Sreesanth: where is he?

[Precambrian]

He certainly deserved the recall on the basis of his FC season, but people are more worried about his lack of pace and the chance that he'll be cannon fodder at this level. Gagandeep Singh was ridiculously prolific as a FC bowler, never got a call-up and everyone understood why after seeing him bowl in a few matches (in the IPL I think). I'm hoping Balaji doesn't disappoint but I would've taken Praveen Kumar over either him or Kulkarni.

You are saying as if Balaji has been terrible so far in test cricket. Far from reality that is.

 

[adharcric]

You are saying as if Balaji has been terrible so far in test cricket. Far from reality that is.

He was merely decent in his first stint and now he's lost a yard of pace. That's all there is to it. If he bowls as well as he did for India pre-injury, that'll be a good start (though not good enough long-term).

 

[Jono]

He certainly deserved the recall on the basis of his FC season, but people are more worried about his lack of pace and the chance that he'll be cannon fodder at this level. Gagandeep Singh was ridiculously prolific as a FC bowler, never got a call-up and everyone understood why after seeing him bowl in a few matches (in the IPL I think). I'm hoping Balaji doesn't disappoint but I would've taken Praveen Kumar over either him or Kulkarni.

Yep, agree with everything you've said there.

Its a tough one. Sometimes people get criticised for choosing players merely on how good they look, and not whether they actually get it done at FC level. The selectors haven't done that here, and rewarded him for his great FC season.

I wish I could see some highlights of how Balaji went in the last FC season. Surely the tracks weren't friendly considering some of the scores posted in the Ranji Trophy. If that's the case, how the hell did he dominate?

 

[adharcric]

Guess we'll find out soon enough - going by Cricinfo reports, Balaji may be slightly ahead of Munaf in the race for the third seamer's spot.

 

[Precambrian]

He was merely decent in his first stint and now he's lost a yard of pace. That's all there is to it. If he bowls as well as he did for India pre-injury, that'll be a good start (though not good enough long-term).

His role then and now are vastly different. He was No.2 bowler then, and considering his relative inexperience, he did a good job, even on dead pitches. Now his role is that of a third seamer, which takes a lot of pressure of him, and could be a good foil to Ishant's pace and bounce and Zaheer's trickery.

 

[Precambrian]

Yep, agree with everything you've said there.

Its a tough one. Sometimes people get criticised for choosing players merely on how good they look, and not whether they actually get it done at FC level. The selectors haven't done that here, and rewarded him for his great FC season.

I wish I could see some highlights of how Balaji went in the last FC season. Surely the tracks weren't friendly considering some of the scores posted in the Ranji Trophy. If that's the case, how the hell did he dominate?

IPL is hardly the indicator to assess the wicket taking capabilities of such pace bowlers. It could have been just an aberration. I would certainly put years of brilliant FC performances ahead of 14 days performance in mickey cricket.

 

[Pratters]

IPL is hardly the indicator to assess the wicket taking capabilities of such pace bowlers. It could have been just an aberration. I would certainly put years of brilliant FC performances ahead of 14 days performance in mickey cricket.

IPL showed that Gagandeep Singh didn't have the pace to sustain his wicket taking in domestic cricket at the test level.

 

[silentstriker]

It didn't show a damn thing like that.

 

[Precambrian]

IPL showed that Gagandeep Singh didn't have the pace to sustain his wicket taking in domestic cricket at the test level.

How? FFS it is a 20-20 game which showed nothing.

 

[Pratters]

It didn't show a damn thing like that.

So what speciality did you find in Gagandeep Singh from whatever you saw off him? He had the pace to scare international batsmen or was it the variation which I some how blindly missed. Gagandeep Singh is not international class. Any one could see it seeing him in the IPL.

 

[Pratters]

Precambrian - 20-20 games are not nothing cricket. You can judge certain aspects of a player's game via it like how a player has variation in his bowling or say special pace in his bowling.

 

[Precambrian]

So what speciality did you find in Gagandeep Singh from whatever you saw off him? He had the pace to scare international batsmen or was it the variation which I some how blindly missed. Gagandeep Singh is not international class. Any one could see it seeing him in the IPL.

Anyone? Disagree. We are all armchair analysts at best, and we see only what we want to. Such a record in FC does not grow on trees. GG Singh is definitely better than what he showed in the IPL. It could have been that he was going through an off season blues, or was having some injury or a thousand reasons.

It is akin to watching B Lee in the Indian test matches last year and concluding he's not a test class player. The available data in favor of GG Singh's credentials far outweigh those against him.

 

[Precambrian]

Precambrian - 20-20 games are not nothing cricket. You can judge certain aspects of a player's game via it like how a player has variation in his bowling or say special pace in his bowling.

By that logic, Slowhail Tanveer should have been the best test bowler for Pakistan last year. Was he? Hardly.

IPL is just bull crap when it comes to identifying test talent. ODIs maybe, tests? No.

 

[Pratters]

By that logic, Slowhail Tanveer should have been the best test bowler for Pakistan last year. Was he? Hardly.

IPL is just bull crap when it comes to identifying test talent. ODIs maybe, tests? No.

I am not saying 20-20 cricket equates to test cricket. Why make such a stupid assumption. We can of course see certain aspects of a player seeing him in even a club game, let alone a 20-20 game.

 

[Pratters]

Anyone? Disagree. We are all armchair analysts at best, and we see only what we want to. Such a record in FC does not grow on trees. GG Singh is definitely better than what he showed in the IPL. It could have been that he was going through an off season blues, or was having some injury or a thousand reasons. .

or maybe he was just what he showed he was - average. FC figures, believe it or not, can lie. If FC cricket was the be all and end all, Graeme Hick would be god.

It is akin to watching B Lee in the Indian test matches last year and concluding he's not a test class player. The available data in favor of GG Singh's credentials far outweigh those against him

I agree that the data is small. It does show aspects though.

 

[Precambrian]

I am not saying 20-20 cricket equates to test cricket. Why make such a stupid assumption. We can of course see certain aspects of a player seeing him in even a club game, let alone a 20-20 game.

Club games are of more duration that IPL generally, so yes. A lot of factors might have contributed to GG Singh's poor showing in the IPL, as I said, poor form, injury or the propensity to bowl him as third or fourth choice, usually at the time batsmen are going wild tonko, all this could have shown him a lesser light than he actually deserved.

 

[Nate]

I wish I could see some highlights of how Balaji went in the last FC season. Surely the tracks weren't friendly considering some of the scores posted in the Ranji Trophy. If that's the case, how the hell did he dominate?

From what I've heard and watched, he's just hitting the seam on a length on off-stump. Also sounds like he's been getting some reverse with the older ball. Which sounds like good bowling to me.

IPL showed that Gagandeep Singh didn't have the pace to sustain his wicket taking in domestic cricket at the test level.

 

[Pratters]

Club games are of more duration that IPL generally, so yes. A lot of factors might have contributed to GG Singh's poor showing in the IPL, as I said, poor form, injury or the propensity to bowl him as third or fourth choice, usually at the time batsmen are going wild tonko, all this could have shown him a lesser light than he actually deserved.

He was not going through a bad domestic game form so his form was certainly not bad. What information do you have that Gagandeep Singh was injured or not match fit and thus his poor showing. Heh.

 

[Precambrian]

or maybe he was just what he showed he was - average. FC figures, believe it or not, can lie. If FC cricket was the be all and end all, Graeme Hick would be god.



I agree that the data is small. It does show aspects though.

How can just 14 days of 3 hr cricket, and with just 4 overs at disposal can conclusively term a bowler as average?

If that is the case, a person watching Ishant or Kumble for the first time in the IPL would also be led to believe both are not worthy of test kits. Right?

 

[Precambrian]

He was not going through a bad domestic game form so his form was certainly not bad. What information do you have that Gagandeep Singh was injured or not match fit and thus his poor showing. Heh.

About as much proof as you have to say he lacks the goods to succeed at the top level. Just visible evidence which your brain construes as him being crap, and mine construes as him having some injury.