More foreigners should be allowed in the playing 11 in ipl

[raki05]

33 minutes ago, Adamant said:

Pant has already proven himself , he is actually talented.

 

Same goes for Jaiswal.

 

 

The problem starts when you people bring IPL kachda and expect selectors to replace champion cricketers with them.

 

I remember last year @zen thought Deepak Hooda will do better than Kohli.

I also heard how Iyer should replace Kohli in world cup last year

 

Now you guys are bringing players like Dubey, Rinku, Kishan.

 

Believe me, they are all trash

Lol now that JaiswL and Pant has proven themselves you started singing praise, I remember before 2020 you used to dislike pant ad well and singing same song that there is no youngsters.Dont say you guys i dont know what do you mean , lets talk about me as everyone has their own opinion.i just said dubey, sky and rinku are good for the format they play not across the format.

Edited April 17 by raki05

[raki05]

29 minutes ago, Adamant said:

He has enough to show, lets not even get there.
 

I dont call out all youngsters, Jaiswal, Gill, Pant, Shaw I believe in all of them but I will alwaus call out IPL kachda.

Ok show me his achievements with the kind of team he had how many overseas series he won against full strength team. How many icc trophy india won under him. You dont call out these youngsters now but while they din’t play internationals and only performed in ipl or domestics you still used to call them.

Edited April 17 by raki05

[singhvivek141]

11 minutes ago, Adamant said:

Pant has already proven himself , he is actually talented.

 

Same goes for Jaiswal.

 

 

The problem starts when you people bring IPL kachda and expect selectors to replace champion cricketers with them.

 

I remember last year @zen thought Deepak Hooda will do better than Kohli.

I also heard how Iyer should replace Kohli in world cup last year

 

Now you guys are bringing players like Dubey, Rinku, Kishan.

 

Believe me, they are all trash

I agree with you on Dube and Kishan..but not on Rinku.

He is not trash, coming at no 5-6-7 there is only so much you can do. It's a high risk, high reward position so consistency is not expected.

 

Yet he averages 90 with an SR of 176. He has scored runs in places like India, China, SA & Ireland where he has played so far.

His role is designated for that no 5-6-7 role in T20I's  which neither Kohli, nor Rohit nor even Jos Butler can do it.

[Adamant]

2 minutes ago, raki05 said:

Lol mow that JaiswL and Pant has proven themselves you started singing prais, I remember before 2020 you used to dislike pant ad well and singing same song that there is no youngsters.Dont say you guys i dont know what do you mean , lets talk about me as everyone has their own opinion.i just said dubey, sky and rinku are good for the format they play not across the format.

I have always admired Pant, actually anyone that comes out of the Under 19 setup is worth giving a chance.

 

Can you actually quote me in any thread where I said Pant is garbage?

 

Pant is one of the most talented players in the team.

 

[raki05]

13 minutes ago, Adamant said:

I have always admired Pant, actually anyone that comes out of the Under 19 setup is worth giving a chance.

 

Can you actually quote me in any thread where I said Pant is garbage?

 

Pant is one of the most talented players in the team.

 

Once i will get time i will find out. Not explicitly pant, you used to call out all youngsters saying we dont have any youngsters. BTW can you show me a comment of yours  where you admired pant , jaiswal, gill and shaw before they debut in international or before their break through performances. 

[Suhaan]

1 hour ago, vvvslaxman said:

 

Ya without trying he is bowling at 148 kph lol This is an excuse for all the non-performers from overseas. 

Actually problem is youngsters,every post you will disect you will find hatred soaked words directed towards youngsters as if their masters/heroes have ownership right over playing the game and representing the national side which has been doing absolutely great without their services actually

[vvvslaxman]

3 minutes ago, Suhaan said:

Actually problem is youngsters,every post you will disect you will find hatred soaked words directed towards youngsters as if their masters/heroes have ownership right over playing the game and representing the national side which has been doing absolutely great without their services actually

 

Yea. Whoever we back have top class domestic credentials. Guys like Parag, Abhishek sharma.  ONly IPL hack we have is SKY. He is world no.1 ranked batsman in this format.  All the other guys we talk about are from either under-19 group or first class. Raghuvanshi under-19 world cup winner much like Kohli was.  Rohit, Pujara, Dhawan, DK, Jadeja, Rahul, Pant, Jaiswal, Gill, Samson, Jurel all from under-19 batch. These are the guys we want to play for India. Branding them as IPL hacks shows lack of domestic cricket following from some fans

[express bowling]

1 hour ago, Adamant said:

Pant has already proven himself , he is actually talented.

 

Same goes for Jaiswal.

 

 

The problem starts when you people bring IPL kachda and expect selectors to replace champion cricketers with them.

 

I remember last year @zen thought Deepak Hooda will do better than Kohli.

I also heard how Iyer should replace Kohli in world cup last year

 

Now you guys are bringing players like Dubey, Rinku, Kishan.

 

Believe me, they are all trash

 

Test cricket is a format which needs pedigree.  Even ODIs to a large extent. But T20 is a format which needs current form, current hitting ability, current T20 bowling ability. 

 

In test matches,a Deepak.Hooda can never out-bat a Kohli if both get to play 15+ tests. But it is possible in 15+ T20s if Hooda is in the T20 form of his life and Kohli isn't for those matches.

 

In T20s, a team of Lotan, Chhotan, Ghotan, Johnny-Come-Lately, Average Joe etc. may win a T20 series against a team of Smith, Kohli, Williamson, Bumrah, Cummins, Rabada, Ashwin etc. IF Lotan and Co.are in great T20 form and most of the greats aren't. BUT this is never possible in test matches. 

 

For T20Is, we should stop looking for names and look for current form. Keep rotating players very fast and not look for long careers. New players, who haven't been analyzed enough, may yield results for a year and then start failing when their weaknesses come to the fore. Utilize that one year.

 

Thought process should change regarding T20Is. The only things of pedigree needed are a captain and a coach who understand modern T20s.

 

 

Edited April 17 by express bowling

[Suhaan]

@Adamant

Kohli was saying 330 -340 was what he was looking as enough against NZ in the SF

If he had his way ,that could have been our another "SF run" in an ICC event,if not for Iyer who kept on hitting and batted NZ out of the game

Don't say I'm Iyer's fan,had to admit given the conditions he played apt kind of innings,that was a belter

And this is also art to keep on hitting when conditions go your way

 

 

Edited April 17 by Suhaan

[Suhaan]

23 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

Test cricket is a format which needs pedigree.  Even ODIs to a large extent. But T20 is a format which needs current form, current hitting ability, current T20 bowling ability. 

 

In test matches,a Deepak.Hooda can never out-bat a Kohli if both get to play 15+ tests. But it is possible in 15+ T20s if Hooda is in the T20 form of his life and Kohli isn't for those matches.

 

In T20s, a team of Lotan, Chhotan, Ghotan, Johnny-Come-Lately, Average Joe etc. may win a T20 series against a team of Smith, Kohli, Williamson, Bumrah, Cummins, Rabada, Ashwin etc. IF Lotan and Co.are in great T20 form and most of the greats aren't. BUT this is never possible in test matches. 

 

For T20Is, we should stop looking for names and look for current form. Keep rotating players very fast and not look for long careers. New players, who haven't been analyzed enough, may yield results for a year and then start failing when their weaknesses come to the fore. Utilize that one year.

 

Thought process should change regarding T20Is. The only thing of pedigree needed is a captain and a coach who understand modern T20s.

 

 

This is why t20s are most open format to bring even the rag tag teams into fray against regular bigger sides

[vvvslaxman]

14 minutes ago, Suhaan said:

@Adamant

Kohli was saying 330 -340 was what he was looking as enough against NZ in the SF

If he had his way ,that could have been our another "SF run" in an ICC event,if not for Iyer who kept on hitting and batted NZ out of the game

Don't say I'm Iyer's fan,had to admit given the conditions he played apt kind of innings,that was a belter

And this is also art to keep on hitting when conditions go your way

 

 

Big overs is never a friend of Kohli these days. At the most 15 runs. THat's it. No aim to pick a 25 run over.  Something youngsters are way better at. They may be inconsistent. But they can pull these things off. 

[Need4Speed]

I like Kohli’s mental strength but we are now seeing high 200s scores in T20s and unfortunately Kohli wont be in my team if this becomes normal range..

He is very good for <200 scores or slower tracks where regularvstrokemakers will struggle

[singhvivek141]

29 minutes ago, Need4Speed said:

I like Kohli’s mental strength but we are now seeing high 200s scores in T20s and unfortunately Kohli wont be in my team if this becomes normal range..

He is very good for <200 scores or slower tracks where regularvstrokemakers will struggle

In short he is becoming like Dhoni of 2015-2019 in ODI.

Good while chasing 250-260 scores, but the moment target is 300+ he will do blockathon while others around him take risk, perish and then Dhoni fans will say "there was no one with him till the end, he was all alone".

[zen]

With the increase in the number of teams, the limit of OS players in the 11 should have gone up to max 5 (depends on teams to utilize that number). 
 

Eventually, the limit can be removed to create a “free market” where talent irrespective from where it comes from becomes the priority. 

[Need4Speed]

Initially I myself used to think that to improve match quality..we need to increase foreign players to 5…however it will reduce opportunities for Indian players who require grooming..

We are not seeing Kartik Tyagi..Sakib Hussain..Umran etc…

So lets not increase the limit..All I care more and more Indian players get opportunity and be groomed..

In worst case if limitnis to be increased then add 1 player quota for associate nation player for their development too..

Edited April 17 by Need4Speed

[AuxiliA]

The only thing I personally like about the IPL is the financial security it has provided to Indian cricketers. Giving 1 extra foreign quota will deprive a domestic journeyman. 

 

Forget about the quality, it's a Tamasha league. People are going to watch it anyway.

 

 

Edited April 17 by AuxiliA

[Lord]

11 hours ago, BacktoCricaddict said:

True, but we are also preventing potential team-India all-rounders from shining. Double-edged sword.

 

Yes that can be fixed by some tweaks instead of scrapping it e.g. the impact sub should only replace those who haven't batted bowled yet.

[Kron]

I think you are confusing the league for what it is supposed to be. It's an Indian premier league. It's to help indian talents grow and reach their potential. Adding more phoren players won't help that cause. 4 is fine for now. Max 5. Majority should always be indian

 

 

Infact we should have a quota for power hitting talents of indian origin and also one for fast bowling quota. Quicks who can bowl 140 to 150 should be awarded a direct slot into the team. 

[Need4Speed]

1 hour ago, Kron said:

I think you are confusing the league for what it is supposed to be. It's an Indian premier league. It's to help indian talents grow and reach their potential. Adding more phoren players won't help that cause. 4 is fine for now. Max 5. Majority should always be indian

 

 

Infact we should have a quota for power hitting talents of indian origin and also one for fast bowling quota. Quicks who can bowl 140 to 150 should be awarded a direct slot into the team. 

If ICF guys get their way they will set a quota for pacers but BCCI will set quota for trundlers instead :P

[Adamant]

10 hours ago, express bowling said:

 

Test cricket is a format which needs pedigree.  Even ODIs to a large extent. But T20 is a format which needs current form, current hitting ability, current T20 bowling ability. 

 

In test matches,a Deepak.Hooda can never out-bat a Kohli if both get to play 15+ tests. But it is possible in 15+ T20s if Hooda is in the T20 form of his life and Kohli isn't for those matches.

 

In T20s, a team of Lotan, Chhotan, Ghotan, Johnny-Come-Lately, Average Joe etc. may win a T20 series against a team of Smith, Kohli, Williamson, Bumrah, Cummins, Rabada, Ashwin etc. IF Lotan and Co.are in great T20 form and most of the greats aren't. BUT this is never possible in test matches. 

 

For T20Is, we should stop looking for names and look for current form. Keep rotating players very fast and not look for long careers. New players, who haven't been analyzed enough, may yield results for a year and then start failing when their weaknesses come to the fore. Utilize that one year.

 

Thought process should change regarding T20Is. The only things of pedigree needed are a captain and a coach who understand modern T20s.

 

 

I understand what you are saying and it can be true for a single short series or in non pressure matches but in no way a team of Lotan, Chotan, Gotan win a t20 world cup.

 

Can you give me an instance where that has happened? Has any team with poor players and random no namers ever won a t20 world cup?

Considering we have a good enough sample size of 8 wt20, atleast one no namer team should have won?