Very very happy to see Rishabh Pant back

[lemsip]

11 minutes ago, singhvivek141 said:

 

We needn't push Pant to keep in Tests, let him play as batter and use him as a fielder in Tests

He has just started playing and the nearest test is many months away. If Pant is fully fit then he should just reclaim the role he has been very successful in.

If he is not fit when the tests happen then India have more options now than they did before Pant got injured. Jurel has just played 2 tests at home and performed very well but will always come behind a fully fit Pant in the selection stakes unless he reinvents himself as a pure batsman.

Having multiple high class options a good situation to be in for India and no decision on Pant's test keeping is needed now.

[putrevus]

18 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

You must be joking.

 

He averages 43.7  as a batsman in test matches after all of 33 tests.

 

This batting average is higher than

 

Gambhir

Ganguly

Vengsarkar

Vishwanath

Amaranth

Rahane

Rahul

Sidhu 

 

and many more celebrated batters in Indian cricket 

 

I guess these are not batsmen either then. 

 

Since when rahul and Rahane are batsmen. Pant being better than Rahul and Rahane means only one thing , India kept giving chances to bozos .

[putrevus]

28 minutes ago, lemsip said:

Agreed. The closest equivalent to him is Adam Gilchrist. He also played many crunch knocks for Australia  batting in the lower half just like Pant. However, his primary role in the team was that of a keeper who can bat and Pant is exactly the same.

Watching him keep in the IPL, I don't see anything that suggests he has lost any skill on the keeping front. If there is a need to reduce his workload, I would look at giving him a break for IPL captaincy before anything else.

Having said that a lot depends on the individual player as well. Being asked to give up a skill is easily something that can affect the player negatively from a psychologicial point of view.

Dhoni was very very wise in that aspect, even though he had chances to play just as batsman, he never gave up his gloves. Neither did Adam Gilchrist.

 

Pant is best WK batsman after Gilchrist.He is already the best WK batsman from Asia. We move him from that spot, we are losing the strength there.

 

 

[lemsip]

15 minutes ago, singhvivek141 said:

If there are 2 keepers who are better than others as batsman, one of them may have to field elsewhere and not behind wickets.

Jurel has just played 2 tests at home vs the might of debutant spinners in Bashir/ Hartley and a 42 year old medium pacer. It's a big leap to go to putting him straight into the 11 based purely on his batting prowess.

 

[putrevus]

23 minutes ago, singhvivek141 said:

How do you remove Jurel then, who has done well so far in limited games ?

Won't it be unfair on him as well ?

 

Pant averages 43.xx in Tests, almost as equal to Pujara and way higher than Rahane..both of whom were settled batters for Tests.

 

We needn't push Pant to keep in Tests, let him play as batter and use him as a fielder in Tests. Maybe use both Jurel & Pant interchangeably as keepers. Jurel is a good outfielder as well and hence it won't be a bad deal even if he fields at slips, shorter or elsewhere.

See I don't mind Jurel and Pant playing in home series .But In Australia we cannot play both and expect India to win.

 

I am not worried about fielding or keeping.Gilchrist could play that carefree style at number 6 or 7 just like Pant. Gilchrist just as batsmen in top order would have had to change his style in top order.

[singhvivek141]

3 minutes ago, lemsip said:

Jurel has just played 2 tests at home vs the might of debutant spinners in Bashir/ Hartley and a 42 year old medium pacer. It's a big leap to go to putting him straight into the 11 based purely on his batting prowess.

 

Understand your concern, but let him throw in deep waters and see if he can swim.

[putrevus]

6 minutes ago, lemsip said:

Jurel has just played 2 tests at home vs the might of debutant spinners in Bashir/ Hartley and a 42 year old medium pacer. It's a big leap to go to putting him straight into the 11 based purely on his batting prowess.

 

100% agree, Jurel had good debut series. It will be a leap to play him just a batsman.

[express bowling]

15 minutes ago, lemsip said:

The ones you listed are all top-order batsmen whereas Pant bats in the lower order and usually comes in when the ball is older and the bowlers are in their second or third spells. He is a great player but the role he does in the team is a keeper/lower order batsman who can put the pressure back on the opposition or change the game when that is needed. He cannot replace a pure batsman in the composition of the team - at least not at the moment.

 

An average of almost 44 in tests is pretty commendable irrespective of where one bats.

 

And he has batted 2/3 of the times at 5 and 6 which are proper batting positions. 

 

Batting there has its own challenges of having to face the 2nd new ball and having to bat with the tail. Laxman averaged 45.5 batting in these positions. Rahane averaged 38.

 

And even if Pant plays as a pure batter, he will bat at 5 or 6 only.

[putrevus]

11 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

An average of almost 44 in tests is pretty commendable irrespective of where one bats.

 

And he has batted 2/3 of the times at 5 and 6 which are proper batting positions. 

 

Batting there has its own challenges of having to face the 2nd new ball and having to bat with the tail. Laxman averaged 45.5 batting in these positions. Rahane averaged 38.

 

And even if Pant plays as a pure batter, he will bat at 5 or 6 only.

That means you are dropping a legit batsman like Sarfraz. If Sarfraz at number 5 turns out to be a very good batsman. What wrong has he done to be dropped.

 

How is it adding value to the team by playing Pant as a batsman.

Edited April 4 by putrevus

[singhvivek141]

5 minutes ago, putrevus said:

That means you are dropping a legit batsman like Sarfraz. If Sarfraz at number 5 turns out to be a very good batsman. 

 

How is it adding value to the team by playing Pant as a batsman.

Pant is as legit as a batsman as Sarfaraz.

Hypothetical scenario, what if Pant drops keeping permanently as play as a pure batter. Does he don't deserve a place then despite him averaging more than other pure batters.

 

Philips was a keeper, he left gloves and became pure batter. His impact is as good as when he was a keeper.

 

Sangakkara was another who became beast of the batter when he left gloves. So did Andy Flower, so did Alec Stewart.

[express bowling]

9 minutes ago, putrevus said:

That means you are dropping a legit batsman like Sarfraz. If Sarfraz at number 5 turns out to be a very good batsman. What wrong has he done to be dropped.

 

How is it adding value to the team by playing Pant as a batsman.

 

That means you are dropping Jurel who is a fighter and performed under pressure twice. While Sarfraz failed under pressure. 

[putrevus]

2 minutes ago, singhvivek141 said:

Pant is as legit as a batsman as Sarfaraz.

Hypothetical scenario, what if Pant drops keeping permanently as play as a pure batter. Does he don't deserve a place then despite him averaging more than other pure batters.

 

Philips was a keeper, he left gloves and became pure batter. His impact is as good as when he was a keeper.

 

Sangakkara was another who became beast of the batter when he left gloves. So did Andy Flower, so did Alec Stewart.

Then he has to replace one of the top 4 in the line up. I would not want him to replace a very good batsman in Sarfraz, he has done nothing wrong to lose his place.

 

Sanga as keeper averaged 40 but as batsman he avg over 65. Do you think Pant is as good as Sanga. Then I don't have any problem.

 

Sorry who is philips?

[putrevus]

4 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

That means you are dropping Jurel who is a fighter and performed under pressure twice. While Sarfraz failed under pressure. 

Yes, Jurel is excess  if Pant comes in, India will always have abundance of good batsman so to play two wicket keepers is an overkill.

[singhvivek141]

8 minutes ago, putrevus said:

Then he has to replace one of the top 4 in the line up. I would not want him to replace a very good batsman in Sarfraz, he has done nothing wrong to lose his place.

 

Sanga as keeper averaged 40 but as batsman he avg over 65. Do you think Pant is as good as Sanga. Then I don't have any problem.

 

Sorry who is philips?

Glenn Philips

 

Pant can be as good as Sanga, he has solid technique. Let's all depend on his mental strength (which is anyway top notch).

 

From top 4 Jaiswal, Rohit & Kohli are locked. Only place available in Gill but he is the future.

Pant only can go at top 4 when one of Rohit or Kohli retire.

Edited April 4 by singhvivek141

[vvvslaxman]

He has tremendous mental resolve.  But there is only so much he can control with respect to recovery. He may face some niggles on and off especially while keeping like we saw other day.  So we need more evidence on how well He has recovered

[express bowling]

11 minutes ago, putrevus said:

Yes, Jurel is excess  if Pant comes in, India will always have abundance of good batsman so to play two wicket keepers is an overkill.

 

Jurel has one of the best defenses in this current team, very good footwork, is temperamentally strong and averages 49 in FC cricket.

 

He is a batsman who is incidentally a keeper too.

[lemsip]

46 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

So we need more evidence on how well He has recovered

Any evidence will be evaluated by medical professionals when the time comes to select the test side. That is many months away and anyone can be injured at that time . The only relevant thing right now about pants place or role in tests is that he has recovered faster than expected and his game hasn't suffered after the long rehab. That's a good sign not a reason to start limiting his role

[lemsip]

45 minutes ago, express bowling said:

Jurel has one of the best defenses in this current team,

As I said above, he has only played 3 tests against a mediocre English attack at home. He has only played 18 first class games. He has shown a good ability to absorb pressure and a cool head but there are far sterner tests to evaluate a batsman for a place as a pure test batsman. He deserves his chances but there are many contenders for a pure batting place in Indian FC cricket 

[Vijy]

4 hours ago, singhvivek141 said:

Pant is as legit as a batsman as Sarfaraz.

Hypothetical scenario, what if Pant drops keeping permanently as play as a pure batter. Does he don't deserve a place then despite him averaging more than other pure batters.

 

Philips was a keeper, he left gloves and became pure batter. His impact is as good as when he was a keeper.

 

Sangakkara was another who became beast of the batter when he left gloves. So did Andy Flower, so did Alec Stewart.

Don't forget a WI ATG: Clyde Walcott. he was a decent batter when keeping, and became a beast batter when he gave up keeping. Likewise, Alec Stewart as you wrote (not Flower, who mostly kept and did not give up gloves for majority of career).

[Vijy]

4 hours ago, express bowling said:

 

Jurel has one of the best defenses in this current team, very good footwork, is temperamentally strong and averages 49 in FC cricket.

 

He is a batsman who is incidentally a keeper too.

he is better than sarfaraz, padikkal, patidar in terms of temperament. won't surprise me if he can score more runs than even some of the fading seniors too.