From one statistical perspective, Prasidh Krishna was the best bowler in the series

[BacktoCricaddict]

Seriously, listen me out here.

 

I have been one of Prasidh Krishna's biggest critics on this forum, but he elicited the highest rate of false shots of any bowler in the entire series - 28.7% of his deliveries induced a false shot. Next was Siraj at 26.8% and Bumrah at 24.4 %. England's best was Gus Atkinson at 22.2%.  So, from this statistical perspective, one could argue that he was the best bowler in the series.

 

Only 1 out of every 13 false shots fetched him a wicket (the lowest ratio of any bowler), so one could argue that he was the unluckiest bowler.

 

Or should we argue that they must change the definition of what constitutes a false shot?  Which brings up the question - how *do* they define a false shot?

 

 

 

 

Edited August 8, 2025 by BacktoCricaddict

[Lone Wolf]

Shami Ishant made a career Outta inducing false shots in England.

 

Prasidh's delivery to Joe Root in Oval is MVP though.  The extra kick he generated surprised Root & he couldn't ride the bounce and couldn't guide it to third man.

 

No Indian pacer would've Done that other than Harshit Rana perhaps.

[Ultimate_Game]

7 hours ago, BacktoCricaddict said:

Seriously, listen me out here.

 

I have been one of Prasidh Krishna's biggest critics on this forum, but he elicited the highest rate of false shots of any bowler in the entire series - 28.7% of his deliveries induced a false shot. Next was Siraj at 26.8% and Bumrah at 24.4 %. England's best was Gus Atkinson at 22.2%.  So, from this statistical perspective, one could argue that he was the best bowler in the series.

 

Only 1 out of every 13 false shots fetched him a wicket (the lowest ratio of any bowler), so one could argue that he was the unluckiest bowler.

 

Or should we argue that they must change the definition of what constitutes a false shot?  Which brings up the question - how *do* they define a false shot?

 

 

 

 

 

There gotta be some sort of optical illusion on display coz whenever I watched, he was the poorest bowler on display. He was either too short and wide or sprayed it down leg. He has no control and generally took wickets when batters went after him.

[jf1gp_1]

Bowlers take time to develop. Krishna is getting oppertunities for a reason. Harshit rana, even Kamboj need to be given more time. 

 

Likes of Mayank yadav and Umran are unlikely to ODI let alone test. 

[BacktoCricaddict]

10 hours ago, Ultimate_Game said:

 

There gotta be some sort of optical illusion on display coz whenever I watched, he was the poorest bowler on display. He was either too short and wide or sprayed it down leg. He has no control and generally took wickets when batters went after him.

That may also explain his T20 success. 

[BCCISelector]

Prasidh is too wayward. He might fool us on greentops like Sydney and first innings at Oval, but a bowler without any control over line and lengths has no business playing Test match cricket.

 

He has a couple of key ingredients that we don't normally find in Indian bowlers: height and skiddy bounce. But given his age and long history of injuries, India would be better served to invest more gametime in a younger pacer and use Prasidh sparingly as a stopgap replacement.

[BacktoCricaddict]

9 minutes ago, BCCISelector said:

Prasidh is too wayward. He might fool us on greentops like Sydney and first innings at Oval, but a bowler without any control over line and lengths has no business playing Test match cricket.

 

He has a couple of key ingredients that we don't normally find in Indian bowlers: height and skiddy bounce. But given his age and long history of injuries, India would be better served to invest more gametime in a younger pacer and use Prasidh sparingly as a stopgap replacement.

But the false shot statistic is tantalizing, no?

[goose]

what's s false shot? might be failing to deposit a wide one in the stands

[BacktoCricaddict]

4 minutes ago, goose said:

what's s false shot? might be failing to deposit a wide one in the stands

Exactly. I asked the question in the OP, but no one seems to know. It's probably some analyst or intern watching live and deciding. Edges and complete misses would be included. What else? 

[deathmonger]

Krishna's highs are high but also has real low lows. High ceiling, low floor.

 

Management is persisting with him with the hopes of removing those lows.

 

Edited August 9, 2025 by deathmonger

[putrevus]

22 hours ago, BacktoCricaddict said:

Seriously, listen me out here.

 

I have been one of Prasidh Krishna's biggest critics on this forum, but he elicited the highest rate of false shots of any bowler in the entire series - 28.7% of his deliveries induced a false shot. Next was Siraj at 26.8% and Bumrah at 24.4 %. England's best was Gus Atkinson at 22.2%.  So, from this statistical perspective, one could argue that he was the best bowler in the series.

 

Only 1 out of every 13 false shots fetched him a wicket (the lowest ratio of any bowler), so one could argue that he was the unluckiest bowler.

 

Or should we argue that they must change the definition of what constitutes a false shot?  Which brings up the question - how *do* they define a false shot?

 

 

 

 

His problem is he leaks almost boundary every over.There was a stat, he leaked atleast boundary per over 60 or 65 percent of his overs.He rarely bowls maidens to build pressure.

 

That negates all other good things he does with the ball.

Edited August 9, 2025 by putrevus

[Norman]

Prasidh has got the things required at this level and a good bowling coach can absolutely make him very deadly. We need to have a bit of patience especially now that cupboard seems bare..

 

Kambhoj too has got a few things going for him and shouldn't be discarded straight away after just one test. 

[figo6762]

Ok how much of of the 28 % you attribute to bazz ball batters making mistakes when trying the beat the crap out of him coz he’s so easy to clobber … 

 

He’s not novocaine 

[BacktoCricaddict]

11 hours ago, figo6762 said:

Ok how much of of the 28 % you attribute to bazz ball batters making mistakes when trying the beat the crap out of him coz he’s so easy to clobber … 

Exactly. Who knows?

 

[Lord]

Always backed him

[Lord]

On 8/8/2025 at 8:30 PM, Ultimate_Game said:

 

There gotta be some sort of optical illusion on display coz whenever I watched, he was the poorest bowler on display. He was either too short and wide or sprayed it down leg. He has no control and generally took wickets when batters went after him.

Or you are expecting too much

 

He has taken wickets in his last 3 Tests even if expensive 

[Chaos]

41 minutes ago, Lord said:

Or you are expecting too much

 

He has taken wickets in his last 3 Tests even if expensive 

IF EXPENSIVE? going at 6 is criminal in ODIs let alone test matches. Lmao wickets he got were almost wheb batsman are too agressive. If it was nz or sa or any decent batsman will grind the hell out of him. Lol he has only one variety run in with no emotions and bowl one length and line. Easy as hell to line him up. Play him in t20s n u will see even worse results. Criminal bowler to go at 6.

[Lord]

22 minutes ago, Chaos said:

IF EXPENSIVE? going at 6 is criminal in ODIs let alone test matches. Lmao wickets he got were almost wheb batsman are too agressive. If it was nz or sa or any decent batsman will grind the hell out of him. Lol he has only one variety run in with no emotions and bowl one length and line. Easy as hell to line him up. Play him in t20s n u will see even worse results. Criminal bowler to go at 6.

In Tests wickets matter more. Trundlers will stop runs but it's useless. I'd have wicket taker any day 

 

Not saying he's perfect, but would have him any day over trundlers 

[Ultimate_Game]

1 hour ago, Lord said:

Or you are expecting too much

 

He has taken wickets in his last 3 Tests even if expensive 

 

You're right I guess. But the biggest gripe I have with Prasidh is that he always starts off poorly. You can't afford to waste the new ball and let opponents off to a flier. He generally gets wkts when batters attack him. His default length is on the shorter side and he struggles when he tries to pitch it up. In Tests to be successful consistently you need to bowl a good line & length - a bit more on the fuller side. You've to build up pressure in Tests and Prasidh doesn't do that.

 

Prasidh is probably a good 4th pacer in the team but we need better front line pacers. Bowlers who can take over from Bumrah and Shami. Siraj is one though he's "blow hot blow cold" but we need couple of pacers better than Prasidh.

[Trichromatic]

Bowlers should look to be economical first.

 

All talented bowlers became better when they became economical.