On what basis is Rahul Sharma selected?

[ganeshran]

Rahane is Quota Player as Replacement of Zaheer. Mukund Out as Ashwin IN.

:fool:

[MCcricket]

Selection is not solely averages, strike rate,otherwise we would not need selectors, a computer would suffice.We would have V Kumar, Joginder Sharma, JP Yadav,S Narwal, Jaffer, Manish Pandey , Amit Verma, Uthappa,S Joshi in our test team.The best players might not necessarily have the highest averages, or highest wickets,there might be injuries, oppositon, home ground, conditions,mediocre players seem to thrive at this level,the job of selectors is not to pickup the Badrinaths, Unadkats but Rohits,Aarons. Good players sometimes need good opposition to raise their game as the gap is huge level wise,selectors job is to identify the potential , does this guy have talent to play at the next level. Some comments over here are stupid,when mediocre players are selected we are pissed, and when talent and potential is the reason why the player is selected we open the stats page lol,it is like having the cake and eating it too lol.

[asterix]

I don't like this idea of only selecting those players who've unproven trak records. Sometimes wildcards click. You don't have to follow a set pattern to select players. He's a leg spinner and we've seen our present leg spinners do diddly squat. We do need variety in our bowling attack. So what's wrong in giving chance to a tall, leg spinner who can get good bounce on his deliveries and could be a potential strike bowler? It'll be fascinating to see tall Ashwin and Rahul operating from both the ends with fielders surrounding the batsman and creating all sorts of trouble to the batsman..

[Malcolm Merlyn]

pishu mishi are the options....thnx i wil take Sharma anyday.......

[mani0993]

It's a brave selection. Can't justify it. If the bowl turning away was the consideration then Ojha and Abdullah could also do the same. Also, I don't think he'll get a game. Ojha deserves more games. He has bowled well in the past and has been sidelined for few series due to Mishra.

[Silva]

Definitely IPL. But we cannot deny that he has lot of accuracy for a leggie . It is a gut selection i must say. Mishra was miserable. Chawla despite enough confidence didn't really show consistent progress. Both of them are slow through the air. Rahul Sharma is more like Kumble . I am all for giving a chance to a different type of leggie.

I just checked Last year ranji seasons leading wicket takers. And their where only 3 leggies out of the top 50! Its dominated by Right off spinners and lefty spinner. One was Chawla, the other had an average of 40 and another only played 4 matches last year! Ladda, the leg spinner from punjab I once saw on a highlight package of him in a dometic list a match and he was comfortable bowling both googlies and legbreaks and he wasnt a midget. He was giving Rahane loads of trouble as well. The keeper blew 4 chances. But the thing is punjab selectors don't pick him to play because they choose defensive spinners instead. Especially now that bhajji is back his career might be over. Since he is in his mid 20s this is the most crucial part of his career. And he isn't getting matches! http://www.espncricinfo.com/ranjisuperleague2010/content/player/317292.html

[carnish]

Rahul Sharma probably promise to do chica's household chores if he picked him and therefore has been blessed with a test spot even without making ODI or T20 impressions in Indian colours...

[Trichromatic]

Rahul Sharma probably promise to do chica's household chores if he picked him and therefore has been blessed with a test spot even without making ODI or T20 impressions in Indian colours...

:facepalm:

[mani0993]

Ashwin also got picked because of IPL. They are hoping for him to click as having a leggie is a huge advantage for any test side.

Sorry ? Please check his FC records. He (Ashwin) was one of the best spinners in the domestic circuit, hence was picked. There is no evidence to prove Rahul Sharma is a better or even avg. spinner in the Ranji team he plays. He debutted in FC @ 2006 for Punjab and look at the matches he has played. This leg spin thing cannot be agreed by me at least. If we go by this pattern, then any gully bowler bowling a chinaman should get a special quota. Frankly even I was impressed with the way Rahul Sharma bowled in the IPL this season. But is that enough to get a Test birth directly without even playing an International game ?

[Silva]

Sorry ? Please check his FC records. He (Ashwin) was one of the best spinners in the domestic circuit, hence was picked. There is no evidence to prove Rahul Sharma is a better or even avg. spinner in the Ranji team he plays. He debutted in FC @ 2006 for Punjab and look at the matches he has played. This leg spin thing cannot be agreed by me at least. If we go by this pattern, then any gully bowler bowling a chinaman should get a special quota. Frankly even I was impressed with the way Rahul Sharma bowled in the IPL this season. But is that enough to get a Test birth directly without even playing an International game ?

Ashwins overall record isn't that great. Last years ranji trophy hid pretty well but yousuf pathan and couple of other spinner bowled better statistically than him. Sharma first class record is mediocre but their are only 3 indian leggies with better records than him and two of them haven't looked very good at the international level and the other isn't a regular pick for his first class side. I don't think either Sharma or ashwin are being picked based on their First class records alone.

[mani0993]

Ashwins overall record isn't that great. Last years ranji trophy hid pretty well but yousuf pathan and couple of other spinner bowled better statistically than him. Sharma first class record is mediocre but their are only 3 indian leggies with better records than him and two of them haven't looked very good at the international level and the other isn't a regular pick for his first class side. I don't think either Sharma or ashwin are being picked based on their First class records alone.

Ashwin - 34 Matches - 134 Wickets - Avg 28 - SR 63 Yusuf - 46 Matches - 120 Wickets - Avg 31 - SR 67 Overall who is better ?

[Silva]

Ashwin - 34 Matches - 134 Wickets - Avg 28 - SR 63 Yusuf - 46 Matches - 120 Wickets - Avg 31 - SR 67 Overall who is better ?

I was specifically talking about last years ranji season which was the breakout season for Ashwin. In that season Ashwin 5 matches 24 wickets avg 24 sr of 54 Y pathan 5 matches 24 wickets avg 17 sr of 37. First class stats can't always be trusted. Especially with our crappy First class set up.

[Cricket_Guru]

IPL rules

[Pagalpanti]

IPL is Indian domestic competition. I don't see why people find it wrong when players are selected based on it, especially when the ones who have excellent fc record are shite in International arena like Mishra.

[MCcricket]

AKASH CHOPRA'S COLUMN The Rahul Sharma fiasco Published on Thursday , November 03, 2011 at 09 : 34 Rahul Sharma's incredible ascent to the Indian dressing room within a span of a few odd months, in spite of being debatable, hasn't been a complete shocker - after all, this tall leg spinner from Punjab has an uncanny knack of wheedling out extra bounce from not-so-juicy pitches. More, he has dismissed no less than Sachin Tendulkar in IPL-IV and boasted of compelling figures of 2 for 7 in the return fixture. Even though his mediocre first-class figures of 10 matches/18 wickets didn't speak volumes about his potential, his T-20 qualifications led to his selection for the ODI series against England. While it was odd to pick him exclusively on the basis of his IPL showings, one lived with it. After all, selectors aren't statisticians and can be allowed to judge a player's potential regardless of what his report card reads. What was baffling though was this - the player who commanded so much faith and trust to bypass the performance protocol wasn't considered good enough to play in any of the ODIs against England, not even in the Dead-Rubber when the series was in the bag. In addition, Rahul Sharma's absence was felt even more in the only T20 game against England-wasn't he considered a T20 specialist? Is it not fair to assume that if someone is good enough to be fast-tracked into the Indian team, he must be good enough to make it to the playing XI? Well, if Rahul Sharma's exclusion in the ODI and T20 games was inexplicable, his inclusion in the Indian Test side has been quite incomprehensible too. After all, 18 wickets in 10 First-Class matches in a career spanning 6 long years can't guarantee a player a permanent spot in his state's playing XI-but here's a man who's been picked to play for India in Test matches on these numbers. Post Rahul's selection a young leg-spinner reminded me that he too had taken 39 wickets in 12 first-class matches so far. So, would he also be lucky enough to play for India? One could have dismissed such ridiculous ideas in the past, but now they look like a real possibility. What precedence are we setting? More importantly, has the Indian cap become so accessible? Shouldn't we allow potential talents to go through the toils of domestic cricket, get nurtured, tested, and developed? Rahul Sharma is a fine young talent-what's the point in declaring him the 'golden boy' today and then later forcing him into oblivion? Besides, such selections send out a clear message - Why struggle in Ranji Trophy when a good season in the IPL can reap bigger rewards? Is this what we want the younger crop to believe? Well, Rahul Sharma has been included in Grade C of the contracted players-Ashish Nehra and Yusuf Pathan, both a part of India's World Cup winning team, have been struck off it. While Yusuf was considered good enough to represent India in the only T20 match against England, he was deemed inept to be kept in the loop. Central contracts were introduce to provide a sense of security to the cricketers. Are we not nullifying the idea?

[BeautifulGame]

If selections are only based on IPl we would have Valthaty playing test cricket not Rahane.Selectors would have picked Balaji and Aravind for test cricket not Umesh Yadav and Varun Aaron. Sometimes when u see something in a player we should take a gamble on him.Nothing wrong with that. Maybe rather than just bashing the selectors how about doing an article on why there are a sudden dearth of leg spinners in the country and the selectors are forced to pick someone like Rahul sharma.Would have been useful to Indian cricket instead pointless articles like the above one. Ofcourse media would hardly write a informative piece.Nonsense article without common sense frankly reading that article was just a waste of time

[Yoda-esque]

AKASH CHOPRA'S COLUMN The Rahul Sharma fiasco Published on Thursday , November 03, 2011 at 09 : 34 Rahul Sharma's incredible ascent to the Indian dressing room within a span of a few odd months, in spite of being debatable, hasn't been a complete shocker - after all, this tall leg spinner from Punjab has an uncanny knack of wheedling out extra bounce from not-so-juicy pitches. More, he has dismissed no less than Sachin Tendulkar in IPL-IV and boasted of compelling figures of 2 for 7 in the return fixture. Even though his mediocre first-class figures of 10 matches/18 wickets didn't speak volumes about his potential, his T-20 qualifications led to his selection for the ODI series against England. While it was odd to pick him exclusively on the basis of his IPL showings, one lived with it. After all, selectors aren't statisticians and can be allowed to judge a player's potential regardless of what his report card reads. What was baffling though was this - the player who commanded so much faith and trust to bypass the performance protocol wasn't considered good enough to play in any of the ODIs against England, not even in the Dead-Rubber when the series was in the bag. In addition, Rahul Sharma's absence was felt even more in the only T20 game against England-wasn't he considered a T20 specialist? Is it not fair to assume that if someone is good enough to be fast-tracked into the Indian team, he must be good enough to make it to the playing XI? Well, if Rahul Sharma's exclusion in the ODI and T20 games was inexplicable, his inclusion in the Indian Test side has been quite incomprehensible too. After all, 18 wickets in 10 First-Class matches in a career spanning 6 long years can't guarantee a player a permanent spot in his state's playing XI-but here's a man who's been picked to play for India in Test matches on these numbers. Post Rahul's selection a young leg-spinner reminded me that he too had taken 39 wickets in 12 first-class matches so far. So, would he also be lucky enough to play for India? One could have dismissed such ridiculous ideas in the past, but now they look like a real possibility. What precedence are we setting? More importantly, has the Indian cap become so accessible? Shouldn't we allow potential talents to go through the toils of domestic cricket, get nurtured, tested, and developed? Rahul Sharma is a fine young talent-what's the point in declaring him the 'golden boy' today and then later forcing him into oblivion? Besides, such selections send out a clear message - Why struggle in Ranji Trophy when a good season in the IPL can reap bigger rewards? Is this what we want the younger crop to believe? Well, Rahul Sharma has been included in Grade C of the contracted players-Ashish Nehra and Yusuf Pathan, both a part of India's World Cup winning team, have been struck off it. While Yusuf was considered good enough to represent India in the only T20 match against England, he was deemed inept to be kept in the loop. Central contracts were introduce to provide a sense of security to the cricketers. Are we not nullifying the idea?

Nail on Head

[vvvslaxman]

This is a straight shootout between Rahul sharma and Piyush chawla. Chawla has been taken to cleaners in this match. What an alarming decline this guy has had.

[1983-2011]

aakash chopra - The Rahul Sharma fiasco Rahul Sharma's incredible ascent to the Indian dressing room within a span of a few odd months, in spite of being debatable, hasn't been a complete shocker - after all, this tall leg spinner from Punjab has an uncanny knack of wheedling out extra bounce from not-so-juicy pitches. More, he has dismissed no less than Sachin Tendulkar in IPL-IV and boasted of compelling figures of 2 for 7 in the return fixture. Even though his mediocre first-class figures of 10 matches/18 wickets didn't speak volumes about his potential, his T-20 qualifications led to his selection for the ODI series against England. While it was odd to pick him exclusively on the basis of his IPL showings, one lived with it. After all, selectors aren't statisticians and can be allowed to judge a player's potential regardless of what his report card reads. What was baffling though was this - the player who commanded so much faith and trust to bypass the performance protocol wasn't considered good enough to play in any of the ODIs against England, not even in the Dead-Rubber when the series was in the bag. In addition, Rahul Sharma's absence was felt even more in the only T20 game against England-wasn't he considered a T20 specialist? Is it not fair to assume that if someone is good enough to be fast-tracked into the Indian team, he must be good enough to make it to the playing XI? Well, if Rahul Sharma's exclusion in the ODI and T20 games was inexplicable, his inclusion in the Indian Test side has been quite incomprehensible too. After all, 18 wickets in 10 First-Class matches in a career spanning 6 long years can't guarantee a player a permanent spot in his state's playing XI-but here's a man who's been picked to play for India in Test matches on these numbers. Post Rahul's selection a young leg-spinner reminded me that he too had taken 39 wickets in 12 first-class matches so far. So, would he also be lucky enough to play for India? One could have dismissed such ridiculous ideas in the past, but now they look like a real possibility. What precedence are we setting? More importantly, has the Indian cap become so accessible? Shouldn't we allow potential talents to go through the toils of domestic cricket, get nurtured, tested, and developed? Rahul Sharma is a fine young talent-what's the point in declaring him the 'golden boy' today and then later forcing him into oblivion? Besides, such selections send out a clear message - Why struggle in Ranji Trophy when a good season in the IPL can reap bigger rewards? Is this what we want the younger crop to believe? Well, Rahul Sharma has been included in Grade C of the contracted players-Ashish Nehra and Yusuf Pathan, both a part of India's World Cup winning team, have been struck off it. While Yusuf was considered good enough to represent India in the only T20 match against England, he was deemed inept to be kept in the loop. Central contracts were introduce to provide a sense of security to the cricketers. Are we not nullifying the idea? cricketnext.in.com/blogs/aakashchopra/2974/62866/the-rahul-sharma-fiasco.html

[cowboysfan]

I think its a no loss situation,he is unlikely to get a game unless there is a injury,the coaches can look at him and really evaluate him.Its not that big of a gamble as Unadkat.