First of all, thanks for a well written piece. It's becoming harder to find good cricket articles these days (not that there are none).
Secondly, fans are allowed to have emotional outbursts. This is, after all, an entertainment industry and we subcontinent fans have always been vocal about our cricket. If Bradman were playing in this s…
First of all, thanks for a well written piece. It's becoming harder to find good cricket articles these days (not that there are none).
Secondly, fans are allowed to have emotional outbursts. This is, after all, an entertainment industry and we subcontinent fans have always been vocal about our cricket. If Bradman were playing in this social media era, we fans (and some trolls)would probably tell how to bat!!!!
But what I hate the most about this saga is respected pundits like Waugh and Ponting not refining and explaining there statements respectively.
Tbh, I didn't expect a very well put neutral statement from Waugh, he's just old school 'Australian' cricketer.
But I expected Ponting to be have a wider perspective and explain it well enough in such a manner that non-cricketers like us would understand what he exactly wants to say (maybe learn from Harsha!!).
Reading the widespread comments about Pujara's innings feels like so many fans (not all, of course) just don't understand Test Cricket, especially when sub continent teams play in SENA. People just seem to ignore you need to survive to score runs in Test matches, and when the bowlers are bowling in bsolutely incredible discipline, batsmen need to respect that. In the name of modern batting, people want batsmen to throw their wickets away.
And also you can't expect anyone to be as consistently good as the best batsmen of contemporary cricket; please don't compare Che Pu with Smith, Kohli or Willaimson!
So in my opinion, Che Pu did a really good job surviving for 150 odd balls.
And also I want to blame Indian Management for giving space to such a discussion when they dropped him for a 'slow' innings a couple of years back, in WI series if I remember right!
I think there is a fundamental problem with how people see players like Pujara, and by that I mean, if you aren't virtually flawless, you're shit. It's why so many good players are dripped., if you can average 45 in Test cricket, chances are you are struggling away from home, against spin, or something else. If you didn't have those weaknesses, your Smith.
First of all, thanks for a well written piece. It's becoming harder to find good cricket articles these days (not that there are none).
Secondly, fans are allowed to have emotional outbursts. This is, after all, an entertainment industry and we subcontinent fans have always been vocal about our cricket. If Bradman were playing in this social media era, we fans (and some trolls)would probably tell how to bat!!!!
But what I hate the most about this saga is respected pundits like Waugh and Ponting not refining and explaining there statements respectively.
Tbh, I didn't expect a very well put neutral statement from Waugh, he's just old school 'Australian' cricketer.
But I expected Ponting to be have a wider perspective and explain it well enough in such a manner that non-cricketers like us would understand what he exactly wants to say (maybe learn from Harsha!!).
Reading the widespread comments about Pujara's innings feels like so many fans (not all, of course) just don't understand Test Cricket, especially when sub continent teams play in SENA. People just seem to ignore you need to survive to score runs in Test matches, and when the bowlers are bowling in bsolutely incredible discipline, batsmen need to respect that. In the name of modern batting, people want batsmen to throw their wickets away.
And also you can't expect anyone to be as consistently good as the best batsmen of contemporary cricket; please don't compare Che Pu with Smith, Kohli or Willaimson!
So in my opinion, Che Pu did a really good job surviving for 150 odd balls.
And also I want to blame Indian Management for giving space to such a discussion when they dropped him for a 'slow' innings a couple of years back, in WI series if I remember right!
I think there is a fundamental problem with how people see players like Pujara, and by that I mean, if you aren't virtually flawless, you're shit. It's why so many good players are dripped., if you can average 45 in Test cricket, chances are you are struggling away from home, against spin, or something else. If you didn't have those weaknesses, your Smith.
I agree a 100%. And sadly, those people will not change their perspective or opinion, be it commentators and pundits or just fans.
The only solace we have is writers like you, whose opinion are unbiased and aren't based on populist behaviour. So Kudos to you (and others).