Pratters
Cricket, Lovely Cricket
It looks like John Abraham.SJS said:
BTW Arjun, who is that in your avataar ?
Dont laugh if everyone is supposed to know the answer. Give allowance for the fact that I am from Jurassic Park
It looks like John Abraham.SJS said:
BTW Arjun, who is that in your avataar ?
Dont laugh if everyone is supposed to know the answer. Give allowance for the fact that I am from Jurassic Park
You are worse than me.Pratyush said:It looks like John Abraham.
SJS said:You are worse than me.
It isnt him.
its hugh jackman from the x-men films lolPratyush said:
I would've played Yuvraj simply to give him one final chance to secure a place in the side, otherwise he should be axed for Kaif. Well, they did that, Yuvraj failed, and they dropped Rao instead ... why? RP Singh doesn't have much pace, and he's no Chaminda Vaas, so he's nothing special yet. He needs plenty of help from Chappell and co.Arjun said:the one they should have rested (or better yet, dropped) is Yuvraj, or Venugopal, or maybe Raina. RP Singh is a decent bowler, but doesn't have the swing that Irfan can get, while his batting is far behind.
Indeed, Kartik can be rubbish at times. He is way too inconsistent, and Ramesh Powar is clearly a better option, with the bat, in the field and even with the ball (he's been getting loads of wickets in the domestic matches).Arjun said:As for that other spinner, he's rubbish. Just plain rubbish. There's that offie who plays for Mumbai and a leggie for Baroda, both of whom are also very hard hitters of the ball. Why do the selectors still have this fixation with just that one left-arm spinner?
I actually think Agarkar's been pretty good in this series, but India could certainly do with a better strike bowler. To partner Pathan, they should try VRV, Zaheer or Sreesanth. As the 3rd seamer, they should try out Agarkar, Nehra, RP Singh, etc. I'm not too sure which of these guys would do better as a new-ball bowler.Arjun said:It's time they get a new strike bowler in ODI's. Agarkar is way too unreliable to have as a striker. At key moments, he still gets pounced for that odd boundary. His bouncer is a weakness that's easy to hit, even for small men. He's underpowered, yet inconsistent, and that's a combination the team can ill-afford for a strike bowler. Irfan Pathan should take over, or they can recall Zaheer Khan, and Vikram Singh (aka VRV) should open the bowling in the forthcoming ODIs.
Even if Yadav adds a few yards of pace to his bowling, he won't open the bowling if he's bowling in the high 120s instead of the low 120s. He needs to bowl well with the old-ball if he wants a place in the team.Arjun said:Talking of Yadav, the coach and his support staff should work hard on adding a few yards of pace to his bowling, so that he can go back to opening the bowlign- he struggles when the ball gets old.
Thats the understatement of the year. He was brilliant from the word go.Arjun said:.... Gambhir is not too bad, ....
Honestly, both should have been dropped. Rao doesn't look a good fit in an ODI side, while Yuvraj has been dreadful so far. Difficult to comment.I would've played Yuvraj simply to give him one final chance to secure a place in the side, otherwise he should be axed for Kaif. Well, they did that, Yuvraj failed, and they dropped Rao instead ... why?
Double standards. JP Yadav and RP Singh bowl at more or less the same pace, but though JP can bat a lot better, he's the one dropped, while RP Singh and Agarkar still hang on! Still, the coach can work on this aspect as well, can't he? Look at how Ashish Nehra and Balaji have bowled with the old ball. Anyway, not everyone can bowl at serious pace, so Yadav's lack of pace should be no issue, even if he opens the bowling. His exclusion is a shocker and the Indian team will feel the pinch in forthcoming matches. Although VR Singh was a good choice in this side, he's replaced the wrong man- there's no way Electric La La Land that he can score as many runs as JP Yadav, even on a good day- in batting, there's a big gap between the two.RP Singh doesn't have much pace, and he's no Chaminda Vaas, so he's nothing special yet. He needs plenty of help from Chappell and co.
Even if Yadav adds a few yards of pace to his bowling, he won't open the bowling if he's bowling in the high 120s instead of the low 120s. He needs to bowl well with the old-ball if he wants a place in the team
Agarkar's been lucky. He's bowled a lot of rubbish, but the Lankan batsmen were in such dreadful form, there was always one loose shot played against him. The most obvious strike partner for Irfan should be VR Singh, and Sreesanth as reserve. Can't say much on Sreesanth as a change bowler, but he seems a good choice too. RP Singh may come on first-change.I actually think Agarkar's been pretty good in this series, but India could certainly do with a better strike bowler. To partner Pathan, they should try VRV, Zaheer or Sreesanth. As the 3rd seamer, they should try out Agarkar, Nehra, RP Singh, etc. I'm not too sure which of these guys would do better as a new-ball bowler.
Making a century in a match does not show any thing apart from possibility of holding a place in the side on a regular basis. Agreed it is tough to score centuries in one dayers but it is too premature to think any thing about Gambhir.SJS said:Just to put it in perspective.
Sehwag has 1 century in last 55 innings as opener !
Ganguly, scored hundreds against minnows Kenya and Namibia in the 2003 world cup. Other than that he hasnt scored a century since September 2002 !
Sachin has one century each in 2004 and 2005.
Yuvraj, for some strange reason, is a part of the playing XI these days. Why not Gambhir?Pratyush said:Making a century in a match does not show any thing apart from possibility of holding a place in the side on a regular basis. Agreed it is tough to score centuries in one dayers but it is too premature to think any thing about Gambhir.
The last time I checked Gambhir was part of the XI and scored a century!Arjun said:Yuvraj, for some strange reason, is a part of the playing XI these days. Why not Gambhir?
Well that was only because SRT was rested, on the other hand Yuvraj is seen as an automatic choice for ODIs despite performing poorly since last year or so. No marks for guessing who is going to sit out when SRT comes back.Pratyush said:The last time I checked Gambhir was part of the XI and scored a century!
Not Really, One has watched Gambhir enough in Test cricket to know that this guy has all it takes to be successful in ODIs and I dont think it's premature to say that about Gambhir.Pratyush said:Making a century in a match does not show any thing apart from possibility of holding a place in the side on a regular basis. Agreed it is tough to score centuries in one dayers but it is too premature to think any thing about Gambhir.
Consistency. Which is why I am not going gaga over one good performance.Sanz said:What else one needs from an ODI player ?
And how is he going to prove his consistency if he isn't even played consistently in ODIs ? No one is going gaga over Gambhir's performance, but a look at his batting is enough to say that he has the skills to succeed in ODIs.Pratyush said:Consistency. Which is why I am not going gaga over one good performance.
Ask the selectors that. I am not going to jump around based on one century.Sanz said:And how is he going to prove his consistency if he isn't even played consistently in ODIs ?
Erm, you are.No one is going gaga over Gambhir's performance, but a look at his batting is enough to say that he has the skills to succeed in ODIs.
That's extremely rude and in a way it suggests that you are not able to argue that point .This is a discussion board and everyone has a right to say his opinion and that's what I did. It doesn't mean that I am jumping around based on one century. If you have not noticed, I have maintained this view about Gambhir for a while and well before he made his century :-Pratyush said:Ask the selectors that. I am not going to jump around based on one century.
No I am not. I am just saying that Gambhir has the technique to succeed in ODIs and I have said it before he made his century. You are the one who is saying that he has to do it consistently, well to be able to that consistently he should be there in the team, no ?Erm, you are.