I would have thought it would be the best stroke player after Tendulkar.Originally posted by vishnureddy
MSK Prasad ( former Indian Player ) referred to him as the best stroke player he has seen after Laxman.
I would have thought it would be the best stroke player after Tendulkar.Originally posted by vishnureddy
MSK Prasad ( former Indian Player ) referred to him as the best stroke player he has seen after Laxman.
Sreesanth said, "Next ball he was beaten and I said, 'is this the King Charles Lara? Who is this impostor, moving around nervously? I should have kept my mouth shut for the next ball - mind you, it was a length ball - Lara just pulled it over the church beyond the boundary! He is a true legend."
The...er...Twitter[/SIZE][/CENTER]
Earlier Laxman used to play a lot of strokes. Now a days he slowed down to gain consistency.
Where are these "fast" bowlers? First of all, we don't have genuinely quick bowlers, they are all medium pacers. Secondly, other than the ones I mentioned, who else is there who merits national selection? You don't take a raw, inexperienced youngster to the WC and hope for a miracle(We have had only one miracle in the pace department in our cricket history and that was Kapil Dev). You should make do with what you have and this unfortunately is what we have.Originally posted by sheerindianspeed
This squad has only 3 genuine fast bowlers of which 1(Srinath) is quite old while Khan is injury prone.There is no way India can go into WC with just three fast bowlers in the squad, there should be atleast 4 of them.
I can see this horribly heading off into Balaji-land. Please prove me wrong...
Keep to Rayudu![]()
MSN Messenger: minardineil2000 at hotmail dot com | AAAS Chairman
CricketWeb Black | CricketWeb XI Captain
ClarkeWatch: We're Watching Rikki - Are You?
Up The Grecians - Exeter City FC
Completing the Square: My Cricket Web Blog
Why keep to Rayudu? The topic is about the Indian squad to the WC, isn't it? So, even if it goes into Balaji-land(I can only assure you that I won't be the one to take you there), it is still relevant.Originally posted by Neil Pickup
I can see this horribly heading off into Balaji-land. Please prove me wrong...
Keep to Rayudu![]()
It's just that I'm getting recurring visions of pointless re-statement of points
I fully agree with you about the quick bowlers anyway![]()
If we're discussing the Indian World Cup squad, surely we shouldn't talk about either of them?
marc71178 - President and founding member of AAAS - we don't only appreciate when he does well, but also when he's not quite so good!
Anyone want to join the Society?
Beware the evils of Kit-Kats - they're immoral apparently.
Originally posted by anilramavarma
Where are these "fast" bowlers? First of all, we don't have genuinely quick bowlers, they are all medium pacers. Secondly, other than the ones I mentioned, who else is there who merits national selection? You don't take a raw, inexperienced youngster to the WC and hope for a miracle(We have had only one miracle in the pace department in our cricket history and that was Kapil Dev). You should make do with what you have and this unfortunately is what we have.
By fast bowlers i wasn't suggesting genuine quicks, no need to get into that detail!
An inexperiance pacer or even a bastmen can prove to be costly thats why i would select Ajit Agarkar as the 4th pacer! But suppose Ajit or Nehra get injured and can't be slected then India will have no choice BUT to select a raw pacer.As i have pointed out earlier, both Zaheer and Srinath are injury prone, suppose they break down in WC then what? Do you suggest that Kumble should open the bowling then? Just avoiding selecting a pacer is not a wise move and will only disbalance the squad!
India has got no chance in the WC
Self Elected Vice-President of AAAS
(Ajit Agarkar Appreciation Society)
"Uniting Ajit Agarkar Fans World Wide"
Always Live Life With: Intensity, Integrity and Intelligence
Everyone has a chance...especially if Agarkar plays!
I think that's a bit harsh... no-one has got no chance, it's ODI cricket after all, but not much is more accurate![]()
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)