Howz dinesh karthik?

[Dasa]

Dropped Vaughan on 37.

It was 1 off 12 balls, when he batted, just one over. Doesn't suggest he middled too much...

He did middle the ball well, but mostly defensively or straight to fielders. Looking at that very short innings, he doesn't seem like a slogger type, but could do well further up the order. Still, no need for him up there.

 

[Arjun]

So no need for Laxman or Dravid, because the top 6 has Pathan and Karthik now (!)

The top 6 should have Laxman, Tendulkar and Dravid, to bat through the innings. Your'e fielding a weak batting side without any of them. Karthik is a good batsman- he has an average of 40-odd, which means he can bat as well as any of the batsmen in this team, given current form. Pathan is just supposed to hit the ball and take quick singles. He does not have to build an innings- just attack. Same for Karthik. Their other skill gives them a licence to do so.

Last itme I looked, he hadn't played Tests, and why are List A figure the most misleading ones?

Make that FC figures. As Bishen Singh Bedi said, one-day cricket is a one-night stand. Long matches are the true test of skill. If he can build an innings the way he has so far, he can bat. Pathan just has potential, but he was never given too many chances, but Karthik was, and he's made very good use of them.

 

[Richard]

No point looking at the List-A limited overs stats. They're the most misleading figures one can get. Anyone who can bat well in Tests can bat well anywhere.

And Michael Vaughan and Michael Slater sure demonstrate that, don't they?!!
Look, Arjun, the two game-forms are different. If you can perform in Tests but not ODIs that makes you a superior player to the Bevan, Knight, Hick, Fairbrother type in almost everyone's eyes.
But it doesn't change the fact that you can do one game and not the other. There have been countless examples to show such.

 

[Richard]

Fair comments rich.. but i think they just trying to work out a wicket keeper to serve as backup for dravid.. if dravid felt the heat of keeping a lot , or found it trouble to cope both keeping and batting.. i still feel think it might be better than seeing Patel as a backup keeper..

Certainly I wouldn't want Dravid 'keeping all the time, but I would if it was a match where you wanted your best chance of winning.
Personally I'd still simply prefer Nayan Mongia as Dravid's back-up!

 

[lord_of_darkness]

Personally I'd still simply prefer Nayan Mongia as Dravid's back-up!

Anyday is what id say.. Mongia to Dravids backup anyday before Karthik then Patel.. but with all the politics in there etc.. im pretty sure i wont see mongia's name on the Indian Scorecard again.. also the fact that i heard that there was some conflict between him and the players i think recalling and the fact that he is 'old' now, and they would rather have young players like karthik and patel come out through the system for their future..

 

[Arjun]

Nayan Mongia as Dravid's back-up!

Ideally, he should be the main wicketkeeper!

 

[lord_of_darkness]

Ideally, he should be the main wicketkeeper!

More than true sorry..

 

[marc71178]

The top 6 should have Laxman, Tendulkar and Dravid, to bat through the innings. Your'e fielding a weak batting side without any of them.

So why do you advocate first Pathan and then Karthik to join the top 6 then?

 

[masterblaster]

Pathan in the top 6 = catastrophe

 

[Arjun]

So why do you advocate first Pathan and then Karthik to join the top 6 then?

Not in Tests! In ODI's, I would consider Pathan to play in the top 6 (top 7, to be more precise), because he can hit the ball hard- that's what he should do. He has very good batting technique and temperament. He just needs a lot of practice. Playing him as a seventh batsman is any day better than playing a seventh specialist batsman. About opening the batting, he just has to keep up a high run rate in the first fifteen overs, rather than bat like a batsman. It's a lot better than promoting pinch-blockers like Agarkar and Patel.

Most teams look for quality all-rounders when they don't have them and this Indian team is afraid to step ahead. Is it a wonder why they lose so badly and so frequently to teams with genuine all-rounders? Is there any harm in experimenting? These are only ODI's, just one-night affairs. If England can make a genuine all-rounder out of Flintoff, why can't the Indians make one out of Pathan? It's worth the effort!

Karthik is a genuine batsman.

 

[marc71178]

Not in Tests! In ODI's, I would consider Pathan to play in the top 6 (top 7, to be more precise), because he can hit the ball hard- that's what he should do. He has very good batting technique and temperament. He just needs a lot of practice.

I was talking about ODI's as well - you want those 2 in the top 6, but why, when India have some very good players there already, and neither of them have done anything in List A to justify it?

And you certainly can't put him up there when he still needs a lot of practice!!!

If England can make a genuine all-rounder out of Flintoff, why can't the Indians make one out of Pathan? It's worth the effort!

But Flintoff has already shown ability with the bat at lower levels. To compare Pathan to him is as crazy as some of the previous players young bowlers have been compared to (Akram, McGrath...)

 

[Richard]

Apparently Pathan was a genuine all-rounder, every bit as good a batsman as bowler, until only 3 or 4 years ago.
That's what I heard anyway.

 

[marc71178]

So up to the age of 15 then.

Which is clearly enough to suggest he's a top 6 batsman and frontline bowler!

For the record his average in all Cricket is about 16 (helped by a third of his innings being not out)

Quite how that qualifies him to replace someone like Laxman or Kaif in the top 6, I don't know.

 

[Richard]

Oh, I wouldn't dream of saying such, but nonetheless Pathan looks pretty good whenever I see him bat and I'm surprised his FC and LA averages aren't a bit higher.

 

[Arjun]

But Flintoff has already shown ability with the bat at lower levels. To compare Pathan to him is as crazy as some of the previous players young bowlers have been compared to (Akram, McGrath...)

When Flintoff made his debut, he was a laughing stock of an all-rounder, far worse than Agarkar. But as many as 5 years of practice made him the all-rounder that he is now.

But Flintoff has already shown ability with the bat at lower levels. To compare Pathan to him is as crazy as some of the previous players young bowlers have been compared to (Akram, McGrath...)

Compare Pathan today with Flintoff 5 years ago. Not much difference, except for the chances that he got. As said earlier, he was an oversizsed, overweight joke, while Pathan has done a decent job as a strike bowler and lower-order batsman. Mere tailenders don't attack Murali and Shoaib the way he did. He's definitely a lot better than what most fans think, as a batsman. Besides, Flintoff is not an all-time great. Definitely not in 2000.

Pathan's junior coach, Sandeep Patil, knows this best. He knows that he has the technique and temperament of a top-6 batsman. Given what we have seen of him so far, he may be right. He should not lose it at a yong age. Coach knows best.

Quite how that qualifies him to replace someone like Laxman or Kaif in the top 6, I don't know.

Both Pathan and Karthik can definitely replace Sehwag. Come to think of it, even Nehra can. Sehwag is playing rubbish and doesn't deserve a place in the ICC ODI team, on present form.

 

[Arjun]

I was talking about ODI's as well - you want those 2 in the top 6, but why, when India have some very good players there already, and neither of them have done anything in List A to justify it?

Do you think Sehwag, Yuvraj, Kaif, Badani and Rohan Gavaskar are very good players? The Indian team would have not only posted more 270+ totals, but also won more matches, if they were that good.

And you certainly can't put him up there when he still needs a lot of practice!!!

And how will either Pathan or Karthik get any practice if they keep batting below some batsmen terribly out of form or below mere tailenders? It is because they lack practice that they have to be promoted regularly. Even if they do little, the specialist batsmen (who are useless without the bat) can make up- there are 6 of them. They have other skills to fall back on. What is one-day cricket? Just a one-night stand! Which is why this idea is worth putting into practice.

 

[tooextracool]

When Flintoff made his debut, he was a laughing stock of an all-rounder, far worse than Agarkar. But as many as 5 years of practice made him the all-rounder that he is now.

Compare Pathan today with Flintoff 5 years ago. Not much difference, except for the chances that he got. As said earlier, he was an oversizsed, overweight joke, while Pathan has done a decent job as a strike bowler and lower-order batsman. Mere tailenders don't attack Murali and Shoaib the way he did. He's definitely a lot better than what most fans think, as a batsman. Besides, Flintoff is not an all-time great. Definitely not in 2000.

except that pathans average of 17 odd in domestic cricket is about half off what flintoff's domestic average was?

 

[tooextracool]

Do you think Sehwag, Yuvraj, Kaif, Badani and Rohan Gavaskar are very good players? The Indian team would have not only posted more 270+ totals, but also won more matches, if they were that good.

both kaif and gavaskar havent done anything to suggest the contrary either.
and you dont win games with just batting, especially when the bowling concedes 300+ in the first inning

 

[Sanz]

Do you think Sehwag, Yuvraj, Kaif, Badani and Rohan Gavaskar are very good players? The Indian team would have not only posted more 270+ totals, but also won more matches, if they were that good.

They are definately best of the lot available for selection. India has been losign matches because of its bowling. Tell me when was the last time our bowlers defended a score below 200 ?

 

[Sanz]

Arjun, It is ridiculous to compare Pathan with Flintoff. Please make a sane comparison. Forget flinthoff, If Pathan can bat like Giles or Vettori then I would consider that as a huge improvement. Till then he is just a bowler who can swing his bat at times.