***Official*** India in Sri Lanka

[SJS]

He is not God SJS I know

He's just a hardworking guy who's paid his dues for many, many years and really deserves his shot in International Cricket. Putting a 19 year old up against Muralitharan, Vaas and Mendis is not a good idea.

Dont worry my dear. He WILL get his chance, and in this very series. Lets hpe he does put up a great show instead of insisting that he definitely will. Thats all I have to say. I like Badrinath but lets take it one step at a time. We have built up youngsters before this and they have ended croppers.

Getting your first chance is a big thing but that is still the easier bit. The difficult bit comes afterwards.

And it is NOT many many years that any grave injustice has been done to him by Indian selectors. Firstly, we have had a great run with a great middle order, no one can deny that. It is only when the youngsters of today have also run through their careers, passed, failed and retired that we wil know where they stand when put on the same page as Sachin, Dravid, Ganguly and Laxman. Its easy today when someone is not doing well, everyone who is not in the side appears ba better choice.

Secondly, we HAVE tried other youngsters over the last 6-7 years, the results are before us. So many came and were to replace the seniors and where are they today. They are gone not because of any politics but because they were only so good and no more.

Even the best young player we have had in over a decade, Yuvraj, is struggling. Three of the four greats I named, are already out of the one day side. Still we do not have a great middle order to replace the old one.

Uthappa, Rohit Sharma, Raina, Dinesh Karthik (as batsman) are some of those we have given chances in the middle order and Gambhir at the top in the last few years. How many of them have proved consistent?

Thats why I ask for caution in building up youngsters.

Look at what happens in other countries. Do you have any idea what kind of scores Hussey was running up in first class cricket in Australia as well as England and yet wasn't in the Aussie side. No one screams for them as we do in India. We expect too much from the youngsters (as does Pakistan) and push them much too early into the top grade. Unfortunately the youngsters too start believing the hype and you have people like Uthappa behaving as if they have thousands of international runs behind them and pontificating on Indian cricket. The results are more bad than good. Thats why we are struggling to replace our seniors. We are impatient with juniors.

 

[Sanz]

Admittedly they've been helped by India batting poorly today, but Sri Lanka really are a complete side at the moment aren't they? Quite an imposing opponent. Glad we don't have to tour there or host them for a while.

SriLanka have always been a competent side @ Home(at least against India), even when they were new to International Cricket.

I am looking forward to see them perform outside of SL.

 

[honestbharani]

In Tests ? So You don't want VVS, Kumble and perhaps Ganguly in teh test team ?

Because in ODIs, Kumble, Dravid, VVS and Ganguly haven't really been playing anyway.

yeah..my bad. I meant ODIs only.. Obvious that they are not part of the set up in ODIs for a while now, but I got the feeling that Pnottnath wanted them in ODIs too...

 

[honestbharani]

Dont worry my dear. He WILL get his chance, and in this very series. Lets hpe he does put up a great show instead of insisting that he definitely will. Thats all I have to say. I like Badrinath but lets take it one step at a time. We have built up youngsters before this and they have ended croppers.

Getting your first chance is a big thing but that is still the easier bit. The difficult bit comes afterwards.

And it is NOT many many years that any grave injustice has been done to him by Indian selectors. Firstly, we have had a great run with a great middle order, no one can deny that. It is only when the youngsters of today have also run through their careers, passed, failed and retired that we wil know where they stand when put on the same page as Sachin, Dravid, Ganguly and Laxman. Its easy today when someone is not doing well, everyone who is not in the side appears ba better choice.

Secondly, we HAVE tried other youngsters over the last 6-7 years, the results are before us. So many came and were to replace the seniors and where are they today. They are gone not because of any politics but because they were only so good and no more.

Even the best young player we have had in over a decade, Yuvraj, is struggling. Three of the four greats I named, are already out of the one day side. Still we do not have a great middle order to replace the old one.

Uthappa, Rohit Sharma, Raina, Dinesh Karthik (as batsman) are some of those we have given chances in the middle order and Gambhir at the top in the last few years. How many of them have proved consistent?

Thats why I ask for caution in building up youngsters.

Look at what happens in other countries. Do you have any idea what kind of scores Hussey was running up in first class cricket in Australia as well as England and yet wasn't in the Aussie side. No one screams for them as we do in India. We expect too much from the youngsters (as does Pakistan) and push them much too early into the top grade. Unfortunately the youngsters too start believing the hype and you have people like Uthappa behaving as if they have thousands of international runs behind them and pontificating on Indian cricket. The results are more bad than good. Thats why we are struggling to replace our seniors. We are impatient with juniors.

Well, I understand the bit about seniors being picked ahead of him, but there have definitely been instances where he deserved to be picked ahead of some of the guys who were, in the end, picked ahead of him... It is not about playing in the XI... I am simply talking about people who did make the squads ahead of him... And the way they have kept on omitting him for over a year now has been a joke.... Before that, one can understand the need for people to wait and see if it was just a peak or whether he was consistent.. But honestly, some guys who have gotten the nod ahead of him recently have been a joke...

 

[chaminda_00]

Kapu scores runs (Y)

 

[SJS]

Well, I understand the bit about seniors being picked ahead of him, but there have definitely been instances where he deserved to be picked ahead of some of the guys who were, in the end, picked ahead of him... It is not about playing in the XI... I am simply talking about people who did make the squads ahead of him... And the way they have kept on omitting him for over a year now has been a joke.... Before that, one can understand the need for people to wait and see if it was just a peak or whether he was consistent.. But honestly, some guys who have gotten the nod ahead of him recently have been a joke...

Do you have any opinion on why completely undeserving guys have been picked (name them if you please) and why his claims are ignored?

 

[Migara]

Just from Cricinfo, there seems to be some seam movement there

Dambulla always have been a bowlers wicket and batsmen's nightmare. There is plenty of seam and plenty of spin in the pitch.

 

[Swervy]

Dambulla always have been a bowlers wicket and batsmen's nightmare. There is plenty of seam and plenty of spin in the pitch.

which explains SL 147/2 off 34 overs

 

[SJS]

Do you know that India, England and West Indies try the largest number of youngsters in Test matches while Australia, South Africa and Sri Lanka try the lowest number.

India is actualy much worse than anyone else because even after trying dozens of youngsters, half the side remains unchanged for a decade !

I am tempted to write an article on the subject - it is fascinating what each country does with its young blood and the results they are able to get.

Do you know that India had 34 Test debutants since January 2000 and yet six of the thirteen players who formed the core of the Indian team in 1999, still form the core in 2008.

Australia on the other hand had only 18 debutants and yet they do not miss tweleve of their core thirteen of 1999 who have gone from the scene. Actualy even Gilchrist should be added to those twelve since he made his debut in the latter part of 1999 and is already gone.

Only Ponting remains. The others are all from the debutants !! (Lee had played just 1 Test in 1999.

There has to be a lesson in this. We try out too many youngsters for too little results. This is not just because we dont give them enough chances but because we do bring a large number of them fairly raw.

Our domestic system and the first class game standards are not taxing enough to show the true caliber of players, particularly batsmen and any player who is any good can average close to fifty in Ranji Trophy and then starts the clamour to bring him in.

Remember I am not talking specifics or Badrinath but a general trend.

The countries who are having fewer debutants are actually getting more of them to become regular members of the side. They are also the countries producing better results. If we refuse to se a correlation - we dont deserve better results.

I dont buy the argument that Badrinath is being kept out due to some diabolical plot to keep him out. Yes there wil be the odd case of a player geting in once in a while due to some pressure but these players do not get many chances. They wil be taken on a token tour or two and then summarily cast aside. Rohan Gavaskar is a case in point.

But the converse is NOT true. A talented player is NOT ignored in India. They invariably get a chance - its just a question of when and its not for you and me to make that judgement - its the selectors job and they, if they are to be faulted, are giving far to many youngsters chances and not the other way around.

Coming back to Badrinath, I do not know why there is such a sudden interest in him. One sees this kind of hype about player after player in our country. Yesterday it was Uthappa. Before that it was raina. In between there was Venu Gopal. But bthese people have to make the best of the chances they get. As Gambhir has done. He scored runs, then failed and was promptly dropped. He has been dropped quite a few times in his short career but one doesn't hear any hue and cry. The fellow just goes back to office. Keeps working, waits for his opportunity and when he gets one, triews to make it count.

Thats what professionals are supposed to do.

Just because someone looks good is no reason for him to be given chance after chance while those who have proven track records are ignored.

Raina is a case in point. He was considered the future. He looked good. He had technique, he had strokes and everyone including Greg Chappell sang his praises but he did not perform inspite of chances. Then everyone started off saying he got chjances because he was Chappell's favourite. If he hadn't got his chances we would have heard a different type of outrage.

Everyone who is not in a team which is not performing well looks like a champion and everyone in the team looks a loser. Thats how the common fan's mind works. The selector's job is not to get swayed by such knee-jerk type of sentiments. Sometimes there selections will work, sometimes they wont but I dont think, in recent years the Indian selectors have shown any great sense of unfair bias one way or the other. The fact is that a squad can have only 15 or 16 players and a match side just eleven. There are always going to be more people aspiring for those positions and everyone of them will have someone or the other thinking they ought to be in.

Unfortunately some have to be disappointed and wait.

PS : There is absolutely no empirical evidence to prove that a billion people can do a better job than a five member selection committee

 

[masterblaster]

SJS, there is hype about Badrinath because he is a class performer not just in Indian Domestic Cricket but also has been a star on India A tours.

You compare him with other youngsters, most Indian youngsters come into the side in the ages of 19 - 22 and have hardly played any FC or List A cricket. Badrinath is 27 years old and is considered a veteran of the Indian domestic and International A tour scene. He's paid his dues, done the hard yards yet is still a non fixture in the Indian team. Plus he's one of the fittest and best fielders in India, he can bowl and he is captain of Tamil Nadu. Still he gets constantly overlooked which is simply baffling.

Badrinath has also played 63 First Class matches and has played 70 List A matches. This indicates that he is a very seasoned and experienced campaigner and deserves his run in the Indian side ahead of somebody like Virat Kohli or Robin Uthappa who have hardly been around and who have hardly played any FC cricket.

 

[ret]

an easy win for the Lankans .... with no Sehwag at the top and Gambhir getting out to a duck, India would usually struggle to put up a competitive score [as we saw in tests too] so no surprises as to the outcome, esp with the youngsters having little time to adjust to the conditions in SL

the positives: India played with a more balanced X1 so thats a step in the right direction
recommendations: have Rohit, Yuvi or Badri at number at 3

 

[Arjun]

A few observations from the match-

The Sri Lankan fielding has been water-tight. They choked their opponents yet again, in a strategy that's worked over the years. In comparison, the Indian fielding, though improved, hasn't had that kind of impact, and a couple of weak links (Munaf again, an injury-carrying Yuvraj) are not helping the cause. Moreover, the field placings between Jayawardene and Dhoni were so different, we could see a lot more singles taken in one innings.

The Indians played out a shockingly high number of dot balls. That handed the innings, and the match, to Sri Lanka. Their overly defensive approach backfired, as a wicket would fall eventually. A lot could have been relieved if each dot could have been converted into a single. This needs to be considered. Moreover, major damage had been done before Murali and Mendis came on to bowl, as the seamers got four early wickets between them- when the Indians should have dominated them.

The Sehwag-Gambhir partnership is now becoming indispensable. Each time they've had a good start, there's a lot less pressure on the batsmen below. They've also been the best on show against the threatening spinners. Sending in Kohli to open was a huge blunder. They could have had Dhoni opening instead, since he's better cut out for the job, and he's a lot more stable.

 

[Sanz]

Do you know that India, England and West Indies try the largest number of youngsters in Test matches while Australia, South Africa and Sri Lanka try the lowest number.

India is actualy much worse than anyone else because even after trying dozens of youngsters, half the side remains unchanged for a decade !

I am tempted to write an article on the subject - it is fascinating what each country does with its young blood and the results they are able to get.

Do you know that India had 34 Test debutants since January 2000 and yet six of the thirteen players who formed the core of the Indian team in 1999, still form the core in 2008.

Australia on the other hand had only 18 debutants and yet they do not miss tweleve of their core thirteen of 1999 who have gone from the scene. Actualy even Gilchrist should be added to those twelve since he made his debut in the latter part of 1999 and is already gone.

Only Ponting remains. The others are all from the debutants !! (Lee had played just 1 Test in 1999.

There has to be a lesson in this. We try out too many youngsters for too little results. This is not just because we dont give them enough chances but because we do bring a large number of them fairly raw.

Our domestic system and the first class game standards are not taxing enough to show the true caliber of players, particularly batsmen and any player who is any good can average close to fifty in Ranji Trophy and then starts the clamour to bring him in.

Remember I am not talking specifics or Badrinath but a general trend.

The countries who are having fewer debutants are actually getting more of them to become regular members of the side. They are also the countries producing better results. If we refuse to se a correlation - we dont deserve better results.

I dont buy the argument that Badrinath is being kept out due to some diabolical plot to keep him out. Yes there wil be the odd case of a player geting in once in a while due to some pressure but these players do not get many chances. They wil be taken on a token tour or two and then summarily cast aside. Rohan Gavaskar is a case in point.

But the converse is NOT true. A talented player is NOT ignored in India. They invariably get a chance - its just a question of when and its not for you and me to make that judgement - its the selectors job and they, if they are to be faulted, are giving far to many youngsters chances and not the other way around.

Coming back to Badrinath, I do not know why there is such a sudden interest in him. One sees this kind of hype about player after player in our country. Yesterday it was Uthappa. Before that it was raina. In between there was Venu Gopal. But bthese people have to make the best of the chances they get. As Gambhir has done. He scored runs, then failed and was promptly dropped. He has been dropped quite a few times in his short career but one doesn't hear any hue and cry. The fellow just goes back to office. Keeps working, waits for his opportunity and when he gets one, triews to make it count.

Thats what professionals are supposed to do.

Just because someone looks good is no reason for him to be given chance after chance while those who have proven track records are ignored.

Raina is a case in point. He was considered the future. He looked good. He had technique, he had strokes and everyone including Greg Chappell sang his praises but he did not perform inspite of chances. Then everyone started off saying he got chjances because he was Chappell's favourite. If he hadn't got his chances we would have heard a different type of outrage.

Everyone who is not in a team which is not performing well looks like a champion and everyone in the team looks a loser. Thats how the common fan's mind works. The selector's job is not to get swayed by such knee-jerk type of sentiments. Sometimes there selections will work, sometimes they wont but I dont think, in recent years the Indian selectors have shown any great sense of unfair bias one way or the other. The fact is that a squad can have only 15 or 16 players and a match side just eleven. There are always going to be more people aspiring for those positions and everyone of them will have someone or the other thinking they ought to be in.

Unfortunately some have to be disappointed and wait.

PS : There is absolutely no empirical evidence to prove that a billion people can do a better job than a five member selection committee

Very Good post and almost echoes my feeling on the subject. Just had one question about :- "A talented player is NOT ignored in India. " which I do agree but also feel that there are some excpetions as well. And that could be very well because of my own ignorance about the player.

The Player in question is "Amol Mazmudar' who was deemed as the next Tendulkar or something and did put up Numbers for Bombay, still never was in serious contention for national team spot.

I never watched him play so dont know how good he was, any reason why he was never considered for Team India, was there any major flaw in his batting etc ?

 

[honestbharani]

Do you know that India, England and West Indies try the largest number of youngsters in Test matches while Australia, South Africa and Sri Lanka try the lowest number.

India is actualy much worse than anyone else because even after trying dozens of youngsters, half the side remains unchanged for a decade !

I am tempted to write an article on the subject - it is fascinating what each country does with its young blood and the results they are able to get.

Do you know that India had 34 Test debutants since January 2000 and yet six of the thirteen players who formed the core of the Indian team in 1999, still form the core in 2008.

Australia on the other hand had only 18 debutants and yet they do not miss tweleve of their core thirteen of 1999 who have gone from the scene. Actualy even Gilchrist should be added to those twelve since he made his debut in the latter part of 1999 and is already gone.

Only Ponting remains. The others are all from the debutants !! (Lee had played just 1 Test in 1999.

There has to be a lesson in this. We try out too many youngsters for too little results. This is not just because we dont give them enough chances but because we do bring a large number of them fairly raw.

Our domestic system and the first class game standards are not taxing enough to show the true caliber of players, particularly batsmen and any player who is any good can average close to fifty in Ranji Trophy and then starts the clamour to bring him in.

Remember I am not talking specifics or Badrinath but a general trend.

The countries who are having fewer debutants are actually getting more of them to become regular members of the side. They are also the countries producing better results. If we refuse to se a correlation - we dont deserve better results.

I dont buy the argument that Badrinath is being kept out due to some diabolical plot to keep him out. Yes there wil be the odd case of a player geting in once in a while due to some pressure but these players do not get many chances. They wil be taken on a token tour or two and then summarily cast aside. Rohan Gavaskar is a case in point.

But the converse is NOT true. A talented player is NOT ignored in India. They invariably get a chance - its just a question of when and its not for you and me to make that judgement - its the selectors job and they, if they are to be faulted, are giving far to many youngsters chances and not the other way around.

Coming back to Badrinath, I do not know why there is such a sudden interest in him. One sees this kind of hype about player after player in our country. Yesterday it was Uthappa. Before that it was raina. In between there was Venu Gopal. But bthese people have to make the best of the chances they get. As Gambhir has done. He scored runs, then failed and was promptly dropped. He has been dropped quite a few times in his short career but one doesn't hear any hue and cry. The fellow just goes back to office. Keeps working, waits for his opportunity and when he gets one, triews to make it count.

Thats what professionals are supposed to do.

Just because someone looks good is no reason for him to be given chance after chance while those who have proven track records are ignored.

Raina is a case in point. He was considered the future. He looked good. He had technique, he had strokes and everyone including Greg Chappell sang his praises but he did not perform inspite of chances. Then everyone started off saying he got chjances because he was Chappell's favourite. If he hadn't got his chances we would have heard a different type of outrage.

Everyone who is not in a team which is not performing well looks like a champion and everyone in the team looks a loser. Thats how the common fan's mind works. The selector's job is not to get swayed by such knee-jerk type of sentiments. Sometimes there selections will work, sometimes they wont but I dont think, in recent years the Indian selectors have shown any great sense of unfair bias one way or the other. The fact is that a squad can have only 15 or 16 players and a match side just eleven. There are always going to be more people aspiring for those positions and everyone of them will have someone or the other thinking they ought to be in.

Unfortunately some have to be disappointed and wait.

PS : There is absolutely no empirical evidence to prove that a billion people can do a better job than a five member selection committee

Too tired to reply in entirety, and honestly, most of the post is something I do agree with myself.. But the one thing about Badrinath and the way he was treated by the selectors is that, for me at least (and I guess quite a number of CWers), it is not about the way Badrinath was treated.


He was not picked ahead of people like Yuvraj (we all know about people's opinions on him as a test player), Raina (in ODIs, extremely talented but again extremely raw and yet to be proven as much as Badri in A team tours), a Rohit Sharma (his FC numbers are hardly flattering even though he does look like the best young batsman in India).. It is what is being signified by Badri's omission that rankles me and I guess, few others here.


It is like he is being overlooked because someone younger LOOKS like he has potential, even though the said guy doesn't actually put up the numbers.


I guess the guys he can be compared to are Amol Muzumdar (as Sanz said) and Pankaj Dharmani.. Perhaps, you can add Sridharan Sriram to that list as well... I don't think there is any diabolical conspiracy against TN players at all... I am juz fed up seeing the "promising" Dinesh Karthik being picked as a batsman ahead of someone "proven" at all levels that he has played in, in Badrinath... The same goes for any number of your Tiwarys, Rainas, Sharmas and Uthappas and Yousuf Pathans that have been picked ahead of this man...... The only guy I do think deserved to be picked ahead of him was Kaif and that is ONLY because I thought he didn't get enough of a run to prove himself and that he was short charged for, again, the flashier Yuvraj Singh.......



Badri may well end up as big a failure as a Sujith Somasundar but the point is, the guy deserves his chance ahead of the "flashier, I m the future and I can sledge" brigade.....

 

[honestbharani]

Do you have any opinion on why completely undeserving guys have been picked (name them if you please) and why his claims are ignored?

Because the "YOUNGER" lot LOOKED more promising, were more flashy and made more headlines than this guy..... And perhaps they looked a lot better scoring their 30s than Badri did accumulating his 100s......

 

[Sanz]

Because the "YOUNGER" lot LOOKED more promising, were more flashy and made more headlines than this guy..... And perhaps they looked a lot better scoring their 30s than Badri did accumulating his 100s......

I dont know if that is the correct assumption. From What I remember, In that past Indian selectors used Ranji trophy Finals, Irani Trophy(Now Challenger Series) matches as their criteria to pick players for the vacant spot in the squad. I would like to see how Badri has performed in those games.

 

[weldone]

Because the "YOUNGER" lot LOOKED more promising, were more flashy and made more headlines than this guy..... And perhaps they looked a lot better scoring their 30s than Badri did accumulating his 100s......

Among the younger lot, Gautam Gambhir, Badrinath and Manoj Tiwary has had similar FC averages...But surely Badri should've been picked before Rohit Sharma, Robin Uthappa, Suresh Raina and Virat Kohli...Yes, some were injustly picked ahead of him (not the seniors, of course...in that regard I completely agree with SJS' excellent post above)...But personally I feel it's not too late for him...

 

[SJS]

Because the "YOUNGER" lot LOOKED more promising, were more flashy and made more headlines than this guy..... And perhaps they looked a lot better scoring their 30s than Badri did accumulating his 100s......

You maybe right but I dont know if that is entirely the explanation.

Someone mentioned that Badri is not a youngster in the sense that he has been around for eight seasons or so. Thats true and there is something to learn from that.

He made his debut in 2000-01. In the first five years (2000-01 to 2004-05) he averaged 39.0 with five hundreds. He had just one good year in this which was his fourth and he averaged over fifty and scored four of the five hundreds in that five year period. Again next year (2004-05) he was in the 30's with a top score of 97.

So his real bright patch has started from 2005-06. From then till the last season (2007-08) he actually came to lime light so its not correct to say that he has been knocking on the doors of selectors WITH performances to talk of for many years.

In the last three years he has averaged a very impressive 75.4. But it should not be expected that in the very first of those three years, he would be a contender, particularly since he already had a history.

I think it is fair to say that he is in contention since early 2007 when his second golden year was halfway through.

If these three years were his first three or three of his first four years he would have been looked as a great youngster with a great potential but in 2006 he was already 26.

Just look at it like this. He is 28 years old (born August 1980) and has had\, after ordinary performances for four out of his first five years, he has finally had three good years.

I am not sure this shows any great injustice done to him by the selectors. Maybe he could have been considered for the squad that went for the Asia cup. Sure. But its not that dramatic as it sounds when you say someone has been averaging over fifty for eight years, has paid his dues (whatever that may mean) etc.

I think he has blossomed late, which is fine for most countries and for me too personally, but in this country, as I have been trying to impress, we are besotted with youth. For us Laxman was too old when he was still not 30 and he had already played some of the greatest innings played by an Indian.

I think Badrinath has played enough first class cricket to be considered experienced at that level and is at the right time to be inducted into the Indian side.

Whether that right time was a year earlier is cutting too fine a point and will need going into the claims of others as one presumes the selectors would have done.

 

[SJS]

To me personally he looks more a Test batsman than a one day player. I think thats where he will find his slot if he does well.

I like his technique and, unlike what you said, I think he looks good.

I also completely agree with you that he could have been tried as a batsman before Karthik but wasnt Karthik tried in the opening?

 

[Dissector]

I haven't followed the Badrinath saga closely but from a distance it looks like he is just unlucky to be a middle-order batsman during a period when it's been very hard to break into the Indian test middle order. Despite their ups and downs all four of the middle order have performed reasonably over the last few years and given their vast experience it would be a bold selector to drop one of them for Badri. Of course all this may change after the flop in the recent series. Ganguly in particular looks pretty vulnerable though I suspect he will get a couple of tests in the next series.

I think Badri's age may actually be an asset when it comes to selection in the next year or two. As the experienced quartet retire or are dropped it will make sense to pick an experienced first-class player to fill the gap and deal with the transition. There aren't too many other players knocking on the door either; with the likes of Yuvraj and Kaif struggling to establish themselves as test players. My hunch is that Badri will get a decent number of opportunities to prove himself as a test player.