zep1706 Posted January 13, 2012 Posted January 13, 2012 To play him in place of Ashwin is one of the dumbest decisions I have ever seen. Dhobi and the grumpy old dude have lost it completely.
Crookbond Posted January 13, 2012 Posted January 13, 2012 what is "justify selection" ? some garbage data in ranjis? this is precisely the problem i am talking about.they belong to the dustbin. what was viv richards doing with a 27 FC average and one county century when he made hsi debut vs india? what did warne to "justify selection" in 1991? what did cummins do to "justify selection" in SA? how would you know federer would stop underperformign at grand slams during june 2003 and would go to win 14+ titles? if you keep waiting for players to "justify selection",keep waiting for the next millenium. people with an eye for talent can pick sampras or tendulkar for for great sucess long before. you need an eye for quality and talent. this is not a math or stat exam. (not that real mathematicians and statisticians will be happy with the math done here or elsehwere :)) In my opinion, you need to keep it simple. People who can score runs and take wickets should be picked irrespective of zone, caste, creed, religion and age. The problem is you need to take contextual information against whom these runs were scored. A hundred by batsman X against a good Ranji bowling side like Mumbai or Tamil Nadu should have more weight than triple hundreds against Tripura. Add to that the nature of the wickets too. For example, a 50 in the recent Ranji SF between Rajasthad/Haryana should count for more than a triple hundred on a concrete track.
CG Posted January 13, 2012 Posted January 13, 2012 A day Vinay Kumar won't forget At this moment, it is doubtful whether anyone noticed Vinay Kumar © Getty Images A seagull flew across the pitch as David Warner faced up to Vinay Kumar. Warner could have smashed it, but instead withdrew from the crease giving Vinay a pause. It was as generous Warner was going to be. My Indian friends mock Vinay’s lack of pace. Even I’ve compared his bowling to that of Damien Martyn. Others suggest that he might want to step up the pace as he was picked as a seamer and not a spinner. More than one said he was slower than Dhoni. And some even suggested he might have moved ahead of Dravid and Laxman in the retirement race. It was all pretty harsh. But compared to Warner hitting his fourth ball in Test Cricket back over his head, every single attack from cricket fans would have meant little. Warner treated Vinay like someone who’d dated his sister twice, before dumping her when she refused to put out. Warner often walks around the crease like a thug from a 1950s throwback film, but when Vinay was bowling it was more like a Frank Miller anti-hero. It wasn’t like Warner was soft to the others: his mid-off sweep to Yadav was an elbow to the throat, and the violent slog to Ishant Sharma was a call back to earlier disagreements. Zaheer Khan was providing more than a few boundaries while Cowan’s job was simply to clap at the non-striker’s end and try not to run Warner out. But Zaheer, Ishant and Yadav weren’t in their first Test. Zaheer is one of the best bowlers on the planet. Ishant is now quite experienced. And Yadav might be new, but has enough pace to hit someone later on and feel better about himself. Vinay is simply a medium-pace bowler in his first Test. And the fourth ball he ever bowled was dispatched with such effortless thuggery that you could have forgiven him for crawling up in a ball and shaking. It wasn’t even a bad ball, or even a ball that hinted at being bad, it was a perfectly well-placed and delivered ball that was sent back over his head for six. After another decent delivery disappeared over midwicket for a boundary in his third over, Dhoni pulled Vinay from the attack. When he came back on, Warner humped him straight over mid-on for another boundary. Vinay’s zinc cream was fading; he was looking much like Michael J Fox in those weird scenes where Marty McFly is disappearing altogether in Back to the Future. The next ball Warner played a horrendous heave-slog-biff-wallop-bang hit that sailed away for six. It was Warner’s hundred. Everyone looked at Warner, it’s doubtful anyone noticed Vinay. This second spell only lasted for one over. Earlier in the day Vinay had made five.
BeautifulGame Posted January 13, 2012 Posted January 13, 2012 what is "justify selection" ? some garbage data in ranjis? this is precisely the problem i am talking about.they belong to the dustbin. what was viv richards doing with a 27 FC average and one county century when he made hsi debut vs india? what did warne to "justify selection" in 1991? what did cummins do to "justify selection" in SA? how would you know federer would stop underperformign at grand slams during june 2003 and would go to win 14+ titles? if you keep waiting for players to "justify selection",keep waiting for the next millenium. people with an eye for talent can pick sampras or tendulkar for for great sucess long before. you need an eye for quality and talent. this is not a math or stat exam. (not that real mathematicians and statisticians will be happy with the math done here or elsehwere :)) Yes.If u cant score runs in Ranji trophy then u dont deserve to be selected.if u have a different opinion fault is with u noone else.We have only produced Sachin Dravid and Laxman based on that. And either way u dont need data bin to see Uthappa and Rayadu doesnt deserve to be selected for national team.Utappa doesnt even have a decent technique.This guy chickened out of opening in Ranji trophy matches when the ball swings so that he doesnt get exposed. If u think Utappa deserves to be seleected for test u are utterly clueless. And u dont wait for next millenium to wait for talented youngsters with potential as welll as performances.If u follow Ranji trophy u would know that.If u dont follow that its no one else's problem
youngindia Posted January 13, 2012 Posted January 13, 2012 In my opinion' date=' you need to keep it simple. People who can score runs and take wickets should be picked irrespective of zone, caste, creed, religion and age. The problem is you need to take contextual information against whom these runs were scored. A hundred by batsman X against a good Ranji bowling side like Mumbai or Tamil Nadu should have more weight than triple hundreds against Trip.[/quote'] if you go by results, you will never have competence in terms of strategy or vision. for example, when sampras over took courier as no 1 around april-may 1993, people who go by results were saying sampras has not performed as well at GS and so why is he no 1 blah blah. but they didn't recognise the dangerous dimensions sampras's game was taking. The more incisive pundits predicted sampras can even overtake 12+ tityles since none including agassi had enough ammunition to counter him. if you go by results, this is what is going to happen. hundreds against tn or mumbai is no guarantee of sucess vs mcgrath ,cummins or steyn. you have to recognise the player's quality by the naked eye and back him for proportionate sucess. that's the only thing that ever works, its keeping things simple as well..but not everyone can do it, .
Crookbond Posted January 13, 2012 Posted January 13, 2012 if you go by results, you will never have competence in terms of strategy or vision. for example, when sampras over took courier as no 1 around april-may 1993, people who go by results were saying sampras has not performed as well at GS and so why is he no 1 blah blah. but they didn't recognise the dangerous dimensions sampras's game was taking. The more incisive pundits predicted sampras can even overtake 12+ tityles since none including agassi had enough ammunition to counter him. if you go by results, this is what is going to happen. hundreds against tn or mumbai is no guarantee of sucess vs mcgrath ,cummins or steyn. you have to recognise the player's quality by the naked eye and back him for proportionate sucess. that's the only thing that ever works, its keeping things simple as well..but not everyone can do it, You're talking about exceptions not norms. Process always helps. It may not make you the best but it will *never* make you worse.
youngindia Posted January 13, 2012 Posted January 13, 2012 Yes.If u cant score runs in Ranji trophy then u dont deserve to be selected.if u have a different opinion fault is with u noone else.We have only produced Sachin Dravid and Laxman based on that. your irrational prejudiced nonsense is becoming unbearable. hard facts show players have become all time greats without any great FC pedigree. the austrlian captain clarke was selected with an average of 37 over huge number of FC luminaries in the australian system which is the best in the world. the standards of ranji are way lower considering the poor quality of bowling and fielding. so what the hell are you crapping about? it has been shown FC performnaces are not necessary to become all time greats.players are not always selected after FC performnaces. so what the hell are you crapping about? i don't care to have a damn about your blind irrational beliefs,. you just have prejudice and preconceived notions embedded in your head.nothing else. .If u follow Ranji trophy u would know that.If u dont follow that its no one else's problem ] dinesh mongia, pravin amre, akash chopra, sriram say hi.
youngindia Posted January 13, 2012 Posted January 13, 2012 You're talking about exceptions not norms. Process always helps. It may not make you the best but it will *never* make you worse. people who can analyse the startegic aspects of the game will often have a clue whereas people who go by results/data will not often have a clue,. this is the norm,
Dravid_TheWall Posted January 13, 2012 Posted January 13, 2012 I hope we lose 4-0. We need a wake up call. Also will allow us to field our best bowling attack. These guys suck so bad. It is embarassing.
akshayxyz Posted January 13, 2012 Posted January 13, 2012 How is it possible that almost everyone in world of cricket followers, at least on ICF, saw his lack of ability from the day one.. and captain/selectors just do not seem to realize - he does not have any skills of a fast bowler.... On top of that, of all the pitches he was debuted at Perth!!.. English conditions would still have made some sense - relatively speaking.
BeautifulGame Posted January 13, 2012 Posted January 13, 2012 your irrational prejudiced nonsense is becoming unbearable. hard facts show players have become all time greats without any great FC pedigree. the austrlian captain clarke was selected with an average of 37 over huge number of FC luminaries in the australian system which is the best in the world. the standards of ranji are way lower considering the poor quality of bowling and fielding. so what the hell are you crapping about? it has been shown FC performnaces are not necessary to become all time greats.players are not always selected after FC performnaces. so what the hell are you crapping about? i don't care to have a damn about your blind irrational beliefs,. you just have prejudice and preconceived notions embedded in your head.nothing else. ] dinesh mongia, pravin amre, akash chopra, sriram say hi. Sigh.I will explain it in even simpler way. Yes there are batsmen who scored big in Ranji trophy and struggled in International cricket.That doesnt make everyone with mediocre record a hidden gem. Now if u are saying this criteria of ignoring Ranji stats then yes it would have been understandable.Because most wickets are batsmen friendly and bowlers need to be picked on potential like Aaron rather than performance like Vinay. But when it comes to batsmen its totally different.We have plenty of batsmen who has great potential and at the same time performing exceptionally well.Because the wickets are batsmen firendly there would u the likes of Sriram who to score plenty of runs but that doesnt mean players with potential wont score. Uthappa is some one with mediocre technique and not even a very good Ranji player.There are whole host of youngsters like Rahane Mukund Pujara Rohit Kohli who are far superior in potential to Uthappa. If u are atleast mentioning someone like mandeep Singh or Manish Pandey it would have been understandable.The only way someone can believe in Uthappa potential can be based on T20 exploits and its stupidity to even believe a player has test credentials based on T20 performances. U mentioned Clarke and Richards.Both were selected when they were young proteges who still have to settle in domestic cricket.So its understandable they had decent average.Uthppa is a Ranji veteran and is already 26.Its even laughable to talk Uthappa as a test player for India.
chainsmoker1985 Posted January 13, 2012 Posted January 13, 2012 koomar is not that bad there are worse bowlers in india ' date='as far as pace is considered where he get so much stick form icfrs, [b']the only guys who are quicker than him are ishant yadav and aron with ind not playing a spinner and praveen being injured who else is there I think you r forgetting Zaheer who is 34-35 and is still quicker than him. Its not about speed only. We have PK too but no one speaks abt him. The thing is VK is not made 4 intl cricket. Mano ya na mano ya der se manoge
chainsmoker1985 Posted January 13, 2012 Posted January 13, 2012 VK's debut match day has become India's most horrible day in decade. LOST on DAY 1
Old guy Posted January 13, 2012 Posted January 13, 2012 I think you r forgetting Zaheer who is 34-35 and is still quicker than him. Its not about speed only. We have PK too but no one speaks abt him. The thing is VK is not made 4 intl cricket. Mano ya na mano ya der se manoge this!
Dravid_TheWall Posted January 13, 2012 Posted January 13, 2012 I like the fact Ishant went up to VK to advise him before his first over. :hysterical:
Dravid_TheWall Posted January 13, 2012 Posted January 13, 2012 pk is injured ' date=' vinay may be ordinary but can u tell me who should have been picked instead ?[/quote'] Sree is injured. But there is Munaf, Nehra and Dinda. In fact pick all 3, don't think they would have done worse than this seam attack. I reckon better.
Crookbond Posted January 13, 2012 Posted January 13, 2012 people who can analyse the startegic aspects of the game will often have a clue whereas people who go by results/data will not often have a clue' date='. this is the norm,[/quote'] And going by the recent posts, ICF'ers understand how to select players. Great!
Manny_Pacquiao Posted January 13, 2012 Posted January 13, 2012 You know it's bad when this loser makes a test debut. Who on earth would think that he could do well in test cricket? Do the selectors even watch the players they pick? Another bad sign for Indian cricket is the fact that Rajasthan and TN are playing the ranji final. Neither team has any international class players. The fact that a team like Rajasthan can make back to back finals with gritty, yet mediocre talent doesn't bode well for Indian cricket. At least TN has some ex internationals. These are supposed to be the best teams in the country?what a joke
Dravid_TheWall Posted January 13, 2012 Posted January 13, 2012 but the point is are munaf dinda ,nehra that much better than vinay , i think they are pretty much similar in overall quality . They are all better than VK in ODI and tests.
(8).thumb.jpeg.0752419e01d6cfbfc0be0f4eedb85663.jpeg)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now