc.  I have been following cricket since the 90s - Ramesh's laziness and 'attitude' wasn't a secret back then.  If somebody as reticent and diplomatic as John Wright alludes to it, I mean.  It is what it is.  

Might have been lazy, who knows. But I hope it isn't from his style of play.....VVS, Ashwin too have that lazy feel to their batting.

 

Who knows what his state of mind was when he talked about his lack of focus compared to Kumble. Maybe he was trying to make peace with his career, justify himself etc. It's like when we do bad in exams, we say that compared to toppers we weren't focused....

 

You levelled some fairly  serious allegations against him, like he had superstar airs or refused to do fitness drills. That is an attack on his character, hence my response. One can always come to 10 different conclusions based on hearsay, but don't think it is fair on the person being discussed. You are generally level-headed about these things, hence my surprise. 

7 hours ago, sandeep said:

Wasim Akram talked about this in one of his interviews.  Pak bowlers loved the SG ball used in that series - after about 10 overs of use that ball use to start reversing.  He even says that they were happy to concede a few boundaries with the new ball early, because that just meant that the ball got scuffed up that much quicker.

 

Yes, following that series then, it got the blood pumping to watch Ramesh get off to those quick starts, hitting the new ball for boundaries while tense Indian fans stressed about the pace threat of Waqar and Wasim.  But context matters.  Was Ramesh talented? Yes - he was the precursor to Sehwag, but paled in comparison to Veeru, both in terms of talent, application and output.  Comparing him to Chopra is flawed from the get go.  Given Veeru's emergence as a quick scoring opener unafraid to take risks, India needed the second opener to be a foil, someone who was ready to do the hard yards and grind against the new ball.  Not to say Chopra was good enough - he clearly was not.  But there was no way to know that without giving him a run.  So it wasn't as cut and dried as you are making it sound in hindsight.

Ramesh also did well against the old ball in those 3 tests (played maximum number balls from either side, and by a significant distance ahead of number two), against a pretty serious bowling attack. Also played Saqlain with aplomb, while others around him were flailing. 

 

Ramesh wasn't as good as Sehwag, so what? His competition was with the second opener and the way I look at it, there was no one remotely close till the emergence of Gambhir. 

 

Aakash was bad, you know it, I know it. Similarly a few others we tried in that period. Anyway coming to the new ball blunting part, Aakash had an average of 23 and SR 34.5. Ramesh had average 38 and SR 46.5. You do the simple math, who played more balls per innings? 

 

No way are you going to be able to justify Ramesh's career lasting just 2.5 years. Absolutely no way. Injustice, plain and simple. 

Edited by Gollum
Link to comment
2 hours ago, Gollum said:

Might have been lazy, who knows. But I hope it isn't from his style of play.....VVS, Ashwin too have that lazy feel to their batting.

 

uh no, Lazy as in got into arguments with the head coach and "opted out" of fitness sessions.  We are talking about 20 years ago, and asking me to find "sources" is a bit unrealistic. 

 

Rest of your post is a head to head hindsight comparison of Chopra vs Ramesh, which there is no point to.  Context matters.  Given that Sehwag had 'sealed' his spot as one of the openers, Ramesh with the baggage he had, and the limitations of footwork etc that were ever present, had an uphill task.  Its not as if Chopra kept him out for years and years.  Gambhir debuted what, in 2004? and that was that.  Ramesh was a "could have been" at best, with a bunch of non-cricket issues - not some kind of 'lost talent'.   

Link to comment
19 minutes ago, sandeep said:

 

uh no, Lazy as in got into arguments with the head coach and "opted out" of fitness sessions.  We are talking about 20 years ago, and asking me to find "sources" is a bit unrealistic. 

 

Rest of your post is a head to head hindsight comparison of Chopra vs Ramesh, which there is no point to.  Context matters.  Given that Sehwag had 'sealed' his spot as one of the openers, Ramesh with the baggage he had, and the limitations of footwork etc that were ever present, had an uphill task.  Its not as if Chopra kept him out for years and years.  Gambhir debuted what, in 2004? and that was that.  Ramesh was a "could have been" at best, with a bunch of non-cricket issues - not some kind of 'lost talent'.   

Chopra debuted in 2003 and Ramesh's glory days against Pak were from 1999.  Suffice to say that 4 years is a long time in cricket during the 90s when there was no IPL or televised domestic cricket 

Link to comment
34 minutes ago, diga said:

Chopra debuted in 2003 and Ramesh's glory days against Pak were from 1999.  Suffice to say that 4 years is a long time in cricket during the 90s when there was no IPL or televised domestic cricket 

To be fair to Ramesh, he was trying to make a comeback in 2003, and worked for it, got himself on the test squad for the Aus tour as well.  But Veeru was preferred ahead of him, and after that 195 at the MCG on Boxing day, he never looked back.  

 

Its easy to say after the fact that Chopra "was worse than Ramesh" by looking at stats now, but if you were sitting there in 2003, before Akash proved himself out to be a dud at the top level,  it was a no-brainer to pick Chopra ahead of Ramesh.  

Link to comment
52 minutes ago, diga said:

Chopra debuted in 2003 and Ramesh's glory days against Pak were from 1999.  Suffice to say that 4 years is a long time in cricket during the 90s when there was no IPL or televised domestic cricket 

 

Absolutely not true. Ramesh's omission is baffling till. I found that surprising given that he was dropped right after being the 2nd highest run getter of the series in SL which happened in 2001. I did follow the whole series and was expecting him to partner with Sehwag. Ramesh had no negative news about him to be ignored. It was a sudden end to his career.

 

https://www.sportskeeda.com/cricket/sadagoppan-ramesh-a-baffling-end-promising-career

 

Ramesh/Ganguly/Dravid played 15 matches together excluding Zimbabwe. So he was not mediocre. 

 

tewwewwww.jpg

 

Let us say he was a bit unlucky and leave it at that instead of finding reasons for his exclusions giving a clean chit to our selelctors/team management.  I know for a fact how hard they tried to protect Parthiv patel during that era despite he had 685 runs worth of catch drops. 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, vvvslaxman said:

 

Absolutely not true. Ramesh's omission is baffling till. I found that surprising given that he was dropped right after being the 2nd highest run getter of the series in SL which happened in 2001. I did follow the whole series and was expecting him to partner with Sehwag. Ramesh had no negative news about him to be ignored. It was a sudden end to his career.

 

https://www.sportskeeda.com/cricket/sadagoppan-ramesh-a-baffling-end-promising-career

 

Ramesh/Ganguly/Dravid played 15 matches together excluding Zimbabwe. So he was not mediocre. 

 

tewwewwww.jpg

 

Let us say he was a bit unlucky and leave it at that instead of finding reasons for his exclusions giving a clean chit to our selelctors/team management.  I know for a fact how hard they tried to protect Parthiv patel during that era despite he had 685 runs worth of catch drops. 

Not giving a clean chit to selectors.. Its just that Ramesh's period coincided with Ganguly/Wright tenure and he missed out .  Zim series did expose his weakness against raw pace with his limited footwork which was held against him in Australia

Link to comment
21 minutes ago, diga said:

Not giving a clean chit to selectors.. Its just that Ramesh's period coincided with Ganguly/Wright tenure and he missed out .  Zim series did expose his weakness against raw pace with his limited footwork which was held against him in Australia

 

Ganguly was the worst batsman for India for a significant period during that phase.  There was no raw pace in that era except from Brett lee/Akhtar who he played with ease.  It is one of those career that inexplicably ended. That opening spot was open until Gambhir. 

 

These are the openers we had between 2002-2004. As you can see most of them were worthless except Gambhir.

 

werwerwewww.jpg

Link to comment
1 hour ago, sandeep said:

To be fair to Ramesh, he was trying to make a comeback in 2003, and worked for it, got himself on the test squad for the Aus tour as well.  But Veeru was preferred ahead of him, and after that 195 at the MCG on Boxing day, he never looked back.  

So you are saying Chopra was our first opener and it was a shootout between Viru and Ramesh :hysterical:

1 hour ago, sandeep said:

Its easy to say after the fact that Chopra "was worse than Ramesh" by looking at stats now, but if you were sitting there in 2003, before Akash proved himself out to be a dud at the top level,  it was a no-brainer to pick Chopra ahead of Ramesh.  

No-brainer why? Because Chopra was the next Barry Richards?

You know who top scored in the warm up before Gabba test? 

Link to comment
2 hours ago, sandeep said:

To be fair to Ramesh, he was trying to make a comeback in 2003, and worked for it, got himself on the test squad for the Aus tour as well.  But Veeru was preferred ahead of him, and after that 195 at the MCG on Boxing day, he never looked back.  

 

Its easy to say after the fact that Chopra "was worse than Ramesh" by looking at stats now, but if you were sitting there in 2003, before Akash proved himself out to be a dud at the top level,  it was a no-brainer to pick Chopra ahead of Ramesh.  


Ramesh was picked in the squad  and never played again without a chance. That’s the case of many many cricketers. Forget Ramesh, what about Karun Nair. Forget for a second what you think of his talent, do you think he was treated fairly? I think what venky is pointing out is the subjective ness when it comes to one player getting an extended run over others.


as fans we are guilty of that too when we think someone is more “talented” so deserves more chances on that perception. Where do you draw the line?

 

Link to comment
58 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

 

Ganguly was the worst batsman for India for a significant period during that phase.  There was no raw pace in that era except from Brett lee/Akhtar who he played with ease.  It is one of those career that inexplicably ended. That opening spot was open until Gambhir. 

 

These are the openers we had between 2002-2004. As you can see most of them were worthless except Gambhir.

 

werwerwewww.jpg

Brighton Watambwa in the Zim test.. he was quite wiry & quick

 

 

Agree that Ganguly as a batsman did not exactly merit a place in the test 11... Someone like Ramesh deserved it above him but those days Dalmiya held fort. 

Link to comment
26 minutes ago, maniac said:


Ramesh was picked in the squad  and never played again without a chance. That’s the case of many many cricketers. Forget Ramesh, what about Karun Nair. Forget for a second what you think of his talent, do you think he was treated fairly? I think what venky is pointing out is the subjective ness when it comes to one player getting an extended run over others.


as fans we are guilty of that too when we think someone is more “talented” so deserves more chances on that perception. Where do you draw the line?

 

Karun batted like a headless chicken vs pace and bounce against Oz. He was dropped. This was in India where he is supposed to be a monster. Ruthless I know but you can't have a weak game vs pace and bounce and expect to be picked. 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, vvvslaxman said:

 

Ganguly was the worst batsman for India for a significant period during that phase.  There was no raw pace in that era except from Brett lee/Akhtar who he played with ease.  It is one of those career that inexplicably ended. That opening spot was open until Gambhir. 

 

These are the openers we had between 2002-2004. As you can see most of them were worthless except Gambhir.

 

werwerwewww.jpg

Ganguly is such an overrated can fodder vs pace and bounce..he is good vs spin only. And can play medium pace swingers. He is absolute trash vs pace and bounce. He should never have been part of oz, SA tours. Useless player in those conditions. 

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, speedracer said:

Karun batted like a headless chicken vs pace and bounce against Oz. He was dropped. This was in India where he is supposed to be a monster. Ruthless I know but you can't have a weak game vs pace and bounce and expect to be picked. 


In how many games ? Also how did Ganguly, Raina, Iyer look against pace and bounce? Did they get opportunities despite that?

 

now you might say he doesn’t have the same body of work but he was just coming off of a 300 against England of all teams just 2-3 games before.

 

I was the first guy to get criticized here when I said Nair had something missing despite the knock but if it is unfair it is unfair.

Link to comment
8 minutes ago, speedracer said:

Karun batted like a headless chicken vs pace and bounce against Oz. He was dropped. This was in India where he is supposed to be a monster. Ruthless I know but you can't have a weak game vs pace and bounce and expect to be picked. 

check Kohli's performance in that series

Link to comment
9 minutes ago, maniac said:


In how many games ? Also how did Ganguly, Raina, Iyer look against pace and bounce? Did they get opportunities despite that?

 

now you might say he doesn’t have the same body of work but he was just coming off of a 300 against England of all teams just 2-3 games before.

 

I was the first guy to get criticized here when I said Nair had something missing despite the knock but if it is unfair it is unfair.

Iyer I am sceptical too

 I dont rate anyone who cant play pace and bounce. Yes spin ability matters but the other 2 help you win games in Oz and SA. 

 

I dislike ganaguly. I never rated that scrub

Overrated player. He is a total can vs pace and bounce. I know it was unfair on k nair but there is nothing much we can do. He needed political support.

Edited by speedracer
Link to comment
2 minutes ago, speedracer said:

Iyer I am sceptical too

 I dont rate anyone who cant play pace and bounce. Yes spin ability matters but the other 2 help you win games in Oz and SA. 

Bro Kohli got owned by Fidel Edwards on WI pitches in his first test series with short ball but got backed on potential. Forget Iyer I will tell you right now that Nair would have faded away in the following international cycle. However he earned some extra games with that 300. That’s the point I am making. Not 2 games after his knock on the basis that he struggled in 2 games .

Edited by maniac
Link to comment
6 minutes ago, Lord said:

check Kohli's performance in that series

I agree. I don't rate coolie either. Even in England back in 2018 he got lucky several times due to dropped catches. He had a good peak of about 2 or 3 years. Apart from that he was mostly a can. Chimp looking fodder post 2020.

 

Nair did deserve more chances but to get picked you need to have some talent, along with that you need to be marketable or you need a lobby to vouch for you. Karen had none of the 3. Limited talent vs pace and bounce.

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...