Online Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 fineleg makes a valid point - albeit a bit exaggerated Link to comment
Mr. Wicket Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Don Bradman was one of the greatest sissies and scaredy-cats of all time by sending in his tailenders to open the innings at Melbourne in 1937 in a deciding test against England, and demoting himself to number 7. Fineleg, agree or disagree? Link to comment
PaiN_KiLLeR Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 What did Ganguly do after being dropped and how was his form before he was called back? Same goes with Laxman. What were his scores in Ranji just before the Kotla test. Ganguly was not prolific but atleast he was getting decent scores for Bengal. He never looked like a lost puppy (which sehwag is right now) As for VVS, he was never out of the team, so his why discuss his ranji performance? Link to comment
PaiN_KiLLeR Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Don Bradman was one of the greatest sissies and scaredy-cats of all time by sending in his tailenders to open the innings at Melbourne in 1937 in a deciding test against England, and demoting himself to number 7. Fineleg, agree or disagree? Really silly of you to compare these two incidents. Everyone knows the only slot open for Sehwag in the national side is the opening position opposite Jaffer. Inspite of that he pushes himself down the order in the first innings. Stupidity or cowardice? Link to comment
Mr. Wicket Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Everybody knows Bradman always batted at 3, or at worst in the middle order. In a decisive test match, he opted to open the batting with his tailenders in the second innings. O'Reilly, Ward and Fleetwood-Smith were numbers 9-11 in the first dig. They were the top 3 the second time around, and Bradman came in at 7. Stupidity or cowardice? Link to comment
PaiN_KiLLeR Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Sehwag sent in Akash Chopra and Dhawan for opening the innings, not his tailenders. Salil you are arguing just for the sake of it. Link to comment
Mr. Wicket Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 No, you're piling onto Sehwag for the sake of it without knowledge of the situation or perspective. Batting order permutations change for all sorts of reasons. If Sehwag had spent time off the field in Maharashtra's last innings, he'd have been ineligible to bat before a certain time or above #7. If he was having fitness problems for any reason, he might have held himself back. If he was aiming for the bonus point and decided that with the pitch/Maharashtra's bowlers, a left-right combination might work better, he might have sent Dhawan up again in hopes of a more solid partnership. All sorts of reasons, so take those into account rather than joining fineleg's one eyed bandwagon. Link to comment
PaiN_KiLLeR Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 ONly 51 runs were needed in the second innings, so i wont dwell upon that. But playing himself at number 4 on day 1 to avoid the new ball is inexplicable for someone who aspires to face Mitchell Johnson & co at the MCG. Link to comment
Mr. Wicket Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Look at Maharashtra's attack. If you are the best batsman in the side and want to a) be the biggest threat to the opposition and b) try and negate their biggest threat, batting in the middle order against them is not a bad idea. Three real rookie new ball bowlers with less than 20 first class caps between them, all medium pacers. There's no concern about avoiding the new ball there. The concern might be over somehow getting out to the new ball and not being able to take on the real threat. Maharashtra are playing on a home track geared to their only bowling strength. Their medium pace attack is complete rubbish, but Agharkar is apparently a decent left arm spinner, and Sairaj Bahutule is Sairaj Bahutule with over 500 first class wickets at 25. So conditions will help them, and if Maharashtra are to dominate the game, it would be on account of their bowling. No surprise btw that in the second innings Maharashtra opened the bowling with Agharkar and had Bahutule bowling leggies after eight overs (may have been earlier had the new ball not taken early wickets). I don't blame Sehwag for holding himself back for the spinners. Shame he didn't last. I bet Agharkar's figures would have not been so impressive had he stuck around, and I would have loved to se the ****ing mercenary get a beating from him. Link to comment
fineleg Posted December 13, 2007 Author Share Posted December 13, 2007 Really silly of you to compare these two incidents. Everyone knows the only slot open for Sehwag in the national side is the opening position opposite Jaffer. Inspite of that he pushes himself down the order in the first innings. Stupidity or cowardice? Exactly. These incidents are not comparable. VS is to open, and its not like he scored century against the other domestic attacks, and he studied Maha attack to move down the order. He failed against other attacks, here was his chance, and he wanted to score big and moved to #4 in 1st Inn. But some fallah or faltu got him out in single digits even at #4! and then he goes to even lower in 2nd Inn! He should have opened in 2nd inn and atleast showed he can REMAIN NOT OUT chasing 51 or whatever! Link to comment
The Outsider Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Is it really that difficult to imagine that Sehwag was perhaps not on the field for the last 7 overs of the Maharashtra innings? He got into the team not on the basis of any domestic runs but on the basis of the backing from the likes of Dravid, Kumble, Ganguly, and Tendulkar. He would have still got in if he had failed here. As for opening, he has never opened for Delhi except for 1-2 innings here and there. Link to comment
fineleg Posted December 13, 2007 Author Share Posted December 13, 2007 Shwetabh, Ok, so he does not open for delhi if you insist, but what about batting at #3 in 1st Inn. Even that he has done before for delhi? Note: Dinesh Kartik did not open before for TN, but after becoming India opener, and then if missing Intl matches, he does open for TN at different times nowadays (if not always when he plays now). That is commitment. He may lack in technique, but Sehwag seems to lack commitment. Link to comment
Mr. Wicket Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Sehwag must bat at #1, 2 and 3, solve world peace, end global hunger, make 1000000000000000000000000 runs (to keep amits happy), hit 7 sixes in an over and score a hundred on a sticky crumbling wicket. Only then will fineleg stop whining. Link to comment
fineleg Posted December 13, 2007 Author Share Posted December 13, 2007 My grouse is with selection process not being fair. You gotta reward performance and drop non performing players (with some leeway for proven stars, but Not TOTAL leeway). Now that he is selected I'll be happy if he does well (if he gets into the 11, and match starts I'll pray for him). But I dont think he deserves getting into 11 ahead of "yuseless" as you would call Yuvraj Singh. YS deserves to be in ahead of VS in the 11. I've said this here too. Cross referencing: http://www.indiancricketfans.com/showpost.php? p=283414&postcount=151 SEHWAG should have boldly opened against Maharastra - that would have shown his commitment, and he should have scored runs against them opening to show his form. Link to comment
fineleg Posted December 13, 2007 Author Share Posted December 13, 2007 We are doing the lottery on Sehwag and it might well work. Lottery does work sometimes. But just becos selectors hit jackpot with this lottery, it does not mean on Dec 12 - when decision was announced - this was a fair decision to other players in the fray. How can it be fair, when merit and performance was not used as the criteria? Link to comment
The Outsider Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Shwetabh, Ok, so he does not open for delhi if you insist, but what about batting at #3 in 1st Inn. Even that he has done before for delhi? Note: Dinesh Kartik did not open before for TN, but after becoming India opener, and then if missing Intl matches, he does open for TN at different times nowadays (if not always when he plays now). That is commitment. He may lack in technique, but Sehwag seems to lack commitment. Delhi already has two good openers in Gambhir and Chopra and both have been in and out of the Indian team. If Sehwag had replaced them you would have been the first one whining about it here. Link to comment
dial_100 Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Sehwag who?? Only this article/I'view comes to my mind when I hear this name, http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/indvpak/content/story/305857.html Now I feel bad for YS. Here we have a chance to play a guy who is in form can score some runs. And Sehwag/GG/KD are none eligible to open. So, RD should take over, SG/SRT/VVS to follow. I dont really see a problem. IF Jaffa, RD, SRT, SG, VVS and Dhoni cannot do it then how can Sehwag make a difference. If these current lot is enough then why the heck we need this guy. As for comparing SG, there is no comparison in two. SG had a very confident body language, he took a nice break and he proved himself. On the other hand, this big name from Delhi gave Int'view for his game plan. We all know how much was proved. This guy is not getting any younger, FGS, this guy is almost 30. His body language is worst I have seen in the Indian side. I really want Sehwag to prove me wrong and prove his captain right. I really hope so....O'wise you should consider we will play 1 batsman less against mighty Aussies. Despite that I feel we will do reasonably good agianst this Aus side. I have quite a lot of faith in Kumble and other sr. Link to comment
Chaos Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 wtf... aggy picked up 5 wickets omg.... Link to comment
fineleg Posted December 13, 2007 Author Share Posted December 13, 2007 fineleg makes a valid point - albeit a bit exaggerated Online, Thanks. Yes, my style of putting it across may have been very exaggerated, but thanks for acknowledging the point. Link to comment
Chaos Posted December 13, 2007 Share Posted December 13, 2007 Online, Thanks. Yes, my style of putting it across may have been very exaggerated, but thanks for acknowledging the point. :psalute: Link to comment
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