Rohit Sharma vs Badrinath

[Sachinism]

we have better options than badri soo his chance to make into indian XI are very slim.He is already in 30s and i dont think its sensible to pic such an old GUY.We should pic younger guns like mayank aggarwal

Agarwal over Badri? :facepalm: Selection is not done in alphabetical order

[gaurav92]

Agarwal over Badri? :facepalm: Selection is not done in alphabetical order

:hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical:

[don_corleone840]

Agarwal over Badri? :facepalm: Selection is not done in alphabetical order

i said " like mayank aggarwal " .NOT MAYANK AGGARWAL. We should select more players from age group of 18-23 rather than someone like badrinath who will play maximum for 5 more years .

[sudheer.b]

Average and SR in domestic One dayers, Badri - 41.25 @ 78 Murali Vijay - 40 @ 78 Nohit - 32 @ 81 Rahane - 38.5 @ 84 Mukund - 57 @ 83 PPatel - 30 @ 80 Dhawan - 44 @ 84 Based on domestic performance, other than Nohit and parthic patel, everyone else deserves a go at the international level. Look at Mukunds stats. Admittedly, he has played only 28 games, but he has already scored more than 1500 runs in them. Mentor this kid instead of nohit and papu patel.

These stats are at Domestic level.......... it means at Indian conditions only.

[cricketsangeeta]

Yes i agree, Rohit Sharma having Special Talent and there is no youngster other than Suresh Raine can beat him. Badinath will fly may be in next IPL as he don't have much talent

[Vijay.Sharma]

i said " like mayank aggarwal " .NOT MAYANK AGGARWAL. We should select more players from age group of 18-23 rather than someone like badrinath who will play maximum for 5 more years .

Err...what difference does age make as long as the player helps India win? Sometimes we make too much about this age business. Let's live in the present. If we keep the 'present' alive and well then the future will automatically take care of itself. Team selection should not be based on whether one can have a career of 10 years ahead. Development of talent is a continuous process that must happen in the background. Getting selected for the team must always be about current status not about some imagined future status. Things always happen in the "now". I'd always pick the best 11 of the country, immaterial of their age, for a Test. Of course we will come across situations where the first choice players are rested as is the case with the WI tour, then we can blood youngsters. But even there the team that is picked should be based on current performance or most recent relevant performance (last Ranji season) and performers must always get the first look in and only after that checkbox is ticked should any consideration for 'future career lengths' be given. Team selection should not be based on which individuals you want to push ahead for a long career. Career length is the responsibility of the individual...if he performs well then he will automatically have a long career. If he doesn't and still gets picked because 'he may be capable of having a long career' then it is unfair to other players who have been performing in the domestic circuit.

[sudheer.b]

Err...what difference does age make as long as the player helps India win? Sometimes we make too much about this age business. Let's live in the present. If we keep the 'present' alive and well then the future will automatically take care of itself. Team selection should not be based on whether one can have a career of 10 years ahead. Development of talent is a continuous process that must happen in the background. Getting selected for the team must always be about current status not about some imagined future status. Things always happen in the "now". I'd always pick the best 11 of the country, immaterial of their age, for a Test. Of course we will come across situations where the first choice players are rested as is the case with the WI tour, then we can blood youngsters. But even there the team that is picked should be based on current performance or most recent relevant performance (last Ranji season) and performers must always get the first look in and only after that checkbox is ticked should any consideration for 'future career lengths' be given. Team selection should not be based on which individuals you want to push ahead for a long career. Career length is the responsibility of the individual...if he performs well then he will automatically have a long career. If he doesn't and still gets picked because 'he may be capable of having a long career' then it is unfair to other players who have been performing in the domestic circuit.

Age should be considered because if a player enter in the team at the age of 30 than he will have to adopt to foreign conditions and at the same time need to perform well in the matches........... so player might take at least one year to settle in the team. Age must effect on the player's performance(may be exception for Sachin Tendulkar)

[Sachin=GOD]

Agarwal over Badri? :facepalm: Selection is not done in alphabetical order

:hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical:

[sarcastic]

Yes i agree, Rohit Sharma having Special Talent and there is no youngster other than Suresh Raine can beat him. Badinath will fly may be in next IPL as he don't have much talent

What do you know about Badri having talent or not!!!!!!!!:blink:

[Ultimate_Game]

Hope both Rohit and Badri get to play all 5 odis and whoever performs better move ahead in the queue. If both fail, Rahane and Mukund should be looked at.

[Pagalpanti]

Rohit is one for the future, if he matures quickly enough like Virat has come off age good for him and Indian cricket, he is a huge prospect. His footwork (when on song) is so awesome, his shots flow, he is a gifted cricketer, but with a wrong mindset, I guess he got the fame to early with T20 Wcup win and it has gone right up his head and then the IPL, he should fix that ASAP and he will be on top of his game. Badrinath well he has been the victim of our super strong batting lineup, can't blame selectors for not picking him before as we hardly had any slot left and now that he is picked he doesn't have much time but will be useful in test side for sometime when we have a huge hole with Dravid,laxman and Sachin retiring in space of 6m to 1 yr.

[Vijay.Sharma]

Age should be considered because if a player enter in the team at the age of 30 than he will have to adopt to foreign conditions and at the same time need to perform well in the matches........... so player might take at least one year to settle in the team. Age must effect on the player's performance(may be exception for Sachin Tendulkar)

Huh? If a guy is 30 yrs he cannot play in foreign conditions? But if a guy is 23 years he can? Is that what you are trying to say? What has being younger got to do with performance in alien conditions. If anything, it is more likely the 30 year old will have played at least 1 game sometime in his career in somewhat similar conditions, than the 23 year old. See, you are assuming that the new player will fail. And therefore if he is young enough then you can at least look at the brighter side that he gained experience which will come in handy at a later date. I am saying, don't even think that way. We want players to perform today not gain experience for today so they can perform tomorrow. Tomorrow will take care of itself if you have lived today well enough. Focus on the 'now'...the present.

[Cricket Tragic]

Agarwal over Badri? :facepalm: Selection is not done in alphabetical order

:cantstop:

[sudheer.b]

Huh? If a guy is 30 yrs he cannot play in foreign conditions? But if a guy is 23 years he can? Is that what you are trying to say? What has being younger got to do with performance in alien conditions. If anything, it is more likely the 30 year old will have played at least 1 game sometime in his career in somewhat similar conditions, than the 23 year old. See, you are assuming that the new player will fail. And therefore if he is young enough then you can at least look at the brighter side that he gained experience which will come in handy at a later date. I am saying, don't even think that way. We want players to perform today not gain experience for today so they can perform tomorrow. Tomorrow will take care of itself if you have lived today well enough. Focus on the 'now'...the presentt.

Obviously you are right...... focus on now.....the present. but some times need to focus on future,that's why we call young players as future stars. After 4-5years team need to find another player to replace a player whose present age is 30. Just Look at Australia team, still they are unable to replace steve waugh after his retirement. Mike Hussey came at the age of 30 but now he is near to retirement stage. It means they need to find another player to replace Hussey.. As per my views team need to find a player who can perform well for a long period(10yrs). For that young players should be considered for foreign tours especially.

[Vijay.Sharma]

Obviously you are right...... focus on now.....the present. but some times need to focus on future,that's why we call young players as future stars. After 4-5years team need to find another player to replace a player whose present age is 30. Just Look at Australia team, still they are unable to replace steve waugh after his retirement. Mike Hussey came at the age of 30 but now he is near to retirement stage. It means they need to find another player to replace Hussey.. As per my views team need to find a player who can perform well for a long period(10yrs). For that young players should be considered for foreign tours especially.

OK, you are mixing things here. Let me make this simpler... a. Selection to the team must be based on performance and not age. Always pick the best 11 you can muster up at any given point in time and space. b. Development of young talent is a continuous process that happens in the background. It need not be tied to team selection (although the reward quite naturally will tie themselves to selection). c. Lets understand that our batting line up of the 2000's was the best ever batting line up in the history of test cricket...o yes, u can compare them with the WI line up and Aussie line ups when they were kings or even the 3Ws and Sobers line up or the English line up of the 50s. Finding a replacement for this line up will never happen. Let's just accept it and live with it. It is a once in a "sport history" moment. c.i. What we can do though is not go the Aussie way but go the WI way - in the 50s and 60s WI had Worrell, Walcott, Weekes, and Sobers. Man to man they were better than the WI line up of Greenidge, Haynes, Richards, and Lloyd. But as a combination the latter brought great laurels (of course they had the WIPQ). c.ii. Man to man Viru, Rahul, Buddha, Lax, and Dada may never be replaceable. Well, we may replace four of those but Buddha is a different deal and if we do then great. However, we will not fall away like the Aussies have done. Right now India has only started scratching the surface of its vast lands and it has found lovely talent. The 2000s were the first time possibly that India went out of its 6 major metros to look for talent. Just scratching the surface gave us talents like MSD, Viru, Yuvi, Bhajji, Zak, Sreesanth, Munaf, etc. We have entered the age of the 1970s of WI now as far as talent is concerned. d. Coming back to the main point - selection has nothing to do with why a 23 year old should be given a chance ahead of a 30 years old just because he is 23 years. It does nto get more stupid than such an argument. When you, God forbiid not but just in case, enter an operation theater next time why don't you request the services of a young talented student (who is yet to successfully demonstrate his skills at performing a surgery) instead of a surgeon who has done it but is actually 30 years old whereas the kid is in his early 20s. After all you believe in youth policy right....so let charity begin at home...your operation!

[vvvslaxman]

Both are at the center now.

[Misu243]

One thing I noticed about Rohit in the T20 was the fact that he was very sluggish while batting...it looked like he was being forced to run..very lazy like body language. On the other hand Badri showed more intent...He better not carry this attitude to the ODIs otherwise it will only affect his performance.

[don_corleone840]

OK, you are mixing things here. Let me make this simpler... a. Selection to the team must be based on performance and not age. Always pick the best 11 you can muster up at any given point in time and space. b. Development of young talent is a continuous process that happens in the background. It need not be tied to team selection (although the reward quite naturally will tie themselves to selection). c. Lets understand that our batting line up of the 2000's was the best ever batting line up in the history of test cricket...o yes, u can compare them with the WI line up and Aussie line ups when they were kings or even the 3Ws and Sobers line up or the English line up of the 50s. Finding a replacement for this line up will never happen. Let's just accept it and live with it. It is a once in a "sport history" moment. c.i. What we can do though is not go the Aussie way but go the WI way - in the 50s and 60s WI had Worrell, Walcott, Weekes, and Sobers. Man to man they were better than the WI line up of Greenidge, Haynes, Richards, and Lloyd. But as a combination the latter brought great laurels (of course they had the WIPQ). c.ii. Man to man Viru, Rahul, Buddha, Lax, and Dada may never be replaceable. Well, we may replace four of those but Buddha is a different deal and if we do then great. However, we will not fall away like the Aussies have done. Right now India has only started scratching the surface of its vast lands and it has found lovely talent. The 2000s were the first time possibly that India went out of its 6 major metros to look for talent. Just scratching the surface gave us talents like MSD, Viru, Yuvi, Bhajji, Zak, Sreesanth, Munaf, etc. We have entered the age of the 1970s of WI now as far as talent is concerned. d. Coming back to the main point - selection has nothing to do with why a 23 year old should be given a chance ahead of a 30 years old just because he is 23 years. It does nto get more stupid than such an argument. When you, God forbiid not but just in case, enter an operation theater next time why don't you request the services of a young talented student (who is yet to successfully demonstrate his skills at performing a surgery) instead of a surgeon who has done it but is actually 30 years old whereas the kid is in his early 20s. After all you believe in youth policy right....so let charity begin at home...your operation!

we should pic wassim jaffer first.He is only 34.:hysterical::hysterical:

[vvvslaxman]

One thing I noticed about Rohit in the T20 was the fact that he was very sluggish while batting...it looked like he was being forced to run..very lazy like body language. On the other hand Badri showed more intent...He better not carry this attitude to the ODIs otherwise it will only affect his performance.

Rohit comes in with half a dozen brain farts. He will unleash them one by one at various points. Apart from Kohli and to some extent Badrinath haven't exhibited the talent to play percentage cricket.

[yoda]

They both played well together today. Rohit seemed a bit lazy to start with, connected well on a few shots. Badri played a more composed innings, although he did get lucky on the stumping late in his innings. Would be good if they both carry over this to the ODI series.