Pant has all the skills leveling with Tendulkar but match awareness of Arshdeep

[vvvslaxman]

1 minute ago, Lord said:

 

that's what we think. 

That is what happened. In 2021 we needed 145 in the post tea session. Besides Rohit did question about pant's shot selection suggesting there was no special instruction.  Post tea he had so many filthy deliveries which he did not punish. That one was pure brain fade

[Vijy]

3 hours ago, Lord said:

 

Nah he definitely said they were going for the total. Whether those instructions were still there on tea is unclear. I think they were

I am sure the exact clip must be somewhere on Reddit or X. Wish someone would dig it out so that we can settle it for sure one way or another

[Frustrated]

All this talk about Rohit instructing Pant to go for the win is utter bullsh!t.  Neither Rohit (at the PC) nor any authentic sources hv revealed any such thing.   Ind needed nearly 6 rpo in order to win from that stage where Pant got out.   (Even if we assume Fatso Rohit instructed Pant to go for the win, Pant had the option of refusing it strongly).  Fact is : Pant is a natural stroke maker who can't resist the temptation to go for big shots (especially while a part time spinner operates) irrespective of the match situation.   He can't play a blockathon sort of inning.   His type of game can take the team either way.  There would be either a Glorious win out of nowhere OR a defeat which was probably avoidable.     We need to accept this and move on.  (No point in discussing RoKo on this thread as there are tons of such threads all over ICF)

Edited December 31, 2024 by Frustrated

[Vijy]

39 minutes ago, Frustrated said:

All this talk about Rohit instructing Pant to go for the win is utter bullsh!t.  Neither Rohit (at the PC) nor any authentic sources hv revealed any such thing.   Ind needed nearly 6 rpo in order to win from that stage where Pant got out.   (Even if we assume Fatso Rohit instructed Pant to go for the win, Pant had the option of refusing it strongly).  Fact is : Pant is a natural stroke maker who can't resist the temptation to go for big shots (especially while a part time spinner operates) irrespective of the match situation.   He can't play a blockathon sort of inning.   His type of game can take the team either way.  There would be either a Glorious win out of nowhere OR a defeat which was probably avoidable.     We need to accept this and move on.  (No point in discussing RoKo on this thread as there are tons of such threads all over ICF)

The part in bold is not true. If he refuses, there is a big power differential - cricket is a team game, and those that do not follow the instructions often get dropped. Look at how people who violated team policies - cricketing or otherwise - were dropped (e.g., Symonds, Jesse Ryder, etc).

 

I am not justifying Pant's shot here. Just saying that I disagree with the part you wrote in bold. It is not that easy to take a stance against something stupid/wrong, even if in principle it ought to be.

[Bigg Brother]

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DEMqc7SpQk9/?igsh=MXBoNm1wZjJ0eDV2eA==

 

 

"Self destruction" is the word. You don't lose matches from such situations if not for such brainfades. 

[lemsip]

27 minutes ago, Bigg Brother said:

"Self destruction" is the word. You don't lose matches from such situations if not for such brainfades. 

The issue with that media commentary  is that if you pinpoint a single player as the self destructor in chief. No mention of Kohli driving wildly at a ball on 7th stump on the final ball before lunch nor the other 6 batsmen who had to bat an hour between them to save the game even after Pant got out. Individual batsmen do make bad mistakes as happened with Pant but that is why you have a long batting order so you can still recover ! No way was that a situation where 126-4 after pant's dismissal should have led to 155 all out !

[Lord]

13 hours ago, Vijy said:

I am sure the exact clip must be somewhere on Reddit or X. Wish someone would dig it out so that we can settle it for sure one way or another

IND vs AUS, 4th Test | Rohit Sharma's bizarre tactical claim after MCG thrashing: Wanted to go for the win - India Today

[Bigg Brother]

5 hours ago, lemsip said:

The issue with that media commentary  is that if you pinpoint a single player as the self destructor in chief. No mention of Kohli driving wildly at a ball on 7th stump on the final ball before lunch nor the other 6 batsmen who had to bat an hour between them to save the game even after Pant got out. Individual batsmen do make bad mistakes as happened with Pant but that is why you have a long batting order so you can still recover ! No way was that a situation where 126-4 after pant's dismissal should have led to 155 all out !

Again defeat is always collective failure. Most of articles have highlighted Rohit-Kohli's failures, Nobody has singled out Pant today in every news outlets-Don't confuse again with this singling out thing.

 

Ro-Ko's failure didn't cause Pant to play rash shot. It is different event and that event triggered the destruction. It's about risk reward. 6 runs would have meant nothing at that point, Incessant defending or trying to shield it with top order's failures always give rise to this fan clubs and usually players get away against criticisim. Below him were 3 ARs- two are less than 10 tests old, the other one (Jaddu) is known for bottling in during crunch moments, that shot should have been avoided. Although It's is different point of discussion that Pant will win the matches in future with such shots. 

Edited December 31, 2024 by Bigg Brother

[lemsip]

1 hour ago, Bigg Brother said:

 

Ro-Ko's failure didn't cause the Pant to play rash shot.

No it didn't. The fact is Pant is a keeper who is an impulsive, attacking batsman and the longer he bats the more likely you are to see an aggressive shot some of which will be considered foolhardy. My point is that it shouldn't be solely upto him to put in a blockathon to save the team. It is not his strength and is alien to his mentality. In addition, there were many other rash shots leading to dismissals from people whose key role it is to play those kind of innings. Even Jaiswal's shot to get dismissed was strictly speaking completely unnecessary in an even more risky situation ( when Pant got out there were still 6 wickets left with  Jaiswal still at the crease)  but I wouldn't criticise it either as he is an aggessive batsman who is comfortable hooking when facing a bouncer.

As an example from the past, Kapil Dev was a useful hard hitting batsman but he wouldn't have been the go to person to block out for a draw over multiple sessions. 99 times out of 100 he would fail playing an aggressive shot. But people would look to a Gavaskar or Vishwanath to earn the draw not Kapil ! As someone pointed out, even Tendulkar had a brainfade at Chennai 1999 vs Pakistan but over time you understand it as one of those things that can happen when you have aggressive mindsets.

Pant would have been centre stage if they were chasing a target and the opposition needed to be attacked but it is the failure of collective batting to use the batting resources to save the match - it is not the fault of your keeper/batsman who was one of the few to at least attempt to fight it out. Maybe over time Pant develops a side to his batting that is able to put in long, grinding innings and hold his concentration level for even longer than he managed to this time  but I don't think it is very likely given his personality. What he should be doing is to get wiser in understanding how the opposition are able to play with his ego and make him gift his wicket by using part timers like Head when nothing else is working.

 

[vvvslaxman]

Have you ever seen Pant getting out to a Pull shot? Not that i can think of. He always rolls the wrist.  But in this case Australia's only hope was a rash shot. This was a clear indication when they used Travis Head. THey were in unwinnable situation as long as these two were there He could have just rolled the wrist and hit with same power. WHat the need of airy shot?

 

 

[rkt.india]

13 hours ago, Frustrated said:

All this talk about Rohit instructing Pant to go for the win is utter bullsh!t.  Neither Rohit (at the PC) nor any authentic sources hv revealed any such thing.   Ind needed nearly 6 rpo in order to win from that stage where Pant got out.   (Even if we assume Fatso Rohit instructed Pant to go for the win, Pant had the option of refusing it strongly).  Fact is : Pant is a natural stroke maker who can't resist the temptation to go for big shots (especially while a part time spinner operates) irrespective of the match situation.   He can't play a blockathon sort of inning.   His type of game can take the team either way.  There would be either a Glorious win out of nowhere OR a defeat which was probably avoidable.     We need to accept this and move on.  (No point in discussing RoKo on this thread as there are tons of such threads all over ICF)

Blaming pant for the loss is foolishness of the highest order.  As a wk, he is already batting higher than he should be. 

[lemsip]

13 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

Have you ever seen Pant getting out to a Pull shot? Not that i can think of. He always rolls the wrist.  But in this case Australia's only hope was a rash shot. This was a clear indication when they used Travis Head. THey were in unwinnable situation as long as these two were there He could have just rolled the wrist and hit with same power. WHat the need of airy shot?

 

He was trying to hit a six. It appears a stupid way to think but it is instinctive reaction to a rank bad ball from an aggressive player.

Had the Australian number 5, Travis Head, been in the same situation I am convinced he would also try to plant the ball in the stands because he is also a similarly aggressive player.

After Pant, the proper batsmen remaining were Jaiswal, Jadeja, Reddy and Sundar yet the entire team folded for 30 more runs on a flat wicket. I am not defending the shot but just saying it is very simplistic to paint him as the architect of the self destruction. He and Jaiswal were the only two batsmen who at least showed some fight before both got out to unnecessarily aggressive shots in hindsight.

[Frustrated]

1 minute ago, rkt.india said:

Blaming pant for the loss is foolishness of the highest order.  As a wk, he is already batting higher than he should be. 

A loss by 200 run margin is mainly due to collective failure of the team. I never singled out pant in any of my posts.  Having said that, it does not change the fact that he barely averages 24 in this test series (which has reached its fag end).   This is inexcusable & quite shameful (obviously less shameful than RoKo's performance) irrespective of the position he bats at.  

[Vijy]

18 minutes ago, Frustrated said:

A loss by 200 run margin is mainly due to collective failure of the team. I never singled out pant in any of my posts.  Having said that, it does not change the fact that he barely averages 24 in this test series (which has reached its fag end).   This is inexcusable & quite shameful (obviously less shameful than RoKo's performance) irrespective of the position he bats at.  

Not really. 24 is par for the course for many keepers in Aus, both Ind and non-Ind (obviously exceptions exist), and it is just 1 bad series. the previous one vs NZ, he was one of the best batters on either side

Edited December 31, 2024 by Vijy

[lemsip]

11 minutes ago, Frustrated said:

A loss by 200 run margin is mainly due to collective failure of the team. I never singled out pant in any of my posts.  Having said that, it does not change the fact that he barely averages 24 in this test series (which has reached its fag end).   This is inexcusable & quite shameful (obviously less shameful than RoKo's performance) irrespective of the position he bats at.  

Dhonii averaged 19 in Australia over his career. A lot of Indian keepers have done a lot worse and for Pant this is an isolated mediocre series and is still acceptable from a keeper. The problem is with the batsmen being carried not the keeper who is at least attempting to fight against his nature to block out for hours.

[vvvslaxman]

23 minutes ago, lemsip said:

He was trying to hit a six. It appears a stupid way to think but it is instinctive reaction to a rank bad ball from an aggressive player.

Had the Australian number 5, Travis Head, been in the same situation I am convinced he would also try to plant the ball in the stands because he is also a similarly aggressive player.

After Pant, the proper batsmen remaining were Jaiswal, Jadeja, Reddy and Sundar yet the entire team folded for 30 more runs on a flat wicket. I am not defending the shot but just saying it is very simplistic to paint him as the architect of the self destruction. He and Jaiswal were the only two batsmen who at least showed some fight before both got out to unnecessarily aggressive shots in hindsight.

 

What instinct ? He curbed his instinct for the entire session. Can't he do that for one more session? He is not 21. Nitish Reddy a T20 dasher curbed his instincts for long periods in this series. Pant a 25 year old guy can't control his "instincts"? This is Test match cricket. This is his third tour. He is no springchicken. Getting out to Boland, Cummins, Starc is one thing. But getting out to Travis head is whole another thing.  That too to a rank long hop. Do you honestly think Australia was really having any hope of pushing for win at that stage? I don't think so. THey were just waiting for new ball so that they can have a crack at these two. THey stopped using fast bowlers as they were needed for new ball. It was supposed to be one of the easiest passage for India turned into a nightmare. Match turned on its head. One indiscreet shot cost the Test match. All the good work done by Nitish Reddy, Sundar, Bumrah were undone by Pant's one shot.  REmember this you can shake hands as early as mandatory over beginning. SO basically India was 12 or 13 overs away from drawing the test.

Edited December 31, 2024 by vvvslaxman

[vvvslaxman]

Rohit, Kohli sucked for sure. Nobody argues. YOu can easily say. I have done my job. But you should look at the guys who performed. If not for Rohit/Kohli you should do it for the likes of Jaiswal, Bumrah, Reddy, Sundar who dragged team out of trouble and Bumrah even put the team in winning position.  So you do it for them.

[lemsip]

1 minute ago, vvvslaxman said:

 

 All the good work done by Nitish Reddy, Sundar, Bumrah were undone by Pant's one shot. 

Is this a one man team that one batsman being dismissed causes them all to fold and that one man is the keeper ? Jadeja, Reddy and Sundar all basically playing as batsmen were still to bat yet you are blaming Pant for causing the defeat as if the rest of the team had no involvement or responsibility. You are spouting complete rubbish. Pant was the 4th batsman out not batting with the tail !

Newsflash - Batsmen make mistake. That's why they get out. That is why a veteran like Kohli can't resist driving at a 7th stump ball when he knows it is the last ball before lunch and that's the oppositions plan. Or why Jaiswal hooks at a wide bouncer which he could have easily ducked. The game is simple from behind a keyboard.Could Travis Head  or Alex Carey  batted defensively for so long  and denied themselves for more than a session in a similar situation ?

[vvvslaxman]

6 minutes ago, lemsip said:

Is this a one man team that one batsman being dismissed causes them all to fold and that one man is the keeper ? Jadeja, Reddy and Sundar all basically playing as batsmen were still to bat yet you are blaming Pant for causing the defeat as if the rest of the team had no involvement or responsibility. You are spouting complete rubbish. Pant was the 4th batsman out not batting with the tail !

Newsflash - Batsmen make mistake. That's why they get out. That is why a veteran like Kohli can't resist driving at a 7th stump ball when he knows it is the last ball before lunch and that's the oppositions plan. Or why Jaiswal hooks at a wide bouncer which he could have easily ducked. The game is simple from behind a keyboard.Could Travis Head  or Alex Carey  batted defensively for so long  and denied themselves for more than a session in a similar situation ?

 

Yes. You have to look at the timing of event . If Pant had played the same shot when India has 4th day to survive then criticism would not have been this bad . But NIida was 12 or 13 overs away from coming away with draw. You had absolutely no demons the pitch. No bowlers is threatening. only option is getting out with a silly shot. He obliged that. That is why he is criticize. Don't look at overall picture. Look at from the angle "What would have happened had he avoided that rash shot".  THere was so much upside doing that.

 

Kohli example is a bad example. You should atleast talk about PUjara, Sundar, Ashwin, VIhari.

Edited December 31, 2024 by vvvslaxman

[lemsip]

1 minute ago, vvvslaxman said:

 

Yes. You have to look at the timing of event . If Pant had played the same shot when India has 4th day to survive then criticism would not have been this bad . But NIida was 12 or 13 overs away from coming away with draw. You had absolutely no demons the pitch. No bowlers is threatening. only option is getting out with a silly shot. He obliged that. That is why he is criticize. Don't look at overall picture. Look at from the angle "What would have happened had he avoided that rash shot".  THere was so much upside doing that.

The point was that after a dismissal, you always find batsman doing things that do not appear optimal and in a perfect world they should have not done. Did Kohli need to drive from the 7th stump ? Did Rohit need that wild drive ?  Did Jaiswal need to hook a wide bouncer when trying to desperately save a test match and only a few overs to see out as the main remaining batsman ? None of those shots had any upside and in hindsight these all appear obvious mistakes but even top players play largely by instinct not robotic calculation and that is what gives sport the unrpredictability which leads to frustrating as well as joyous moments. The uber-rational analysis is done in hindsight by commentators and the easy "match ka mujrim" type analysis is usually overly simplistic.