India Team Discussion

[PokerAce]

But your team is losing badly mate and i.e consistently both in one days and test matches. A performance is just not scoring runs, It is how you have scored it and what it contributed in winning matches for your team.

Nonsense ... scoring runs is key to winning. If only one guy scores, and bowlers don't pick wickets, the team loses. The problem is that then people like you blame the guy who scored, as if its his fault for the defeat. Would it be somehow better if he also didn't score, and failed like everyone else.

Blame the others who didn't score, not the one guy who did. Cricket is not an individual score. A guy can play a great innings and then everyone else fails he will still end up on the losing side. Then people like you turn up and say, that guy who was the only one to score runs, he should have scored runs better.

Perfect example is Andy Flower on the 2000 tour to India, in the two tests the guy was just brilliant. Scored 183* in one test and 200 in the other. Zimbabwe still lost. So will you tell Andy Flower, that he is a fking twat who should have batted better or will you salute that performance.

You, based on what you have to say about Kohli, will clearly do the former, which is just a senseless thing to say about a guy who had a great tour.
What a senseless argument.

When you are the only guy playing well in a rubbish team, your lone performance actually goes up a level, not goes down, because the rest of your team didnt play. When you are the only one scoring runs again an attack everyone else is failing against, it to the batsman's credit, not something to hold against him.

 

[LiveLoveABD]

Kohli though did go onto have a sensational tour of Aus, where he got 4 100s in the 4 tests. He was also facing the full line up of Aus bowlers in Starc, Johnson and even Harris, and Hazlewood. He also has a 100 and a 90 in his only two tests in SA. The guy can definitely bat. He did have a torrid run in England though. I am sure he would want to put that right the next tour.

Kohli however does have his greater feats in the ODIs, especially when India are chasing. I still remember when India had to chase 320 in Aus to get to the tri series final, in 40 overs cos of the bonus point thing, and yeah the guy did it. One of the best ever ODI chases ever.

There's no question Virat can bat, but can he adapt?

I mentioned this in a topic that got blocked, and I will keep harping about it-

You need to bat 'in a very different way' in England. When you get these seaming, swinging conditions you just have to guts it out. I think, and there's no question we're watching a lot of modern day great batsman but the question really is that can these modern day batsmen ADAPT.

If I can just elaborate-

Virat Kohli, like Steve Smith has hard hands. He itches to feel bat on ball. Unfortunately, you can't make a pretty hundred in England. Unlike Australia, where you could be hit on the head by a quick and counter attacking may work, in England you simply have to leave, leave and leave till the bowlers tire or the conditions begin to come to you. (Overheads)

I want to see if Kohli has the patience and wear with all to absorb that sort of pressure for a couple of sessions, may be even a day.

On the second subject, I saw a LOT of test cricket and still do. For instance, a lot of people will be shocked around here when I say that in my opinion, Kane Williamson is the best 'young' (below 30) test batsman in the world. I believe that kid can look ugly but he churns out runs. I also feel that in a test match, from the yesteryear, I'd pick RSD in a test over SRT. Don't get me wrong, they both are legends and SRT the better overall batsman, but on a cold soggy day with fresh fast bowlers on a green top, I will pick RSD.

On the flipside, Aussies tend to lean towards Ponting but I've not seen a batsman adapt like Matthew Hayden could. He is the guy I would pick to bat on a dust bowl rank turner against quality spin.

Hon mention to KP from England as well.

In the history of the game, you will find a lot of people who were good enough, but lacked adaptability. It comes with age I guess.

Lara? He could do anything. Provided his brain was in gear.

 

[PokerAce]

There's no question Virat can bat, but can he adapt?

I mentioned this in a topic that got blocked, and I will keep harping about it-

You need to bat 'in a very different way' in England. When you get these seaming, swinging conditions you just have to guts it out. I think, and there's no question we're watching a lot of modern day great batsman but the question really is that can these modern day batsmen ADAPT.

If I can just elaborate-

Virat Kohli, like Steve Smith has hard hands. He itches to feel bat on ball. Unfortunately, you can't make a pretty hundred in England. Unlike Australia, where you could be hit on the head by a quick and counter attacking may work, in England you simply have to leave, leave and leave till the bowlers tire or the conditions begin to come to you. (Overheads)

I want to see if Kohli has the patience and wear with all to absorb that sort of pressure for a couple of sessions, may be even a day.

On the second subject, I saw a LOT of test cricket and still do. For instance, a lot of people will be shocked around here when I say that in my opinion, Kane Williamson is the best 'young' (below 30) test batsman in the world. I believe that kid can look ugly but he churns out runs. I also feel that in a test match, from the yesteryear, I'd pick RSD in a test over SRT. Don't get me wrong, they both are legends and SRT the better overall batsman, but on a cold soggy day with fresh fast bowlers on a green top, I will pick RSD.

On the flipside, Aussies tend to lean towards Ponting but I've not seen a batsman adapt like Matthew Hayden could. He is the guy I would pick to bat on a dust bowl rank turner against quality spin.

Hon mention to KP from England as well.

Okay when you are a batsman from India (or sub-continent), you have to adapt everytime you play overseas. You have to adapt to swing, adapt to faster pace, adapt to seam movement, adapt to bounce, and so on.

Kohli has so far done well he has a 100 and 90 as I said in SA, he record in Australia is phenomenal. Yes he didn't adapt to English conditions, but he did adapt to the conditions everywhere else he played.

So I will be more than happy to play give him the benefit of the doubt for England, and I am sure next time he plays there he will look to do better.

 

[LiveLoveABD]

I agree with you. I just think he's a bit impatient at the moment in tests. It will come with time/age.

 

[PokerAce]

In England he needs to learn to leave the ball outside off more. Also even the best struggle in Eng. Look at Smith, the best batsman in the world, who did get a 200, but has looked distinctly average apart from that.

 

[shravi]

But your team is losing badly mate and i.e consistently both in one days and test matches. A performance is just not scoring runs, It is how you have scored it and what it contributed in winning matches for your team.

since he has become captain, india hasn't done too badly apart from the series loss in bangladesh. they reached the semi-finals of the world cup, which isn't too shabby... more importantly though, he is not even the captain in odis, so your comment is just lazy and poorly-informed. he has performed well as a batsman in tests as captain. he cannot score in every innings, even though he has come close!

 

[Prithvi]

But your team is losing badly mate and i.e consistently both in one days and test matches. A performance is just not scoring runs, It is how you have scored it and what it contributed in winning matches for your team.

So, what can Kohli (as a player) do about it? Just like how players quit captaincy to concentrate more on batting, should he quit his batting and concentrate more on captaincy?

 

[LiveLoveABD]

since he has become captain, india hasn't done too badly apart from the series loss in bangladesh. they reached the semi-finals of the world cup, which isn't too shabby... more importantly though, he is not even the captain in odis, so your comment is just lazy and poorly-informed. he has performed well as a batsman in tests as captain. he cannot score in every innings, even though he has come close!

Are you talking to yourself mate? Or am I missing something?

 

[IceAgeComing]

^ Yeah I can see how an English fan won't think much of Kohli after his last tour there. Its one of the reason I don't Lara that high, as he never did any worth note against India, and averages a very mediocre 35 against India. I never understood what all the fuss was about.

Yeah I can understand this - although averaging 14 against a country is slightly worse than averaging 35!

But your team is losing badly mate and i.e consistently both in one days and test matches. A performance is just not scoring runs, It is how you have scored it and what it contributed in winning matches for your team.

Would you say the same about Chris Rogers or David Warner, who personally are having very good series despite their team having crumbled to two embarrassing losses in a row and thus losing the Ashes?

 

[Rehan_24]

Yeah I can understand this - although averaging 14 against a country is slightly worse than averaging 35!

Would you say the same about Chris Rogers or David Warner, who personally are having very good series despite their team having crumbled to two embarrassing losses in a row and thus losing the Ashes?

Chris Rogers and David Warner are not captains for your information

Anyhow, Sounds like that you guyz have high hopes for Virat as a captain. You wanna give him chance, so it should be. Time will tell. A Captain is more than a Batsman/Bowler. If a captain just score runs and others are not performing, Then Its captain's job to extract performance from his team and this is a TALENT which not everyone possess. Ultimately if team consistently loses, the blame goes towards Captain. Afterall Its the winning which matters at the end of the day. We will have to wait and see how He goes as a Captain. I am not saying that he should quit either thing at the moment

I would like to give the example of Wasim Akram here. They made him captain at such a young age when he was booming. It was a total failuer, His own performance was very good but the team loses matches. After consistent loses, He himself said that I take quite much pressure and I may not ready for it. After some years, Wasim got matured as a Cricketer and then He came back strongly as a Captain and lead the side successfully. It may would be the case with Virat. I think that Indian cricket board should see which person has right captaincy talent at the moment in their team. If they think Virat is ready. So be it. Lets see...

 

[greymatter776]

I can't understand why Rahane was promoted to 3 and Rohit made to play at lower order,when we have got Pujara with us?Who's desperate to keep Rohit in the team?

 

[PokerAce]

 

[PokerAce]

BCCI contemplates separate coaches for Tests and limited-overs | Cricket | ESPN Cricinfo


Seperate coaches for Tests and Limited Overs side.

This would definitely be a first. I would say I would like it tried, its not the worst idea ever. Lets see how it goes. A test specialist and a limited over specialist that would be an interesting experiment.

 

[IceAgeComing]

This would definitely be a first.

England tried this; it didn't exactly go that well

 

[grkrama]

This would definitely be a first. I would say I would like it tried, its not the worst idea ever. Lets see how it goes. A test specialist and a limited over specialist that would be an interesting experiment.

I would say no directly it never works, all i can see is it create divides in this young team right at the start. We really dont need to much backend staff like ENG did it just gives everybody something to do rather than concentrating on the team.