Waingankars article makes some good points about the handling of Irfan Pathan, and does so without going into the usual bashing mode common to most Indian commentators.
The Rahul Dravid interview talks about all sorts of things which Indian forummers here wont like to hear - especially from the captain about team selection.
It sort of puts the spanner in the works as far as the popular parochialism/incompetence/nepotism/politics/sycophancy thesis goes...
I just do not understand this 'hoo-haa' in the media about Irfan's exclusion from the team. The team will include best 'in form' players for the tests and if Pathan was not meeting the set standard, it was his his problem!
What else should Chappell do to nurture him as Maninder and others including this author is saying? Should we go in with an exhausted, out of form bowler in a test?
Competition is must for success! If Pathan is feeling the heat from Zaheer's success in county, he should look to perform rather than feel insecure or whatever and fail repeatedly!
Originally posted by Kartikeya: Rahul Dravid Interview in the Sportstar The Rahul Dravid interview talks about all sorts of things which Indian forummers here wont like to hear - especially from the captain about team selection.
It sort of puts the spanner in the works as far as the popular parochialism/incompetence/nepotism/politics/sycophancy thesis goes...
I had read Dravid's interview earlier.
What different has he said this time? Didn't we all know already whatever Dravid has said in this interview?
Originally posted by *Chandan*: I just do not understand this 'hoo-haa' in the media about Irfan's exclusion from the team. The team will include best 'in form' players for the tests and if Pathan was not meeting the set standard, it was his his problem!
What else should Chappell do to nurture him as Maninder and others including this author is saying? Should we go in with an exhausted, out of form bowler in a test?
Competition is must for success! If Pathan is feeling the heat from Zaheer's success in county, he should look to perform rather than feel insecure or whatever and fail repeatedly!
I dont think thats the point of Waingankars article. He is not making the case for Irfan Pathan at all. Hes merely pointing to Chappells public comment about Pathans lack of confidence.
He is not making the case for Irfan Pathan at all.
But isn't Maninder doing that?
Where did Maninder come into the picture? I didnot post Maninders comments on this thread.
Maninders also said that India havent been trying new talent in their ODI side. Thats just so ridiculous... especially after you consider that apart from Sehwag, Dravid, Yuvraj, Kaif and Harbhajan, the whole ODI side is new.
Originally posted by *Chandan*: I just do not understand this 'hoo-haa' in the media about Irfan's exclusion from the team. The team will include best 'in form' players for the tests and if Pathan was not meeting the set standard, it was his his problem!
What else should Chappell do to nurture him as Maninder and others including this author is saying? Should we go in with an exhausted, out of form bowler in a test?
Competition is must for success! If Pathan is feeling the heat from Zaheer's success in county, he should look to perform rather than feel insecure or whatever and fail repeatedly!
I dont think thats the point of Waingankars article. He is not making the case for Irfan Pathan at all. Hes merely pointing to Chappells public comment about Pathans lack of confidence.
After the media blows up smallest of things, he expects an honest answer from Greg?
Originally posted by Kartikeya: I dont think thats the point of Waingankars article. He is not making the case for Irfan Pathan at all. Hes merely pointing to Chappells public comment about Pathans lack of confidence.
So according to him Chappell shouldn't have said this even if whole of India knows the truth?
These writers have nothing serious to talk about, I must confess!
Originally posted by Kartikeya: It sort of puts the spanner in the works as far as the popular parochialism/incompetence/nepotism/politics/sycophancy thesis goes...
huh? Couldn't read anything in that interview that could lead you to make that suggestion.
The squad is selected by the selectors, the playing eleven is where the captain has the main word and that's what Dravid is talking about.
The second article about Irfan Pathan (Waingankars) is, IMO, a load of bull. First he goes on about how Indian bowlers should not be compared to other foreign bowlers but then continues at length in examples of how Illingworth treated Devon Malcolm in SA and Snow in Australia. He really discredited his own theories. Individuals must be treated as individuals, no matter where they come from.
I think Pathan has been bowled stale and it has little to do with having confidence in him or not. I remember him being bowled 10 overs at a stretch once. You can't do that to a pacer in hot conditions. I also think in the media assertion that Chappell said he was dropped because of loss of confidence, he either meant Pathan had lost confidence in himself, or it was a figment of media imagination. It could have been a blend of both. Fact still remains that Irfan wasn't a success and had to be dropped. Dravid would have been hard pressed to drop either Patel or Sreesanth just to sooth Irfan's ego. I don't think Irfan would have wanted that either.
I'm sure he'll return in SL and be his old self again. With or without Zaheer's presence, who I hope will return in place of VRV.
Originally posted by Kartikeya: I dont think thats the point of Waingankars article. He is not making the case for Irfan Pathan at all. Hes merely pointing to Chappells public comment about Pathans lack of confidence.
So according to him Chappell shouldn't have said this even if whole of India knows the truth?
These writers have nothing serious to talk about, I must confess!
Waingankars point being that Chappell need not have said what he had said. The media saying something is one thing, Chappell's own coach saying something is another.
Waingankars larger point about the need for a coach to be culturally educated, and to be able to understand the history of cricket in India to be a better national team coach is well made. What he has requested is greater tact from Chappell.
And Chandan, i did read the Maninder Singh article, and i made a response to it immediately after Surenders post.
Originally posted by mirchy: The second article about Irfan Pathan (Waingankars) is, IMO, a load of bull. First he goes on about how Indian bowlers should not be compared to other foreign bowlers but then continues at length in examples of how Illingworth treated Devon Malcolm in SA and Snow in Australia. He really discredited his own theories. Individuals must be treated as individuals, no matter where they come from.
"Individuals must be treated as individuals, no matter where they come from."
I think thats Waingankars point. Individuals must be understood as individuals and treated as individuals. In order to understand them as well as possible as individuals, it is important to understand where they are coming from.
No it's not. It's an alibi for his theory and quite visible, if you're willing to see it and read between the lines. You can't say one thing and then discredit what you say by leaning on examples that you say are wrong in the first place. Suggest you read the article again, keeping in mind what I just said.
Originally posted by mirchy: No it's not. It's an alibi for his theory and quite visible, if you're willing to see it and read between the lines. You can't say one thing and then discredit what you say by leaning on examples that you say are wrong in the first place. Suggest you read the article again, keeping in mind what I just said.
A huge part of who Irfan Pathan is as a pace bowler is the fact that hes used to bowling on merciless wickets, hes young, and he comes from a place with no tradition in fast bowling.
What youre calling an "alibi" is actually quite a sound thesis.
And..... mind you, hes not criticizing Chappell in the time-honoured tradition of the Indian press-man and cricket fan. Hes merely offering a constructive thesis on an issue which has caused some comment - namely the sidelining of the closest modern day equivalent of a Kapil Dev to the Indian side.
i think the problem is that indians see irfan in odis and expect him to have the same success in tests. that is not going to happen, unless he changes drastically. loopy pace, gentle swing, etc may work for 10 overs with a white ball, but not in a test match
Originally posted by The One: i think the problem is that indians see irfan in odis and expect him to have the same success in tests. that is not going to happen, unless he changes drastically. loopy pace, gentle swing, etc may work for 10 overs with a white ball, but not in a test match
True. Irfan needs to redefine his role as a Test player - maybe as a bowling allrounder batting after Dhoni - something like a poor mans Flintoff. A Test batting average of 30-35 should be expected of him, in addition to a bowling average of about the same.
He could take the new ball - especially when the opposition openers are right handers.
I think one of the things that destroyed Irfan Pathans confidence was his inability to control Chris Gayle. He couldn't deliver on the Indian strategy of bowling without a cover point to Chris Gayle. His lack of pace meant that Gayle was occasionally able to hit the wider balls thru there even if they were rank short ones. To compensate, he tried to bowl quicker, and subsequently lost his length. Lost rythm, became less effective. Worse, what happened is that he stopped being able to control the runs.
Rahul Dravid did the right thing in not pushing the field back when he was bowling, because that would have defeated the purpose of using him as a specialist bowler expected to take wickets.
Chappell could have been tactful about the way he described Irfan Pathan getting dropped.
Originally posted by The One: i think the problem is that indians see irfan in odis and expect him to have the same success in tests. that is not going to happen, unless he changes drastically. loopy pace, gentle swing, etc may work for 10 overs with a white ball, but not in a test match
True. Irfan needs to redefine his role as a Test player - maybe as a bowling allrounder batting after Dhoni - something like a poor mans Flintoff. A Test batting average of 30-35 should be expected of him, in addition to a bowling average of about the same.
How can we imagine that Chappell + Pathan +Dravid are not working on redefining the role of Irfan already? And what was wrong in Chappell's statement?
Originally posted by The One: i think the problem is that indians see irfan in odis and expect him to have the same success in tests. that is not going to happen, unless he changes drastically. loopy pace, gentle swing, etc may work for 10 overs with a white ball, but not in a test match
True. Irfan needs to redefine his role as a Test player - maybe as a bowling allrounder batting after Dhoni - something like a poor mans Flintoff. A Test batting average of 30-35 should be expected of him, in addition to a bowling average of about the same.
How can we imagine that Chappell + Pathan +Dravid are not working on redefining the role of Irfan already? And what was wrong in Chappell's statement?
It was uncharacteristic. He has never made a single statement about anyother individual player. You always back you players when it comes to the general public. Even with Ganguly there was never a direct comment from Chappell about him - about Yuvraj when he was struggling early in the SL series...... in general about anyone who has struggled.
The point is not what he should have said and what he shouldnt have said. The point is that it seemed to be completely tactless.
He neednt have said anything. What Waingankar has done is that he has pointed out - gently, constructively, without being cynical or abusive or judgemental, that such comments to the press may backfire, especially given certain things hes pointed out about Irfan Pathan. An excellent example of what a column should do.
