may actually have a point here.
India has had the unique capacity of overstating the importance of even ordinary batsmen while reducing its bowling spearheads to stock bowlers.
And not just pace bowlers - we have also made our spinners - attacking options if handled properly - to run saving defensive options - in Test Cricket!!!
Wednesday, March 07, 2007
Am here.. So Hail..
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
Player Development Homer..... :)
The whole point of the Chappell doctrine.....
Developing VRV, Munaf, Sreesanth, RP...... a whole group. At various stages different ones are going to be the form bowlers - at different stages of development.
Same with the batsmen - trying to develop Raina and co...
The Chappell doctrine..... its not all talk :)
The "experimentation" should begin to bear fruit in the coming years.... if only Chappell could get another 2 year term....
Ideally, it would make sense to change coach now at the start of the 2009-10 season, so that by the time the 2011 world cup comes along the new coach has had a full year at the helm...
Player development is one aspect of it Kartikeya- and if it is about player development, why not Chappell at the NCA instead of as coach of the team?
You can develop a player all you want - but on the field of play, it is the captains call. And just how many Indian captains actually know how to handle their bowlers?
Because the real grooming is going to happen at the deep end - in international cricket.
The Australians have tried it too - they called it rotation.
Its a good thing, and the results have improved due to/despite (depending on how you look at it) it.
I am skeptical on using International cricket as an avenue of testing player mettle because
1. We more often tha not throw players at the deep end overseas instead of giving them a cushion at home or against weaker team - We do not ease the transition from domestic to international cricket.
2. Given the hype that we associate with cricket, any failure, real or perceived, is a huge downer for the player in question.
3. We do not give ample opportunities to players we are throwing at the deep end. Persistence is a virtue ( although blind faith is not).
i think the problem with the initiation of players in the domestic scene first is that the first class structure does not breed the kind of quality that we want on an international stage.
Our domestic scene does not throw up people who are (besides talented) mentally ready to take on the rigours of international cricket. So they are thrown into the deep end where they sink or swim.
True Shakester - but we are also guilty of not giving these players the latitude and time to get into the groove of international cricket.
So how much more time should have been given to Raina? If a player is bad (not enough talented/mediocre) he'll always remain so. Prime example is Md Kaif. He had much better temperament than Yuvraj but the latter had talent. And the moment he understood what he needed to do to rise above mediocrity, he did it to become a good player while Kaif kept struggling and was finally dropped!
Bottomline: Talent is necessary to move forward along with temperament. Possessing only one of the two won't do.
Well..I hope I'm not being too stupid here..but..do you post on some forum too, homer?
I think that is an unfair categorization Chandan. and it is especially unfair towards Kaif who has, for the most part, made use of his chances only to be dropped even after performing.
nope Chandan. Just this place and for a while - at Prems blog.
Post a Comment