For this 7 yrs of rohit, many of the batsman have been sacrificed. Manoj tiwary comes in mind first.a hard working batsman.other work horses like badrinath, Kaif wud have been better test material and consistent the so called once in 10 innings wonder limited over specialist.
If Pujara's form and average is worst than Rohit Sharma, then try someone other new batsman, like say Mayank Agarwal, Manoj Tiwary, Manish Pandey, Shreyas Ayyar or maybe any good domestic batsman who played well in Ranji Trophy. It's no compulsion that we will have to play Pujara only. Give some youngster a chance. As it is you are going to gamble with Rohit Sharma, so why not gamble with some new-comer? England's fresh squad for Ashes who beat Australia was good example, have we heard about these names earlier for England:- Adam Lyth,Jonathan Bairstow, Ben Stokes, Jos Buttler (wk),Mark Wood, Adil Rashid,etc. But that was England squad an entirely new side which easily beat Australia. Then why can't we play new and fresh players who are in form in domestic cricket. Why are we repeatedly giving chances to those same old players who repeatedly fails, in the name of experience?
Yes, after 4-5 years Rohit may have better stats than SRT or RD or even Don Bradman but there is something called the team winning and another requirement called team work and victory. It is unfair that only 1 person gets this luxury. Rohit Sharma may probably score a century or two in this series, we dont deny his capability. It is only his track record and consistency across all formats that raises eyebrows which cannot be closed by showing only average.
Yah you may be right, if we have selected Harbhajan purely on the basis of his past glory and IPL performances then play him in the entire tournament, but if he fails in the entire tour of Sri-Lanka then, it will be a time to think about his future. Because that same measuring criteria could have set for players like Gautam Gambhir, Sehwag, Yuvraj etc. they were also class act and played major role in our most of the victories. But sadly, they were out due to bad form. Same applies to Bhajji. Let him play in this whole tour and show that he had not lost his mettle. We should learn something from Australia, Michael Clark was one of the best batsman in the world and hardly anybody could match his record or performance. But due to current bad performances, lost form and increasing age he got retired gracefully and with respect. I am not saying Harbhajan should retire, but he can not live in the team on his past glory. He has to prove now with his performance that he had not lost his old charm. Nobody is disrespecting him or denying about his past achievements that were commendable, but you can not stay in the team just on the credit of that for eternity.
Kumar would have helped the team with his swing bowling rathen than Aron who is fast compared to Kumar. But Kumar is steady with his line and length and batsmen cannot take liberty with him to play thier shots.Ofcourse Aaron has not fared badly in this test. Only batsmen created problems in the second Innnings to lose the match
Re: Omission of Kumar from the squad
by tejas on Aug 17, 2015 01:12 PM
Yes you are right, the batsmen were more responsible for this defeat especially openers Rahul, Vijay and the worst Rohit Sharma. But had we shown ( especially captain) a little bit of smartness on fourth day after getting their 5 batsmen out, and attacked from both sides with Ashwin & Maishra then match would have finished on day 4 itself. As the pitch started spinning more and more the target of 176 looked like 300, and we traditionally are not good chasers especially in tests. Having said that our batsmen should have played more responsibly and carefully they were too casual and vulnerable against spin which at one time used to be our strong point.
Re: he he he he
by DrYaako TikaNovva on Aug 17, 2015 05:02 PM
In the same tone he tried to prove Dhoni correct by selecting Rohit and it boomeranged. How about some he he he he for that?
Does anybody know why Bhuvaneshwar Kumar is not playing in tests? Is he injured or out of form that's why not selected? Because he is 100 times better bowler than Varun Aaron, even though he is out of form.
I simply dont understand why age should be a criteria for selection. Bhajji is a class act, with 400 wickets in tests, and easily the best spinner of the mordern era, after muralis and Warnes retirement. I think people are forgetting that he was the chief architect in the turnaround for Indian cricket in 2001 with 32 wickets. And he played a major role in the 2011 world cup. He is a class act, and he had a couple of unlucky decisions going against him in the first test, because we all know a spinner becomes a different bowler after the first wicket. Please stick with him for a few matches atleast, and then see the tide turn. he has 2-3 years of cricket in him. As kohli said after the game, he bowled well, but without luck. Look at the non-performing batsmen instead of targetting our world who is a proven performer everywhere!
Re: Treat a 400 wicket bowler with respect!
by T Prakash on Aug 19, 2015 04:08 PM
So you think we have to wait for baaji to take wickets when after 3 or 4 tours
