Cheteshwar Pujara: How good is he?

[hawkeye]

I think he is one of the best today, not far behind deVilliers and Amla and Clarke and Kohli and Chanderpaul. Played a bad shot to get out in 1st innings of first test but he hardly fails twice in a row.

In 17 Tests Pujara has scored six centuries, two of them doubles and one exceeding 150. His stratospheric average of 66.25, which places him only behind Bradman, is likely, many would argue, to fall with time -- Lawrence Rowe averaged over 70 after a dozen Tests and Jimmy Adams averaged 87 but it is worth noting that he has come out of his sternest test to date with a high passing grade. And though form will wax and wane, he seems destined to remain amongst the best of his generation.

Cheteshwar Pujara

 

[SpitfiresKent]

Too early to tell, he's not proven outside of India yet.

 

[asprin]

Yep. Very very early. Would be fair to judge after he has about 30-40 tests under his belt and at least 35% of them overseas.

 

[Cricketman]

He is better than Kohli in tests IMO

 

[zeustrojanstark]

Pujara is a quality cricketer in domestic cricket. He needs to prove a point in foreign pitches. Till now he looks just normal in foreign tracks. Virat is by far the best Test, ODI and T20 player in the world now along side AB Devilliers.

 

[SaiSrini]

He is better than Kohli in tests IMO

I agree with this view, but Kohli has more of the big knocks overseas, and Pujara has only a few (his century in Jo'burg and his 70 knock in Durban in SA, in the recent series). He needs a few big knocks in challenging conditions like how Dravid used to do for India. And I am pretty confident such knocks are around the corner, especially when we tour England and Australia this year. Pujara has the potential to do what Dravid did for us last time we toured England.

----------

Pujara is a quality cricketer in domestic cricket. He needs to prove a point in foreign pitches. Till now he looks just normal in foreign tracks. Virat is by far the best Test, ODI and T20 player in the world now along side AB Devilliers.

Virat has played more abroad than Pujara. Pujara has started off better than Virat when it comes to overseas conditions. Pujara has only played 7 innings so far overseas (this includes only innings where he batted). Here are his scores in all his overseas innings:

19, 10, 2, 25, 153, 70, 32

Compare this with Kohli's first 7 innings overseas (again only includes innings where he batted):

4, 15, 0, 27, 30, 11, 0

 

[playkid12]

There's a sense of calmness that Cheteshwar Pujara brings when he comes out to bat. He looks like he will never get out once he's set. This is unlike someone like Rohit Sharma, who is completely unpredictable no matter how many runs he's scored.

As far as Pujara vs Kohli is concerned, I personally enjoy watching Pujara more. He generally scores his first 50 runs very slowly, and then his next 50 come at an extremely brisk pace. I really enjoy seeing that, as it seems very calculated. It's as if he knows when he's set and gets confident as a result. Then, he just rides his confidence for runs.

Kohli, on the other hand, plays at a brisk rate throughout his innings. However, he takes more risks. He's also a bit too dramatic for my tastes. He comes off more immature. The recent emotions he's shown upon the umpire raising his finger have really irked me, especially because he's been out in all of those instances as evidenced by the replays. I know he's worked on this, as he was a lot worse when he first started, but he still has room for improvement in his temperament.

That being said, I like them both.

 

[vaibhavtewatia]

I dont understand why Pujara wont be effective in the subcontinent as he could have been outside? Its easier to bat in the subcontinent than it is to bat outside of it. Of course the value of doing well outside the subcontinent is greater, but the focus is on doing well anywhere you play. Pujara has all the ability to do well in the subcontinent. And he should score quickly. Only thing is, he should bat at the top of the order. He is not a big hitter, he is someone who scores his runs quickly by other means.

Just thought this would be the apt place for this conversation.

I'd make my points clearer here. In no way I'm doubting his technique, but he didn't get his chances abroad, not even here in India when he was selected for the ODI's against England. The kind of tracks here in sub-continent, as we all know, are ones which generate scores of upto 350. Making Pujara play at no. 4 would mean a lot of deliveries being used up, which would not have been a case if Raina or Yuvraj batted at a similar position. Especially while chasing the big 300's, it simply puts the team under enormous pressure when our bowlers do not look like conceding anything under that score. Lets be honest, Pujara is no Dhoni, who will first use up 40 balls to make 15, and then take it all the way with a S/R of over 100.

That said, Pujara deserves his own chances. But it was very important that he played limited overs outside the sub-continent before, and India did really miss the chance there. The only thing I would fear is something what Sri Lanka did to Dinesh Chandimal, making him bat at no. 6 or even no. 7, where he was actually of no use. So, Pujara's role should be very clear right from the start, otherwise dropping him just because thinking that he couldn't adapt to the format, would be ridiculous, simply because he couldn't be the aggressor they were looking for.

Maybe this presumption is because of the fact I haven't seen him in List A, and I would definitely want to be proven wrong

 

[playkid12]

Just thought this would be the apt place for this conversation.

I'd make my points clearer here. In no way I'm doubting his technique, but he didn't get his chances abroad, not even here in India when he was selected for the ODI's against England. The kind of tracks here in sub-continent, as we all know, are ones which generate scores of upto 350. Making Pujara play at no. 4 would mean a lot of deliveries being used up, which would not have been a case if Raina or Yuvraj batted at a similar position. Especially while chasing the big 300's, it simply puts the team under enormous pressure when our bowlers do not look like conceding anything under that score. Lets be honest, Pujara is no Dhoni, who will first use up 40 balls to make 15, and then take it all the way with a S/R of over 100.

That said, Pujara deserves his own chances. But it was very important that he played limited overs outside the sub-continent before, and India did really miss the chance there. The only thing I would fear is something what Sri Lanka did to Dinesh Chandimal, making him bat at no. 6 or even no. 7, where he was actually of no use. So, Pujara's role should be very clear right from the start, otherwise dropping him just because thinking that he couldn't adapt to the format, would be ridiculous, simply because he couldn't be the aggressor they were looking for.

Maybe this presumption is because of the fact I haven't seen him in List A, and I would definitely want to be proven wrong

We have enough hitters in the game. What we lack are anchors that can guide an innings like Dravid did. Pujaras best use would be either as an opener or #4. If he can only play at around an 80 strike rate, that's good enough, as long as he anchors the innings. The whole problem has been that our entire side just topples over and then Dhoni is left to rebuild and hit at the end. Dhoni is a far better finisher than a rebuilder. And it's getting very tiring to see him stuck with the tail around the 40th over. Right now, it's as if Kohli gets out, the next few batsmen just get bowled over and then it's Dhoni who scores a 40-50 before getting out too.

Another option is to give Dravid's role to Pujara, and either bring Kohli to open or drop him down to 4, which was his position when Dravid was there.