Hardik Pandya is a better bowler in Limited Overs than Ben Stokes

[sandeep]

On 10/17/2016 at 10:02 AM, sandeep said:

Pandya is skinny, and tries too hard to be cool, and is an Indian pace-bowling allrounder.  These things are affecting his perception.  He has the bowling and batting tools to be a very effective LOI cricketer, maybe even tests - but that depends on the continuation of his learning curve and his ability to stay injury free.   

 

 

 

On 10/17/2016 at 11:11 AM, maniac said:

Players with Utility factor-There is a place for these players in the X1....likes of Vijay,Moeen Ali,Nathan Lyon,Ravindra Jadeja etc fall into this category.....These are players who will not win games on their own but their contribution is absolutely must for the match winners-Players with X and IT factor to do their thing.

Apples to Apples Moeen Ali or Jadeja may not be the best spinners in their respective countries but they are right about there and their batting in Ali's case or Fielding in Jadeja's case makes them rise above the ranks....similarly in a pace attack like Aussies where the fast bowlers are match winners you need a Lyon to do his thing and hold one end up when the pitch has assistance.

Pandya,Vijay and Rayudu are 2 examples of these kind of players...They will play efficiently around match winners but won't win you games singlehandedly.

 

In October 2016, One person called Pandya "a very effective LOI cricketer", while someone else called him a "utility" player like Rayudu.  

 

[King Tendulkar]

Quite a few called pandya a hack 

 

stokes was pretty mediocre when started . But improving all the time . Pretty similar story to pandya but stokes a few years ahead in time line 

[mishra]

On 9/20/2017 at 9:19 AM, rkt.india said:

this thread is about ODIs.  He did the same against SL in the test when he scored his debut 100.

Agree! HArdik Pandya need to be tested on a overseas bilateral tour in places like SA,England and Australia. Comparison between Stikes and Pandya is more of tested vs untested player.

 

Mind you, Its on back of players like Stokes, that English team has become a force in odis. So he is a match winner.

[mishra]

^ Also when icf match thread has posts like "give the ball to Pandya (to chk scoring or break partnership)" or "Next bat should be Pandya", I will say Pandya becomes Stokes

[Vijy]

I dont think either is really a capable bowler in ODIS.

[sandeep]

On 10/1/2017 at 2:52 PM, Vijy said:

I dont think either is really a capable bowler in ODIS.

Thread was made to make the case to give Pandya a proper run in ODIs.  This was at a time where Pandya was pigeonholed as only a T20 option, and not deemed worthy enough for ODI selection.  Wrong-headed fans were dismissing him as a weak bowler who bats a bit.  When in fact he was a useful batsman with bowling as his second skill, while still being handy enough to deserve an extended audition in a team like India, which hardly has any options for pace allrounder.   

 

The purpose of the almost "click-baity" headline, at the time, was to highlight the potential that Pandya offered to the Indian team.  Which has since been proven.   Gujju Lukdya has risen.  And how.  

[sandeep]

On 8/30/2016 at 3:45 PM, sandeep said:

Next ODI World Cup is in England.  Look at how England are building their team, and their ODI wickets.  We are not going to win with 6+5 in 2019.  We will need Chahal and Pandya to be successful international players with multiple tricks up their sleeve, to be contenders.  

Bump.  Safe to say the thread has passed the test of time. 

 

Pandya and Chahal have indeed become ODI mainstays over the last couple of years, but we are still stuck with a top 6 that doesn't offer much bowling.