Born in Roehampton tbh.Other SA players playing who don't play in SA domestic comps anymore or who never have... Dawid Malan (Middlesex)
I know it was only ODIs and not Tests, but I don't think Manpreet Gony had any domestic record to speak of when he was picked for India.What examples are there?
If you name players that did well in the IPL, like Jadeja or Ashwin, and then got put into the international side, that was on the basis of their domestic records (first class and list A). And both of them haven't been in the test side anyway, only the ODI.
There is not one player you can say who was put into the test team on the basis of IPL. Raina was chosen because of his ODI performances (which isn't a good thing, but is not the IPL's fault).
It's a myth that the IPL is being used as the criteria for selecting players.
Yeah but the County Championship includes both divisions. If you were to say the English first division is the strongest first class competition, then you might be right.That's like saying the English Premier League isn't the best football league in the world because it has the Championship underneath and division 1 under that, that makes no difference to the quality of the top division.
His form in the IPL did play a part, but he was the leading wicket taker in the Deodhar Trophy prior to his ODI selection.I know it was only ODIs and not Tests, but I don't think Manpreet Gony had any domestic record to speak of when he was picked for India.
There are quality swing bowlers playing in the Ranji trophy, but most don't bowl very quick and there aren't any fast and bouncy pitches. That's why Indian batsmen still get shocked by pace and bounce, but are ok otherwise.A question: Indian seamers, and bowling in general, seems to get big knocks against it for not being of a high standard. The domestic setup isn't lauded for being particularly good either. So how do they produce fine batsmen so regularly? You'd think they'd be shocked by the jump in standard at Test level.
I think most of the big knocks against the Indian domestic set up are made by people who do not follow it first hand. Even among the Indian 'fans', the percentage that follows domestic cricket is miniscule. Indian seamers are routinely slammed by those who do not realize that of the top ten bowlers (wickets taken) in the Ranji, five are seam bowlers. That there are only two spinners in the top twelve wicket takers in the Duleep. That full strength England Lions teams have not fared well against Indian domestic teams, when they participated in the Duleep Trophy.A question: Indian seamers, and bowling in general, seems to get big knocks against it for not being of a high standard. The domestic setup isn't lauded for being particularly good either. So how do they produce fine batsmen so regularly? You'd think they'd be shocked by the jump in standard at Test level.
This is so true. Even I, who am a pretty diehard cricket fan and have watched international cricket for nearly 2 decades, have only started following the domestic performances of some Indian players after I joined this site. Obviously I was aware of the domestic competitions and teams before, but never followed it at all.I think most of the big knocks against the Indian domestic set up are made by people who do not follow it first hand. Even among the Indian 'fans', the percentage that follows domestic cricket is miniscule. Indian seamers are routinely slammed by those who do not realize that of the top ten bowlers (wickets taken) in the Ranji, five are seam bowlers. That there are only two spinners in the top twelve wicket takers in the Duleep. That full strength England Lions teams have not fared well against Indian domestic teams, when they participated in the Duleep Trophy.
The only unbiased measure of how strong a FC set up is, is how good the national test side is. Anything else is merely unsubstantiated opinion, usually coloured by patriotic sentiments. I find it laughable that so many posters here think that the Aussie FC set up is currently the strongest; if it were, they would have had a decent test team; they wouldn't have so much trouble in cobbling up a competent eleven. No country which has even a half-decent first class set up would struggle as much as Australia has done to discover players of international class.
India has a massive advantage by sheer largeness of numbers; which is why I rate the South African FC structure as the strongest in the world.
ErrrrI think most of the big knocks against the Indian domestic set up are made by people who do not follow it first hand. Even among the Indian 'fans', the percentage that follows domestic cricket is miniscule. Indian seamers are routinely slammed by those who do not realize that of the top ten bowlers (wickets taken) in the Ranji, five are seam bowlers. That there are only two spinners in the top twelve wicket takers in the Duleep. That full strength England Lions teams have not fared well against Indian domestic teams, when they participated in the Duleep Trophy.
The only unbiased measure of how strong a FC set up is, is how good the national test side is. Anything else is merely unsubstantiated opinion, usually coloured by patriotic sentiments. I find it laughable that so many posters here think that the Aussie FC set up is currently the strongest; if it were, they would have had a decent test team; they wouldn't have so much trouble in cobbling up a competent eleven. No country which has even a half-decent first class set up would struggle as much as Australia has done to discover players of international class.
India has a massive advantage by sheer largeness of numbers; which is why I rate the South African FC structure as the strongest in the world.
Nah.The only unbiased measure of how strong a FC set up is, is how good the national test side is.
Ok.Let me add the obvious qualification; in comparison to the times when Australia actually had the strongest domestic FC setup. When they always had eleven players of international class, with more waiting in the sides.Errrr
Here's the kicker... it isn't. No one will say the spinning stocks are fantastic here but what got up people nerves so much is that Doherty was picked as a specialist spinner (Smith was picked as a #6 which is also pretty bad IMO) when there was a perfectly competent Test spinner in Hauritz waiting in the wings, and a spinner with an excellent FC record also in the works (O'Keefe)If the best that the FC set up can throw up is twenty eight year old Doherty, or a clearly not yet test-ready Smith, it just can't be a strong one.
Yes you can. Though it starts showing up when some of these 11 exceptional players hang up their boots and replacements of a reasonable quality are not forthcoming even after some four or five years.Or you could have a case where there are 11 exceptional players in a country that are all in the Test side and the others are mediocre
Agree with that. Hauritz now, and Krejza earlier.Here's the kicker... it isn't. No one will say the spinning stocks are fantastic here but what got up people nerves so much is that Doherty was picked as a specialist spinner (Smith was picked as a #6 which is also pretty bad IMO) when there was a perfectly competent Test spinner in Hauritz waiting in the wings, and a spinner with an excellent FC record also in the works (O'Keefe)
True. Although if you are suggesting that is the case with Australia, you are wrong because there have been many "reasonable quality" replacements. If you are judging their quality by the length of time they have kept their spots, it could also relate to the strength of the domestic competition where they need to really secure their spots early.Yes you can. Though it starts showing up when some of these 11 exceptional players hang up their boots and replacements of a reasonable quality are not forthcoming even after some four or five years.