for the greater good of Indian cricket

[jf1gp_1]

Everyone keeps talking about how players should only focus on winning than personal milestone. Makes perfect sense. Any player who plays for himself is criticised and in principle I agree with critics. HOWEVER a cricketer is after all a human just like you and me. They have personal goals and milestones and dreams and every now and then our players are going to be selfish.

 

A poster just criticised Jadeja for being over defence this morning since he was closing on a 100.  We are on 3rd morning with 190 ahead, anyone who understands cricket with great deal of certainty will agree that this game will not see 5th day (might not even see 4th) then why can't Jadeja take time to get a 100. It's rare for him to be in this position. 

 

I just want posters to apply this 'for the greater good' theory on themselves. Do you want your employer/org to have a profitable year with you getting no bonus vs poor annual result but you get a fat bonus ? I know which one I am taking.

 

Also, don't get into your example/comparison is incorrect etc etc and start arguing on the comparison. you get the point.    

Edited January 27 by jf1gp_1

[Serpico]

Yes in tests, batsmen can afford to be a little selfish

 

Problem is, all format players like jadeja will bring the same attitude into shorter formats too

[Sgattick10]

That was out. Damn jhatu keeper should have known 

[goose]

the two objectives don't have to be mutually exclusive. the personal milestone can can give the individual the confidence to repeat it again which obviously benefits the team.

[Serpico]

Jaddu learnt from his mistake and got his 100 in next innings in just 150 balls! Salute the champion 

[singhvivek141]

7 hours ago, jf1gp_1 said:

Everyone keeps talking about how players should only focus on winning than personal milestone. Makes perfect sense. Any player who plays for himself is criticised and in principle I agree with critics. HOWEVER a cricketer is after all a human just like you and me. They have personal goals and milestones and dreams and every now and then our players are going to be selfish.

 

A poster just criticised Jadeja for being over defence this morning since he was closing on a 100.  We are on 3rd morning with 190 ahead, anyone who understands cricket with great deal of certainty will agree that this game will not see 5th day (might not even see 4th) then why can't Jadeja take time to get a 100. It's rare for him to be in this position. 

 

I just want posters to apply this 'for the greater good' theory on themselves. Do you want your employer/org to have a profitable year with you getting no bonus vs poor annual result but you get a fat bonus ? I know which one I am taking.

 

Also, don't get into your example/comparison is incorrect etc etc and start arguing on the comparison. you get the point.    

You also understand if the employer will have poor annual returns, employees will get axed, mostly the employees with fat paycheque & bonus whose skillset isn't proportional to their package.

 

The "employees" working with BCCI are unable to win any major tournament from last 10 years...how many of them were axed ? The same faces are rotated every year on the excuse of "experience"...whats the point of have Senior Developers & Fat paycheck Architects when they start to make school boy mistakes on the day of deployment.

[BacktoCricaddict]

The problem is not the players. It's the overall culture of counting useless, arbitrary stats such as cumulative number of 50s/100s over a career. Once we recognize that a 95* and sticking around at the end when a team win is completed is more valuable than a 101 and out before the real task is completed, we'd be in a better place.

 

It seems a bit more pronounced in Indian cricket, but I don't think that is necessarily the case. Even others celebrate OTT when they reach these "landmarks."

 

I would love for some guy to raise his bat to the crowd when he reaches 95* ... just for the heck of it.

[singhvivek141]

1 hour ago, BacktoCricaddict said:

The problem is not the players. It's the overall culture of counting useless, arbitrary stats such as cumulative number of 50s/100s over a career. Once we recognize that a 95* and sticking around at the end when a team win is completed is more valuable than a 101 and out before the real task is completed, we'd be in a better place.

 

It seems a bit more pronounced in Indian cricket, but I don't think that is necessarily the case. Even others celebrate OTT when they reach these "landmarks."

 

I would love for some guy to raise his bat to the crowd when he reaches 95* ... just for the heck of it.

100% true, and then when a batter get out at 96-97 by playing with intent. Commentators will try to rub in them by asking "do you regret for not scoring 100". It was asked multiple times to Viru, to Pant and now even to Yashasvi.

 

 

[BacktoCricaddict]

5 hours ago, singhvivek141 said:

100% true, and then when a batter get out at 96-97 by playing with intent. Commentators will try to rub in them by asking "do you regret for not scoring 100". It was asked multiple times to Viru, to Pant and now even to Yashasvi.

 

 

This culture change must happen from younger days with coaches and selectors (and parents) minimizing the importance of arbitrary landmarks. And one day, when a youngster is asked about missing a century, he'll blow off the commentator with "am not here to count arbitrary landmarks like 50s and 100s. I am here to help my team win and, whether I score 99 or 101, I will feel the same joy when my team wins and same level of disappointment if they lose. Next question."

 

Maybe Sehwag already did that.

[jf1gp_1]

12 hours ago, BacktoCricaddict said:

The problem is not the players. It's the overall culture of counting useless, arbitrary stats such as cumulative number of 50s/100s over a career. Once we recognize that a 95* and sticking around at the end when a team win is completed is more valuable than a 101 and out before the real task is completed, we'd be in a better place.

 

It seems a bit more pronounced in Indian cricket, but I don't think that is necessarily the case. Even others celebrate OTT when they reach these "landmarks."

 

I would love for some guy to raise his bat to the crowd when he reaches 95* ... just for the heck of it.

I see merit in what you wrote. after all rahul dravids declaration when sachin was about to get a double ton is still debated. 

[SRT100]

14 hours ago, BacktoCricaddict said:

The problem is not the players. It's the overall culture of counting useless, arbitrary stats such as cumulative number of 50s/100s over a career.

 

I watched an interview once with Gavaskar on Australian TV stating exactly this, the culture of 100s and its crucial importance, adulation and admiration. Its no coincidence in the interview that stated he also passed this advice on to SRT who infamously played on for 100th 100.

[Vijy]

On 1/27/2024 at 10:08 PM, SRT100 said:

 

I watched an interview once with Gavaskar on Australian TV stating exactly this, the culture of 100s and its crucial importance, adulation and admiration. Its no coincidence in the interview that stated he also passed this advice on to SRT who infamously played on for 100th 100.

and sacchu passed it on to the next cohort, who have all played much beyond their time. best 2 examples: chepu & rahane

[SRT100]

4 hours ago, Vijy said:

and sacchu passed it on to the next cohort, who have all played much beyond their time. best 2 examples: chepu & rahane

Yes, SRT began this madness of batting for records, mind you didnt Gavaskar as well? So maybe thats where it started?

[figo6762]

Now rohit is playing till he gets into size 40 pants …  talk about records… 

[Vijy]

3 hours ago, SRT100 said:

Yes, SRT began this madness of batting for records, mind you didnt Gavaskar as well? So maybe thats where it started?

it started with kapil.

[cricketfan28]

Honestly, I think players are more selfless than the avg employee but that is not enough unfortunately.