Project Raina part 2

[hendrix]

Come on hendrix. Ashwin is a better test batsman than Raina. Case closed.

I agree. I'd rather have Ashwin at 6 than anyone else, tbh.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Nah, come on. This Rohit hate is overboard. He's not great right now but he's better than Ashwin.

 

[harsh.ag]

Yeah, Rohit is better than Ashwin. But we were talking more about Raina.

 

[Pratters]

Rohit Sharma averages as under:

in SA 11 (2 tests)
in England 17 (1 test)
in NZ 40 (2 tests)
in India 288 (2 tests)

Maybe this is a dire representation as it is just 7 tests. But then why is he crap in ODIs as well?

in Australia 26 (15 ODIs)
in Ban 29 (10 ODIs)
in England 38 (7 ODIs)
in India 58 (26 ODIs)
in Ireland 8 (2 ODIs)
in NZ 37 (7 ODIs)
in Pakistan 29 (6 ODIs)
in SA 12 (8 ODIs)
in SL 14 (21 ODIs)
in WI 54 (14 ODIs)
in Zim 59 (8 ODIs)

 

[harsh.ag]

Can't extrapolate from ODIs.

 

[Pratters]

Suresh Raina averages in places which offer bounce:

in Australia 26 (8 ODIs)
in NZ - 41 (8 ODIs) - 1 50 in 7 innings, though there are 2 not outs. So I won't say that's very good.
in SA - 23 (12 ODIs)
in WI - 22 (15 ODIs)

Averages 37 in England, so is okay there.

 

[OverratedSanity]

You just need to watch Raina bat to know he's hopeless against anything that gets up over waist height. Also terrible against movement. And awful against quality spin. He gets away with it in ODIs because of a number of obvious reasons, the most important being that's it's a *****'s game.

Rohit has issues too, but while his technique against the moving ball isn't great, I think he handles bounce fine. It's just his ability to pull out an offensively terrible shot at the worst possible time that hurts his image. He's objectively a superior batsman to both Raina and Ashwin. Pretty comfortably too.

 

[cnerd123]

Raina's an ugly Yuvraj basically. And bowls ****tier spin.

Rohit is a dumber, right handed Kambli.

 

[Pratters]

I am not arguing Raina or Rohit Sharma are worse than Ashwin. I have my doubts either will succeed in the World Cup in Australia though.

 

[Pratters]

Re Rohit Sharma being technically okay but making fewer runs as he plays poor shots


Having the tendency to play poor shots shows lack of concentration apart from a habit to do so. It is not easy to develop the concentration required. It is not just a matter of, 'oh, let me start concentrating and reduce poor shots, and I will score 100s'. It is a part of batting which comes from years of practice. A fast bowler will test you outside off for overs on and if your concentration dips for 2 balls, you will try and cut and and you are out. I am not convinced Sharma can develop this so called concentration for the test level immediately.

One can see that his FC average is near 60. Sure. But the concentration required on placid Indian wickets is far different from one where your technical ability is being tested almost every over like tests, particularly tests abroad.

Also, it is not like he is technically most proficient. He has his technical soft spots. If bowlers bowl at him for 10-15 overs, he will nick one. It is not a completely sound technique which fills me with confidence.

 

[Prince EWS]

I am not arguing Raina or Rohit Sharma are worse than Ashwin. I have my doubts either will succeed in the World Cup in Australia though.

We're not talking about the World Cup though; this is about the Test series.

 

[Pratters]

Neither is likely so succeed in tests in Australia. Rohit Sharma might make a 100 in an inning when it's great for batting but not much more. I can see both of them out of the reckoning in 4-5 months after Kohli takes over as captain.

 

[cnerd123]

I think Rohit has what it takes tbh. If he gets his temperament right he is definitely Test quality. Raina, at his best, will still be mediocre at Test level.

 

[Arachnodouche]

We'll be lucky if Rohit Sharma becomes 3/4th the player Ian Bell is today. Which isn't saying much but I'll take that.

 

[Salamuddin]

Rohit Sharma averages as under:

in SA 11 (2 tests)
in England 17 (1 test)
in NZ 40 (2 tests)
in India 288 (2 tests)

Maybe this is a dire representation as it is just 7 tests. But then why is he crap in ODIs as well?

in Australia 26 (15 ODIs)
in Ban 29 (10 ODIs)
in England 38 (7 ODIs)
in India 58 (26 ODIs)
in Ireland 8 (2 ODIs)
in NZ 37 (7 ODIs)
in Pakistan 29 (6 ODIs)
in SA 12 (8 ODIs)
in SL 14 (21 ODIs)
in WI 54 (14 ODIs)
in Zim 59 (8 ODIs)

Those numbers don't tell the full story though. He has been a bit of a late bloomer.
He averages 45 in ODIS in the last 2 years and he's hardly had a poor start to his test career.

Can't believe people are lumping him with Raina - looks a far better player than Raina technically.
I am quite sure Rohit will turn out to be a pretty good layer for India - reminds me a bit of Laxman. I remember people saying Laxman would never amount to anything much back in the late nineties.

 

[Daemon]

Yadav has to play. He's genuinely got the ability to do a job at Test level.

Pretty sure Dhawan's career is ending in Australia and we'll see Rahane open the batting at some point.

 

[marc71178]

Well the idea behind two spinners isn't to run through Australia, it's to bowl containing overs so we can rotate our fragile quicks and not bowl them into the ground. The problems for India arise when, as we saw in England, the fast bowlers tire out and breakdown over the course of a 5 Test Series. And most of that is down to them having to bowl 20 odd overs every innings and not having the strength and fitness to do so across 5 Tests.

20 odd overs is a day's work. Nothing for a bowler.

 

[smash84]

Yeah. 20 overs a day isn't a problem but 80 overs a test does become tiring :-p

 

[Contra]

Karn Sharma + Ashwin + 3 seamers. Rohit's batting isn't good enough to offset the balance of the bowling department, which India badly needs.

 

[Daemon]

The minute you look for containing bowlers and ****s to take over your tired bowlers is the minute you've given up on winning a test

You have to be prepared to lose to win