Pacers for Newzealand Tour

[Ram]

How about the spell he bowled to Pakistan in the ODI series before that when he claimed three top order wickets in a couple of overs on a patta?

I remember that match. And yes, he took 3 wickets in 2 overs and a bit. But come off it, that’s hardly anything worth shouting about. He bowled with pace and Pak batsman played poor shots.

For all the slating he got in England - yes he had a poor match at Nottingham - he was our best bowler at the Oval and had brought India right back into a winning position with wickets of Vaughan, Pietersen, and Collingwood, again all top order wickets. No other Indian bowler looked like buying a wicket in that innings.

And yet, you have completely ignored his absolutely listless bowling during the rest of the tour? Remember, how just before that England tour, many of you guys said Sreesanth was the ‘real leader of our pace attack’ and ironically, he turned out to be our worst bowler. Honestly Shwetabh, you’re clutching at straws if you want to defend Sreesanth. I am not for one moment suggesting he isn’t a good bowler, but he certainly does not deserve the support and praise that you are according to him.

[The Outsider]

Thats just a gross exaggeration. The standout pacemen from our team in that tournament were clearly Ishant and Praveen Kumar. Sreesanth was decent at best, not 'decimating'..

Praveen Kumar only played the finals against Australia and taking SL wickets in Australian conditions counts for much less than taking 9 Aussie wickets at 20.

Thats probably the ONLY T20 match that Sreesanth has had a significant positive impact. Doubt if thats something anyone can shout about.

Well considering that he has played a grand total of 10 T20, matches for him to play a crucial role in the SF of a WC and a significant role in the match which got us there is not bad. Moreover, Sreesanth has evolved into a good limited overs bowler only during the last year or so. And not that it's totally relevant to his position in the test team, he was the second highest wicket taker in IPL and one of the few Indian bowlers who were bowling good yorkers.

[The Outsider]

I remember that match. And yes, he took 3 wickets in 2 overs and a bit. But come off it, that’s hardly anything worth shouting about. He bowled with pace and Pak batsman played poor shots.

What a Pakistani post!!! The bowler was crap, it's just that the batsmen got out to poor shots!!

And yet, you have completely ignored his absolutely listless bowling during the rest of the tour? Remember, how just before that England tour, many of you guys said Sreesanth was the ‘real leader of our pace attack’ and ironically, he turned out to be our worst bowler.

Yes, I had a lot of expectations from him on that tour, and he did not live up to them. So what? Is he the first bowler not to come under pressure and being able to deliver as much as he is capable of with less than 10 tests under his belt. You want to check out how Zaheer Khan did on his first tour of England? Was pasted by all and sundry. And yet in a 14 test match career, the guy has bowled superbly in around 5 of those. What more do you want from someone starting off his career?

Honestly Shwetabh, you’re clutching at straws if you want to defend Sreesanth. I am not for one moment suggesting he isn’t a good bowler, but he certainly does not deserve the support and praise that you are according to him.

Clutching at straws? How about you name one Indian pace bowler who has put in such superb performances in the first few matches he has played? Ishant seems to be the only one who has made such a promising start and even then has nothing like a Johannesburg or Durban to show on his resume, where he was able to hustle the entire batting line up into submission.

[f.b.m]

I cant believe that a real talent like Sreesanth is so hated (well, maybe thats too strong a word) by so many people. Forget about 20/20, odis or whatever else and how he did or didnt bowl in those. What matters is that he can run through batting line ups when the conditions suit him and can move the ball well even in completely unhelpful conditions. If he can clean up South Africa in South Africa then why is it that he cant do the same in New Zealand? And please stop comparing him to Irfan Pathan who'se the closest thing to a bowling equivalent of Tilakratne Dilshan.

[Ram]

What a Pakistani post!!! The bowler was crap' date=' it's just that the batsmen got out to poor shots!![/quote'] Not its not. I've already acknowledged, he bowled with pace.. But plainly, it wasnt one of those 'dream spells' for anyone to shout about.

Yes, I had a lot of expectations from him on that tour, and he did not live up to them. So what? Is he the first bowler not to come under pressure and being able to deliver as much as he is capable of with less than 10 tests under his belt. You want to check out how Zaheer Khan did on his first tour of England? Was pasted by all and sundry. And yet in a 14 test match career, the guy has bowled superbly in around 5 of those. What more do you want from someone starting off his career?

The point isnt about how good he is or he isnt. The point is about how he compares with the rest of the fast bowling stocks. Zak and Ishant select themselves by default. Munaf is clearly ahead of him, atleast as far as the team's favor goes. So, that leaves us to chose between Sree, RPS, Irfan and Praveen Kumar. And we've repeatedly seen that in pacer friendly conditions, whether they be in Australia, South Africa or England, the RPS and Praveen have performed well. Admittedly, not all of them were tests, but so what? And I believe Irfan has turned a page. You dont take so many wickets in domestic FC cricket like he did, without bowling decent fast bowling. I think he is very close to going back to his best, he only needs more matches.

Clutching at straws? How about you name one Indian pace bowler who has put in such superb performances in the first few matches he has played? Ishant seems to be the only one who has made such a promising start and even then has nothing like a Johannesburg or Durban to show on his resume, where he was able to hustle the entire batting line up into submission.

Its not about potential.Its also not about sporadic good performances either. You need to show consistency and that what Sreesanth lacks the most. RPS, when in full fitness and form, is certainly more dependable than Sressanth.

[Ram]

Praveen Kumar only played the finals against Australia and taking SL wickets in Australian conditions counts for much less than taking 9 Aussie wickets at 20.

So all of a sudden we're going to weight 'Sri Lankan wickets in Australia' relative to 'Australian wickets in Australia'... What next?

Well considering that he has played a grand total of 10 T20, matches for him to play a crucial role in the SF of a WC and a significant role in the match which got us there is not bad. Moreover, Sreesanth has evolved into a good limited overs bowler only during the last year or so.

And thats a sum total of 'ONE' match.. Yes O-N-E. Just for your record, peruse through RPS' T20 contribution. He was potent, right throughout that T20 WC.

[The Outsider]

The point isnt about how good he is or he isnt. The point is about how he compares with the rest of the fast bowling stocks. Zak and Ishant select themselves by default. Munaf is clearly ahead of him, atleast as far as the team's favor goes. So, that leaves us to chose between Sree, RPS, Irfan and Praveen Kumar. And we've repeatedly seen that in pacer friendly conditions, whether they be in Australia, South Africa or England, the RPS and Praveen have performed well. Admittedly, not all of them were tests, but so what?

Yeah, Munaf is ahead of him in the team's pecking order, but I am arguing he should not be. And it's not even a point of discussion among the other contenders, as far as I am concerned. Firstly, it's nothing but a joke to compare Pathan and P Kumar to Sreesanth. They are trundlers - period. RP Singh could have been a contender but has been horribly out of sorts and is not fit. Now assuming Sreesanth is fit and he will play the Duleep matches, the case is pretty much closed. Australia? Sreesanth bowled superbly in the ODIs he played there. England? Yes RP Singh was better, but look at him now. South Africa? Are you kidding me - the guy picked up 8 wicket hauls in consecutive tests.

And I believe Irfan has turned a page. You dont take so many wickets in domestic FC cricket like he did, without bowling decent fast bowling. I think he is very close to going back to his best, he only needs more matches.

We have been hearing the same clap trap about Pathan since God knows when. He gets thrown out, picks up some domestic wickets, and gets back to chucking international pies. His only place is as an allrounder in the limited overs game. To even consider Pathan as a test bowler is a huge leap of faith. B Kumar, Balaji etc. etc. have also been picking wickets in domestic matches. Let's play them in tests as well.

Its not about potential.Its also not about sporadic good performances either. You need to show consistency and that what Sreesanth lacks the most. RPS, when in full fitness and form, is certainly more dependable than Sressanth.

Don't know what you find sporadic about Sreesanth's performances. He has bowled superbly in at least 5 of the 14 tests he has played, bowled consistently well in ODIs in Australia last year, and was the second highest wicket taker in the IPL. And why should it not be about potential? You can't expect the world from someone who has played a handful of international games and he has to be given chances based on the tremendous upside he offers.

[The Outsider]

So all of a sudden we're going to weight 'Sri Lankan wickets in Australia' relative to 'Australian wickets in Australia'... What next?

That's just basic cricketing logic. Sri Lankan batsmen suck in Australian conditions and Australian batsmen don't.

And thats a sum total of 'ONE' match.. Yes O-N-E. Just for your record, peruse through RPS' T20 contribution. He was potent, right throughout that T20 WC.

Fine. Play him in T20 then. Talk about replacing Sreesanth in tests, the day RP Singh is able to bowl out an international side for 80 runs.

[Show_stopper]

Munaf Patel in Tests is a brilliant bowler..bowled superbly in WI and in the home series vs Pak in 2007.Our most accurate bowler.Will shine in NZ for sure.

[Dravid]

Munaf Patel in Tests is a brilliant bowler..bowled superbly in WI and in the home series vs Pak in 2007.Our most accurate bowler.Will shine in NZ for sure.

to bad he dosent last more then 2 tests in a row..:giggle: he is apna akhtar.. (without the doping, balltempering, *****y teammate attitude, or blowing up stuff plans that is)

[Fontaine]

Sreesanth : Let's see where to begin. I can't even believe that some are purporting Pathan over him. How about the VB series win last year? Decimated the Australian top order innings after innings and left them paralyzed to score any decent runs throughout the series. Completely transformed his reputation as an average ODI bowler and finished with 9 wickets in 5 matches at an average of 20 against Australia. 6 out of those 9 were top order wickets, underlying his importance. How about the spell he bowled to Pakistan in the ODI series before that when he claimed three top order wickets in a couple of overs on a patta? T20? How about his bowling in the WC instrumental in our wins against South Africa and Australia. I see Fontaine above praising our bowlers in the last 3 overs....here is some news - the match would have been over by then had Sreesanth not bowled at 3 RPO in a T20 match and picked up Hayden Tests? What Sreesanth did to South Africa at Johannesburg is unmatched by either Zaheer or Ishant. It was the best spell by an Indian fast bowler since Srinath's 8 wicket haul at Calcutta a decade ago. That is what this guys is capable of - shredding to bits an accomplished batting line up in their own backyard. Followed it up with a marathon 8 wicket haul in the next test match. Zaheer Khan in his 60+ match career has been able to pick up 8+ wickets once.......Sreesanth did it in back to back matches. Or what about Kingston, when Sarwan looked like taking the match away from us? The perfect outswinger to get another crucial top order wicket. For all the slating he got in England - yes he had a poor match at Nottingham - he was our best bowler at the Oval and had brought India right back into a winning position with wickets of Vaughan, Pietersen, and Collingwood, again all top order wickets. No other Indian bowler looked like buying a wicket in that innings. Everyone knows cricket is much more than numbers and the ability of Sreesanth to take top order wickets at crucial junctures and the potential to turn in absolute ripping spells at times makes it a no brainer to play him in the team whenever he is fit. Oh, and his numbers aren't bad either - 50 wickets in 14 matches at 31 is a better return than either Zaheer or Ishant. Not that I am saying he is better than either on current form, but you don't get those kind of wickets and numbers unless you have talent and ability. The guys is special and mentioning trundlers like Pathan and P Kumar in the same breath as him is a disrespect for all that fast bowling stands for.

See it's posts like this that are hilarious. No one worth reading is saying Sreesanth is worthless. People have acknowledged that he can be a very good bowler when he is in prime form. But when exactly is that? Once every couple of test series? The fact remains that along with his few great spells, he has two to three awful spells for EACH good one. That's NOT what a front line bowler is about with the new ball. If Sreesanth can be consistently accurate and control then yes, he definitely has a place in the team but not the way he's bowled so far in his career. Everyone talks about his ONE test against South Africa. WOO-HOO!!!! That's great, now what happened to the rest of the tests? Has he duplicated that performance? Yes it's nice to have a couple of match winning performances but just as importantly you can't leave out a high number of performances where he was just awful when other bowlers were bowling well in helpful conditions. At what point do solitary or a handful of performances become the flukes of an average career? How long do we continue to pick a guy that can't be consistent? Look at it this way. When Zaheer was dropped it was the best thing for him. Sreesanth is the same way. A lot of talent, very little maturity, knowledge of the game and control of his bowling. He's either going to cry like a child if he's dropped like when he got slapped or he'll handle it like a man and come back better after focusing on his weakeness. Not to mention that he's severely limited as he isn't a first or second change bowler but has to use the new ball because he doesn't have the control over line and length so you would have to displace ZK or Ishant from the new ball attack to fit Sreesanth into the team which would be sheer lunacy.

[Fontaine]

And lastly people who are comparing Pathan/Sreesanth need to go get their heads examined. One is an allrounder being groomed as a number 3 first change bowler, occasional test new ball bowler and genuince all rounder the other is exclusively a pace bowler who can last only 5-6 overs who has to use the new ball in both tests and ODIs. They're not competing for the same position so it's futile to compare then not to mention they are COMPLETELY different in bowling styles. It's not about individual bowling but how bowlers fit together as a bowling unit, left/right combinations, swing and line and length accroding to the conditions.

[The Outsider]

But when exactly is that? Once every couple of test series? The fact remains that along with his few great spells, he has two to three awful spells for EACH good one. That's NOT what a front line bowler is about with the new ball. If Sreesanth can be consistently accurate and control then yes, he definitely has a place in the team but not the way he's bowled so far in his career.

Yeah, let's talk facts - the guys has put in superb performances in 5-6 out of the first 14 tests he has played. How many bowlers make that kind of start? His numbers are better than Zaheer and Ishant. Surely, he couldn't have managed those numbers if he was delivering 3 awful spells for each good one.

Everyone talks about his ONE test against South Africa. WOO-HOO!!!! That's great, now what happened to the rest of the tests? Has he duplicated that performance? Yes it's nice to have a couple of match winning performances but just as importantly you can't leave out a high number of performances where he was just awful when other bowlers were bowling well in helpful conditions. At what point do solitary or a handful of performances become the flukes of an average career? How long do we continue to pick a guy that can't be consistent?

In the very next test, he picked up 8 wickets again. In the test before Johannesburg, he had picked up 5 wickets at Kingston including crucial top order strikes. In the third test at Oval, he bowled superbly througout. You expect someone with less than 10 test caps to win you every single test he plays? On what basis are you calling those performances flukes of an average career when in the same number of matches he has a better record than Ishant?

Look at it this way. When Zaheer was dropped it was the best thing for him. Sreesanth is the same way. A lot of talent, very little maturity, knowledge of the game and control of his bowling. He's either going to cry like a child if he's dropped like when he got slapped or he'll handle it like a man and come back better after focusing on his weakeness. Not to mention that he's severely limited as he isn't a first or second change bowler but has to use the new ball because he doesn't have the control over line and length so you would have to displace ZK or Ishant from the new ball attack to fit Sreesanth into the team which would be sheer lunacy.

Yeah, just because you say he is not a first change bowler makes it so. He is not like Pathan who can't do jack once the ball loses shine. Moreover in tests abroad at least the first 25 overs of the new ball are shared amongst the 3 front line seamers while the ball is still new. He bowled superbly with the old ball at Durban and Oval. He also bowled really well in the Ahmedabad test without luck last year against South Africa. Munaf/RP Singh, I can still understand people's point. But trundlers like Pathan and Kumar being compared to Sreesanth is nothing but a joke.

[msb1991]

Yeah' date=' Munaf is ahead of him in the team's pecking order, but I am arguing he should not be. And it's not even a point of discussion among the other contenders, as far as I am concerned. Firstly, it's nothing but a joke to compare Pathan and P Kumar to Sreesanth. They are trundlers - period. RP Singh could have been a contender but has been horribly out of sorts and is not fit. Now assuming Sreesanth is fit and he will play the Duleep matches, the case is pretty much closed.[/quote'] How is Pathan a trundler? He often bowls at 130kph and rarely drops below 125kph, he is an adequate pace for a medium-fast bowler in international cricket. And are people forgetting his performance at the WACA against Australia where he removed both openers cheaply both innings.

We have been hearing the same clap trap about Pathan since God knows when. He gets thrown out' date=' picks up some domestic wickets, and gets back to chucking international pies. His only place is as an allrounder in the limited overs game. To even consider Pathan as a test bowler is a huge leap of faith. B Kumar, Balaji etc. etc. have also been picking wickets in domestic matches. Let's play them in tests as well.[/quote'] Slight leap of faith to say that he has done poorly in Tests recently. Against Pakistan in Bangalore, he took 1/80 off 37 overs. He kept things tight on what was initially a very flat pitch. In the second innings was 0/30 off 7 overs, on a pitch now criminally slow and where the spinners were to play the greater role. Then came his good performance in Perth and a 3/112 at Adelaide where Australia racked up 563 on a very flat pitch. Only Ishant other than Pathan took 3 wickets and he took 3/115. After that, his next opportunity was in the Ahmedabad Test against South Africa where he bowled poorly. Hardly a terrible last few games. As for your theory of him always doing well in domestic cricket, that is rubbish too as this has been his best season in terms of average for his entire career.

Don't know what you find sporadic about Sreesanth's performances. He has bowled superbly in at least 5 of the 14 tests he has played' date=' bowled consistently well in ODIs in Australia last year, and was the second highest wicket taker in the IPL. And why should it not be about potential? You can't expect the world from someone who has played a handful of international games and he has to be given chances based on the tremendous upside he offers.[/quote'] Last two Test series for India, he has performed poorly. He was inconsistent in England, from someone who watched pretty much the entire Test series and cost us with his lack of wickets against South Africa in India.

Munaf Patel in Tests is a brilliant bowler..bowled superbly in WI and in the home series vs Pak in 2007.Our most accurate bowler.Will shine in NZ for sure.

I hope he does, I think that albeit with slightly more pace and slightly less height, he could fulfil the role Jacob Oram has in NZ cricket. Keep in mind that in Tests in NZ, Oram has 41 wickets at 18.75.

No one worth reading is saying Sreesanth is worthless. People have acknowledged that he can be a very good bowler when he is in prime form. But when exactly is that? Once every couple of test series? The fact remains that along with his few great spells, he has two to three awful spells for EACH good one. That's NOT what a front line bowler is about with the new ball. If Sreesanth can be consistently accurate and control then yes, he definitely has a place in the team but not the way he's bowled so far in his career. Everyone talks about his ONE test against South Africa. WOO-HOO!!!! That's great, now what happened to the rest of the tests? Has he duplicated that performance? Yes it's nice to have a couple of match winning performances but just as importantly you can't leave out a high number of performances where he was just awful when other bowlers were bowling well in helpful conditions. At what point do solitary or a handful of performances become the flukes of an average career? How long do we continue to pick a guy that can't be consistent? Look at it this way. When Zaheer was dropped it was the best thing for him. Sreesanth is the same way. A lot of talent, very little maturity, knowledge of the game and control of his bowling. He's either going to cry like a child if he's dropped like when he got slapped or he'll handle it like a man and come back better after focusing on his weakeness. Not to mention that he's severely limited as he isn't a first or second change bowler but has to use the new ball because he doesn't have the control over line and length so you would have to displace ZK or Ishant from the new ball attack to fit Sreesanth into the team which would be sheer lunacy.

I'd have to agree with this, Sreesanth is too inconsistent and until he can find consistent fitness, he cannot demand a place in the Test side. We must keep in mind that he has a poor FC record and so does not have too much going his way other than currently untapped potential.

Yeah' date=' let's talk facts - the guys has put in superb performances in 5-6 out of the first 14 tests he has played. How many bowlers make that kind of start? His numbers are better than Zaheer and Ishant. Surely, he couldn't have managed those numbers if he was delivering 3 awful spells for each good one.[/quote'] He has been on decline through his years in Test cricket. He started off well, now he is horribly inconsistent... In 2006: 35 wickets at 24.37 In 2007: 11 wickets at 40.54 In 2008: 4 wickets at 68.50

[Fontaine]

Yeah, let's talk facts - the guys has put in superb performances in 5-6 out of the first 14 tests he has played. How many bowlers make that kind of start? His numbers are better than Zaheer and Ishant. Surely, he couldn't have managed those numbers if he was delivering 3 awful spells for each good one. In the very next test, he picked up 8 wickets again. In the test before Johannesburg, he had picked up 5 wickets at Kingston including crucial top order strikes. In the third test at Oval, he bowled superbly througout. You expect someone with less than 10 test caps to win you every single test he plays? On what basis are you calling those performances flukes of an average career when in the same number of matches he has a better record than Ishant?

How long ago were those performances? Yeah like I said before he's put in a few very good spells but how long ago was that? At the end of 2006? Great if that's the criteria then Pathan/RP/Patel are awesome bowlers who should be picked because apparently performances two years ago apparently count for a whole lot. Nevermind how he's bowled recently.

Yeah, just because you say he is not a first change bowler makes it so. He is not like Pathan who can't do jack once the ball loses shine. Moreover in tests abroad at least the first 25 overs of the new ball are shared amongst the 3 front line seamers while the ball is still new. He bowled superbly with the old ball at Durban and Oval. He also bowled really well in the Ahmedabad test without luck last year against South Africa.

Great, three performances in South Africa and the Oval over his career so far. Damn, by that count Peter Siddle is 1/3 away from being an automatic selection for Australia since he's had two pretty good tests.

Munaf/RP Singh, I can still understand people's point. But trundlers like Pathan and Kumar being compared to Sreesanth is nothing but a joke.

Again who's comparing the two? I'm not. They're two completely different bowlers and swing bowlers like Kumar/Pathan aren't striving for raw pace but if you call bowling at 135 as trundlers then Sreesanth also fits in this category because he doesn't maintain his pace for more than 5-6 overs.

[Fontaine]

I'd have to agree with this, Sreesanth is too inconsistent and until he can find consistent fitness, he cannot demand a place in the Test side. We must keep in mind that he has a poor FC record and so does not have too much going his way other than currently untapped potential.

That's all I'm saying too. Sreesanth doesn't deserve a place as a test bowler considering his inconsistency, huge lack of proper cricket practice this year and irrelevant FC record. But yeah if you want to only look at a few test performances 2 years ago then yeah put in Sreesanth and pray he doesn't screw up. Right now our front line bowlers are doing great because they're the right pairing in a left/right combination that work different angles to right/left handed batsmen and pose problems with tough deliveries even for top batsmen. No loose deliveries, crappy spells. Above all of that is the consistency and control ZK/Ishant bring that is a captain's dream that puts the batting team under constant pressure. That 8-1 field we played recently would be an IMPOSSIBILITY for sreesanth because he has zero control and accuracy from over to over and say goodbye to a test win/draw there. Patel has shown he can bowl that wicket to wicket line around the offstump, crowding the batsmen and restricting the flow of runs. He's still miles away from being in top shape. Pathan is similar. He's bowling with accuracy and picking up wickets cheaply. It's up to Sreesanth if he can tear himself away from dance contests to earn some respect, get back that consistency, and accuracy he's sporadically shown so that he earn a test recall instead of being chosen just for numbers or one of the most useless words in cricket: Potential. Potential is just a polite way of saying "Hasn't gotten it done yet!"

[fineleg]

We need to take 5 pacers 1. ZK 2. Ishant Sharma 3. Munaf Patel ----- Reserves: 4. Irfan Pathan 5. RP Singh (if fit) else Praveen Kumar (if fit) else ??? (L.Balaji or god forbid Sir Aggy) No Sreesanth please...let him show commitment to cricket for a few months, and performance in domestics, and we'll consider that buffoon after that. He has talent, potential etc. but he is goofing around and not paying any attn to the game.

[Fontaine]

We need to take 5 pacers 1. ZK 2. Ishant Sharma 3. Munaf Patel ----- Reserves: 4. Irfan Pathan 5. RP Singh (if fit) else Praveen Kumar (if fit) else ??? (L.Balaji or god forbid Sir Aggy) No Sreesanth please...let him show commitment to cricket for a few months, and performance in domestics, and we'll consider that buffoon after that. He has talent, potential etc. but he is goofing around and not paying any attn to the game.

Well I would have 1. ZK 2. Ishant Sharma 3. Munaf Patel/Pathan depending on the conditions ----- Reserves: 4. Sreesanth 5. RP Singh (if fit) else Praveen Kumar I think given the helpful conditions there it could be an ideal situation to get Pathan or Patel a lot of overs and give them a real chance to get into top form against an average batting attack.

[The Outsider]

Slight leap of faith to say that he has done poorly in Tests recently. Against Pakistan in Bangalore, he took 1/80 off 37 overs. He kept things tight on what was initially a very flat pitch. In the second innings was 0/30 off 7 overs, on a pitch now criminally slow and where the spinners were to play the greater role. Then came his good performance in Perth and a 3/112 at Adelaide where Australia racked up 563 on a very flat pitch. Only Ishant other than Pathan took 3 wickets and he took 3/115. After that, his next opportunity was in the Ahmedabad Test against South Africa where he bowled poorly. Hardly a terrible last few games. As for your theory of him always doing well in domestic cricket, that is rubbish too as this has been his best season in terms of average for his entire career.

Come on......now flat pitch and accurate bowling are being used as Pathan's excuses. Why don't you apply the same to when Sreesanth did poorly. Ishant took a 5 wicket haul in the same Bangalore test. Yes, Perth was superb....but how many matches are we going to play on wickets like Perth?

Last two Test series for India, he has performed poorly. He was inconsistent in England, from someone who watched pretty much the entire Test series and cost us with his lack of wickets against South Africa in India.

Sreesanth had one really bad match in England - Trentbridge. He was not able to get the right English length to bowl. And he did bowl well in the South Africa series at home. Forget about Chennai, it was too flat a pitch to merit mention, but at Ahmedabad he was constantly causing problems till there was something in the pitch. He was unlucky in that innings - it happens.

He has been on decline through his years in Test cricket. He started off well, now he is horribly inconsistent... In 2006: 35 wickets at 24.37 In 2007: 11 wickets at 40.54 In 2008: 4 wickets at 68.50

I hope you are not serious while presenting those numbers. For someone who has played a grand total of 14 tests, you have demarcated a decline period as well. He had a couple of ordinary tests in England, bowled a few unlucky spells, and got some absolute flat pitches and all of a sudden he has declined? Tomorrow, if Ishant is not able to pick up as many wickets in the next couple of series, should we boot him out too? Fast bowlers take time to come into their own. Their initial tests are invariably marked with inconsistent performances right from Akram, Imran, Marshall, Steyn etc. etc. If you don't identify the genuine talent and play him even at the cost of a few insipid returns, all you'll see are line and length merchants.

[Fontaine]

Fast bowlers take time to come into their own. Their initial tests are invariably marked with inconsistent performances right from Akram' date=' Imran, Marshall, Steyn etc. etc. If you don't identify the genuine talent and play him even at the cost of a few insipid returns, all you'll see are line and length merchants.[/quote'] I agree and that's why Sreesanth should be in the Indian setup but he doesn't get to just walk in and be one of the first three seamers like you suggested. He's been playing for three years and we should see improvements in his fitness, stamina and consistency. That's the problem I have with Sreesanth. He's constantly injured, he still can't bowl long spells and keep his pace up like ZK/Ishant, and he's way too inconsistent. Let him prove those things first and then he can get a test recall but you don't use the test arena as an experiment hoping things go right with your third fast bowler.