Viru is gone When will Sachin's turn come

[Ultimate_Game]

i thought pujara didnt tour australia n england due to injury. Feelin too lazy to google fr info

Point being instead of persisting with over the hill players, a chance could have been iven to folks like Rahane/Rohit/Pujara etc. I mean any youngster would have been better than tried and tested failures. Kohli showed how much he improved playing those 4 tests in Aus and we very well could have had the same with another youngster.

[Ultimate_Game]

Pujara hasnt played in Australia and England. He played 1 test in SA where he couldnt score much. Dont over hype him. He still has to learn a lot when it comes to playing in foreign conditions and hopefully he will do that too. Same with Kohli who has played only in Australia. Rahane, Tiwary, Vijay have little to no experience overseas. Dont compare them to Laxman, Dravid already.

Yes Pujara only played one Test in SA but looked good enough to be persisted with. If he and other youngsters are not played in Eng & Aus, how else do you expect them to get better or learn? I mean given a choice between bunch of has beens who are over the hill and youngsters who are ready to take the next step forwards, whom would you back? If we are losing anyways, whom would you rather lose with? I would go for youngsters anyday coz at least you have expectation of getting some payback later in their careers but with guys pushing 40 what exactly is the benefit to persist with when we are losing with them in the team anyways?

[GautiMaan]

Point being instead of persisting with over the hill players' date=' a chance could have been iven to folks like Rahane/Rohit/Pujara etc. I mean any youngster would have been better than tried and tested failures. Kohli showed how much he improved playing those 4 tests in Aus and we very well could have had the same with another youngster.[/quote'] We've tried only 4 new batsmen and struck gold with two thats decent,ur post reminds me of a thread which pointed out that india has had the least debutants in last couple of years.

[Ultimate_Game]

We've tried only 4 new batsmen and struck gold with two thats decent' date='ur post reminds me of a thread which pointed out that india has had the least debutants in last couple of years.[/quote'] And if you look at the batting side the no. would be even less as I would expect most of the debutants to be on the bowling side, i.e. likes of Dinda, B Kumar, Vinay Kumar, Unadkat, Aaron, Umesh etc. We have hardly blooded any batsman with players like Rahane and Rohit either riding the bench or picked for wrong formats (shorter ones instead of Tests). Also, if you don't try a youngster, how else are you going to unearth stars of the future :dontknow: Can you imagine if Tendulkar had been forced to play Ranji trophy till he turned 25 coz Vengsarkar, Gavaskar, Shastri, etc. wanted to play in their 40s? If the youngsters have performed at domestic level and the seniors are not pulling their weight or the team is still losing despite all the experience, go with youngsters and rebuild rather than drag us through losing with seniors followed by more losing coz youngsters were never given a chance earlier and are going through growing pains.

[Sarkar]

It was Sachin who rescued India at Chennai dont get me startd what he has done for Indian cricket people like harbhajan singh who hasnt perform in test cricket since last 4 years what about them they can come and go out of team

[Ultimate_Game]

It was Sachin who rescued India at Chennai dont get me startd what he has done for Indian cricket people like harbhajan singh who hasnt perform in test cricket since last 4 years what about them they can come and go out of team

I would prefer if you do start though :winky: Start from the very beginning documenting the "sacrifices" he's made and what a great "service" he has done for the nation :--D

[Vilander]

After seeing Laxman replaced by Sir Jadeja' date=' I don't want to see [b']Badrinath/Raina replacing Sachin.

[Raghav_12]

And if you look at the batting side the no. would be even less as I would expect most of the debutants to be on the bowling side, i.e. likes of Dinda, B Kumar, Vinay Kumar, Unadkat, Aaron, Umesh etc. We have hardly blooded any batsman with players like Rahane and Rohit either riding the bench or picked for wrong formats (shorter ones instead of Tests). Also, if you don't try a youngster, how else are you going to unearth stars of the future :dontknow: Can you imagine if Tendulkar had been forced to play Ranji trophy till he turned 25 coz Vengsarkar, Gavaskar, Shastri, etc. wanted to play in their 40s? If the youngsters have performed at domestic level and the seniors are not pulling their weight or the team is still losing despite all the experience, go with youngsters and rebuild rather than drag us through losing with seniors followed by more losing coz youngsters were never given a chance earlier and are going through growing pains.

Tell me one youngster who look as talented as Sachin of his teens and not being given a chance? We replaced Laxman with Jadeja and opening pair is going to be Vijay and Dhawan in next test. You still feel that Sachin should be replaced to give youngsters a chance. Replace him on purely performance reasons but what this stupidility of giving young players a chance when we already have more than enough open places. On other hand we should seriously consider rotating test WK. It is extremely discouraging for a young WK playing Ranji that he has no chance of playing for country even if he is best wicket keeper ever to born on earth. Why these wicketkeepers prospects be forced to live in such despair? How you can judge if Saha's, Kaul's, Ojha, Gautams are not good enough if you don't give them a chance at top level. Because of our obsession with Dhoni we are killing future prospects of wicket keeping in India. Point is, irrespective of how Dhoni is playing, new WK's should be given chances, otherwise how you'll know new talent is not good enough or how they'll get exposure. There should be a rule that no WK would be allowed to play 5 series at a strech. We should always try new WK's. Similarly for captaincy. How we would have our Graeme Smith's if we don't give chances to Kohli and Pujara to captain indian side?

[tweaker]

Sachin should retire respectfully.People should wonder why he retired instead of whe he has not.

[I6MTW]

He will retire after SA series.

[Muloghonto]

there is an excellent reason to drop Sachin and that is whether he will play in the SA series' date='there is a great chance to try out Rahane in the middle order if this is sachin's last series.[/quote'] That makes no sense. For one, say if it isn't Sachin's last series. Now what ? Drop the greatest batsman ever, at 40 year old, when he's just found some runs in ten outings ? That is as 'a##-backwards' as you can get. Look, for all the 'flak' he's taken, he's still been our top 3 batsman overseas. Both the England and Aussie tour, he was one of our top 3 batting performers.Then he did decently against the windies. Yes, he had a horrid time against the Kiwis and the English, but he found some form recently. I see no real cricketing reason to drop him.

[Muloghonto]

Couple of bad series seems to be quite an understatement.

Not really. He had mediocre series in Australia and England, but who exactly outshone him with the bat in those series ? Kohli in Australia and Dravid in England. He was our 2nd best bat in Australia. This, despite being a middle order bat regularly exposed at 20-30something for two down. Same situation in England- our #2 batsman despite being a middle order bat exposed to the new moving ball too early. So prior to the whole debacle against NZ/ENG, he's been performing at an acceptable rate and prior to the England tour, he was at his peak against Steyn. So what exactly is the argument towards dropping Tendy, escapes me. I don't care if he is 40 or 50. If he can be consistently amongst the top 4 batsmen in our team, he gets to stay. He can outlast Geordie Howe's career for all i care. And two failed series is not enough evidence for me to jump into the 'drop tendy' bandwagon. If he fails against OZ (next two matches), alarm bells should be ringing and if he still fails against the Saffies, it should be curtain calls for sure. Until then, Tendy's place should not be questioned.

[The Outsider]

I see no real cricketing reason to drop him.

Tests 19. Average 32. Centuries 0. Age 40.

[rkt.india]

Not really. He had mediocre series in Australia and England, but who exactly outshone him with the bat in those series ? Kohli in Australia and Dravid in England. He was our 2nd best bat in Australia. This, despite being a middle order bat regularly exposed at 20-30something for two down. Same situation in England- our #2 batsman despite being a middle order bat exposed to the new moving ball too early. .

Consider one ore fact. His middle order partners on those tours Dravid and Laxman have retired. The opening partners GG and Viru both are out of the team. Only, he is still there despite doing as bad as those four.

[Muloghonto]

Bad couple of series? He's had a bad couple of years with no 100s in the last 2 years or thereabouts. As for he's "one of the top 4 middle order bats" the team only has 4 middle order bats so you will always be in the top 4 unless someone new gets a look-in :giggle:

Not to nitpick, but i actually meant top 4 bats, not middle order bats. Anyways sir, there is a fly in your ointment: tendy happens to be our #2 bat last time we were in England and #2 in Auslalia as well. Given that both those series produced two different #1 batsmen for us, we can logically make a case for Tendy being our most successful overseas bat, based on the most recent performance.

Pujara has shown how much we erred by persisting with Laxman & Dravid in Aus. Why not give the same chance to likes of Rahane, Rohit or Tiwary? Don't they deserve a fair chance before making statements like they are not one of the top 4 middle order bats? Kohli and Pujara are currently both better than Tendulkar in the middle order and I have no doubt Rahane will prove to be the same if given a chance.

Cricket is not about fair chance- that is not what professional sports is about. Pro sports is about fielding the best XI. I don't care who else is the new young gun waiting in the wing, but Tendy's position in the team is logically sound: a) One of the top 3 batsmen, ever. b) Best performer in our most recent overseas tour. c) Two years ago, in midst of a purple patch. d) Since he is not the weakest link on the basis of the last year/year and half, he should not be dropped till his position is the weakest/2nd weakest link. It makes no sense whatsoever to talk about dropping tendy, when #6 position is largely a walking wicket. Yes, Dhoni has 'papered' over this by promoting himself above the order, but it still means we are a batsman short (unless Sir Jaddu shows us some Jadugiri with the bat). So lets fix that first. As it happens, Tendy is the only specialist bat left in the team with more than 50 tests to his name. Lets not end up fielding a juniors team in seniors color due to some innane need to promote youth. Just because you are 21, does not make you any more deserving to play than a 40 year old.

[Muloghonto]

Consider one ore fact. His middle order partners on those tours Dravid and Laxman have retired. The opening partners GG and Viru both are out of the team. Only' date=' he is still there despite doing as bad as those four.[/quote'] Okay, so the worse performers than Tendu got dropped/retired and since there are worse performers with the bat than Tendu in the team currently, we should drop him for what reason ?! Perhaps you folks would like to point out to me when was the last time that a team got rid of their entire top order batting in the span of 12 months and it worked out fine and dandy for them in the next couple of years ? because this is basically what India is doing- with retirements and chops, all of a sudden, we are the 'baccha-log' team with kids. Apparently being young is a pre-requisite and trumps having experience ?! Since when did Indian cricket lose the last few brain-cells it had ?

[Muloghonto]

Tests 19. Average 32. Centuries 0. Age 40.

Largely irrelevant. Absolute numbers mean nothing without context to the team performance. Age-40 is irrelevant. As i said, he could be 50 for all i care. He's had two bad series- against England and NZ. Was our 2nd best performer in Australia, England, easliy the best performer in South Africa, not bad against West Indies. As such, the numbers you provide, are rather meaningless and arbitary. There is no logical basis to dropping our best batsman ever, who has endured a 10-odd innings stretch of bad performances and seems to be comming out of it. Prior to this, he is our most consistent overseas performer just over a year ago. As it happens, our next 3 tours and 4 of 5 are overseas. Ergo, dropping Tendulkar != logic.

[The Outsider]

Largely irrelevant. Absolute numbers mean nothing without context to the team performance. Age-40 is irrelevant. As i said, he could be 50 for all i care. He's had two bad series- against England and NZ. Was our 2nd best performer in Australia, England, easliy the best performer in South Africa, not bad against West Indies. As such, the numbers you provide, are rather meaningless and arbitary. There is no logical basis to dropping our best batsman ever, who has endured a 10-odd innings stretch of bad performances and seems to be comming out of it. Prior to this, he is our most consistent overseas performer just over a year ago. As it happens, our next 3 tours and 4 of 5 are overseas. Ergo, dropping Tendulkar != logic.

South Africa was more than 2 years back. How much further back do you want to go? Just because he was the 2nd best batsman doesn't mean he was not crap in England and Australia. If others averaged 30 and Tendulkar averaged 32 does not mean he was any better than the rest to hold any relevance. And anyway, the others who sucked on those tours are all gone now - Sehwag, Gambhir, Dravid, Laxman. This is not a poor performance of 10 odd innings but of 19 test matches. For 19 test matches he has largely been a walking wicket and an average of 32 is just a reflection of his p!ss poor batting.

[rkt.india]

Okay, so the worse performers than Tendu got dropped/retired and since there are worse performers with the bat than Tendu in the team currently, we should drop him for what reason ?! Perhaps you folks would like to point out to me when was the last time that a team got rid of their entire top order batting in the span of 12 months and it worked out fine and dandy for them in the next couple of years ? because this is basically what India is doing- with retirements and chops, all of a sudden, we are the 'baccha-log' team with kids. Apparently being young is a pre-requisite and trumps having experience ?! Since when did Indian cricket lose the last few brain-cells it had ?

This is called poor planning by selectors as they left everything on time and BTW, I am not asking him to be dropped, was just stating a fact. He will never be dropped eventually. He should play till SA tour.

[Muloghonto]

South Africa was more than 2 years back. How much further back do you want to go?

1.5-2 years ago, he was fabulous. Upto just over a year ago, he was consitently the 2nd best bat in the team. Doesnt seem like i have to go very far at all.

Just because he was the 2nd best batsman doesn't mean he was not crap in England and Australia.

Irrelevant. Crap or not, the case for dropping a player is relative to his teammates. There is no such 'absolute benchmark' for being dropped from the playing 11. The only benchmark relevant for selecting the BEST XI, is relative to the competition. Ergo, Tendulkar was undroppable by the virtue of his performance after the Aussie series, since he was the 2nd best in the XI. Ergo, your case against Tendulkar is based on the back of 2 series where he's been looking wonky. Ie, not enough timeframe.

If others averaged 30 and Tendulkar averaged 32 does not mean he was any better than the rest to hold any relevance.

False. If Tendu averaged 15.00 with the bat and every single batsman averaged less, Tendu, by default, becomes undroppable by the virtue of performance.

And anyway, the others who sucked on those tours are all gone now - Sehwag, Gambhir, Dravid, Laxman.

All the more reason for us to retain the last little bit of experience and proven ability in the team. I am yet to see you answer my question: point out one successful team that has completely remade its test top six, in the span of a year-two years and still gone on to succeed. Just one example would suffice.

This is not a poor performance of 10 odd innings but of 19 test matches. For 19 test matches he has largely been a walking wicket and an average of 32 is just a reflection of his p!ss poor batting.

For 11 of those so-called 'poor performances in 19 matches', he's been the 2nd best performer in the team. As i said, your position is illogical, as it assumes that specialist batsmen have to 'live up to a certain benchmark in statistics to maintain their place in the XI'. In reality, every sporting team operates on the principle of dropping their weakest performers, that too, on a gradual basis. It doesnt matter if Tendy averages 100 with the bat. If six other bats happen to average more, he has to go. Ergo, it doesnt matter if Tendy averaged 32 with the bat. If six others did worse, they are the ones to go first. And once they are gone, its illogical to question his position until the newcommers have solidified their place. We are already acting like as if Pujara or Kohli 'have it made' for the middle order, when the fact is, they are both just over 1 year away from totally busting their careers if things go pear shaped.