Why does team India invest in sub-standard batsmen despite their bench strength?

[stevewittry]

Well, this "investments in sub-standard players" may not be a problem specific to team India, but what amazes me is the wealth of batting talent available in the country.

And despite that we regularly see players such the Viharis, the Rayadus, the Kedar Jadhavs, the Vijay Shankars, the Sahas sneeking their way into the playing XI while several deserving candidates are caught waiting.

It is frustrating to see a talent such as Shubnam Gill to wait for almost 2 years before getting a call into test cricket, whereas a similar talent "Haider Ali" got the opportunity almost instantly and he grabbed it with both hands.

I understand that in a country with a population such as India, it is difficult to make into playing 11, but the least the selection committee and team management can do is to scrap these sub-standard players and invest in long term talents.

 

[gani999]

Vihari averages 56 in FC. He was averaging 60 when he debuted for India. Granted that he has not been his best in the current series but people who think he sub-standard know nothing about the way selections work. The choice for a national role must always be based on first class performance and not pointless IPL six-hitting.

As for Saha, he was the only decent keeper-batsman India had at one point.

And Rayudu was averaging 50+ in ODIs. So he did make good of whatever little chances he got. He did play a major role in bottling his own career though.

 

[hoshiarpurexpress]

The selection criteria in India is pretty simple and straightforward for batting.. and has been like that since 1990's onward.. even when we were really poor team.
1. Score Runs in domestic Ranji test cricket.
2. Score runs consistently, big scores that too.. like 1000 runs in a season.
3. Do it for 2-3 years consistently.
4. Repeat the same on A tours.

Now, coming to names you have taken :
1. Vihari.. his domestic average is 60, and he scored 5000 runs in domestic cricket.
2. Rayadu : Check his record, he was an U-19 Superstar and scored plenty of runs in domestic cricket.
He scored like 1000 runs on England A tour U-19.. as well as in domestic.
3. Kedhar Jadhav.. I believe he plays for Maharashtra(not Mumbai).. again similar record. Scored runs in multiple seasons.
4. Saha is a Bengal stalwart who has really scored some tough runs for Bengal domestics and his decline now is age related. He did not get chance at young age because of Dhoni.

Now some of these players do it when they are 25 plus and mature a bit.
Then there are special talents coming from U-19, Like Kohli, Rohit, Pujara etc to
Gill and Shaw.
Check the number of domestic matches played by them before they got a break.
If there is a special talent like Gill.. who scored in U-19, he has to show that he can repeat the same in domestic side and then A tours to prove that he is ready and real deal.

Shaw scored century on debut in all 3 domestic tournaments, Ranji, Irani and Challenger, record previously held by Sachin Tendulkar.

It may or may not work, but the policy is very consistent, and with very less bias. Average 50 plus, score big centuries for a couple of years for players aged above 22-23 years.
If you are U-19 superstar, do it for at least 1 years in Ranji to show that you are ready.

The idea is to produce battle ready Test Cricketers, not someone who will play a couple of innings with hitting some lifts in the leg side and hoicks..and be hyped as a world beater.
Offcourse batting legacy matters
This same process was repeated in domestics for Vinoo Mankad and Vijay Manjrekar, Sunil Gavaskar and Gundappa, Vengsarkar, Azhar, Ganguly, VVS laxman, dravid etc.
Laxman for example was selected at the age of 22 only when he scored 1000 plus runs consecutively for 3 years.
Same thing for Dravid as well.
Only exception was Sachin who was selected after 10 matches, but he scored like 6 centuries in those matches aged 16.
You don't create test batsmen of international quality by just selecting them after 3 good innings.


And I like this consistency and merit based system, which was there even when we were minnows. We always trusted our system and never looked outside for inspiration.

Success is 99% perspiration and 1% inspiration.

 

[Ab Fan]

Vihari is a good talent. He can do well.

In ODIs, what we lacked over past six years is good middle order batsman and that's why Rayudu and Jadhav got into XI. Jadhav also was a valuable part timer. Rayudu, Manish and Rahane were the best no.4 we had at that point.

Jadeja, too, was a poor LOI player till last couple of years and in need of sixth bowling option, India had to try Shankar and Jadhav.

On other hand, Manish Pandey wasn't used well by Indian team and after that hundred vs Australia, he got injured and when he came back, he mostly batted in final 12-14 overs and that role wasn't suitable to him.

The situation is better now, we have Iyer and Pant, one of the two will take the middle order slot in ODIs alongside the Koffee with Karan duo.

 

[King_Kohli]

The selection criteria in India is pretty simple and straightforward for batting.. and has been like that since 1990's onward.. even when we were really poor team.
1. Score Runs in domestic Ranji test cricket.
2. Score runs consistently, big scores that too.. like 1000 runs in a season.
3. Do it for 2-3 years consistently.
4. Repeat the same on A tours.

Now, coming to names you have taken :
1. Vihari.. his domestic average is 60, and he scored 5000 runs in domestic cricket.
2. Rayadu : Check his record, he was an U-19 Superstar and scored plenty of runs in domestic cricket.
He scored like 1000 runs on England A tour U-19.. as well as in domestic.
3. Kedhar Jadhav.. I believe he plays for Maharashtra(not Mumbai).. again similar record. Scored runs in multiple seasons.
4. Saha is a Bengal stalwart who has really scored some tough runs for Bengal domestics and his decline now is age related. He did not get chance at young age because of Dhoni.

Now some of these players do it when they are 25 plus and mature a bit.
Then there are special talents coming from U-19, Like Kohli, Rohit, Pujara etc to
Gill and Shaw.
Check the number of domestic matches played by them before they got a break.
If there is a special talent like Gill.. who scored in U-19, he has to show that he can repeat the same in domestic side and then A tours to prove that he is ready and real deal.

Shaw scored century on debut in all 3 domestic tournaments, Ranji, Irani and Challenger, record previously held by Sachin Tendulkar.

It may or may not work, but the policy is very consistent, and with very less bias. Average 50 plus, score big centuries for a couple of years for players aged above 22-23 years.
If you are U-19 superstar, do it for at least 1 years in Ranji to show that you are ready.

The idea is to produce battle ready Test Cricketers, not someone who will play a couple of innings with hitting some lifts in the leg side and hoicks..and be hyped as a world beater.
Offcourse batting legacy matters
This same process was repeated in domestics for Vinoo Mankad and Vijay Manjrekar, Sunil Gavaskar and Gundappa, Vengsarkar, Azhar, Ganguly, VVS laxman, dravid etc.
Laxman for example was selected at the age of 22 only when he scored 1000 plus runs consecutively for 3 years.
Same thing for Dravid as well.
Only exception was Sachin who was selected after 10 matches, but he scored like 6 centuries in those matches aged 16.
You don't create test batsmen of international quality by just selecting them after 3 good innings.


And I like this consistency and merit based system, which was there even when we were minnows. We always trusted our system and never looked outside for inspiration.

Success is 99% perspiration and 1% inspiration.

Good analysis.

 

[Mesozoic]

The selection criteria in India is pretty simple and straightforward for batting.. and has been like that since 1990's onward.. even when we were really poor team.
1. Score Runs in domestic Ranji test cricket.
2. Score runs consistently, big scores that too.. like 1000 runs in a season.
3. Do it for 2-3 years consistently.
4. Repeat the same on A tours.

Now, coming to names you have taken :
1. Vihari.. his domestic average is 60, and he scored 5000 runs in domestic cricket.
2. Rayadu : Check his record, he was an U-19 Superstar and scored plenty of runs in domestic cricket.
He scored like 1000 runs on England A tour U-19.. as well as in domestic.
3. Kedhar Jadhav.. I believe he plays for Maharashtra(not Mumbai).. again similar record. Scored runs in multiple seasons.
4. Saha is a Bengal stalwart who has really scored some tough runs for Bengal domestics and his decline now is age related. He did not get chance at young age because of Dhoni.

Now some of these players do it when they are 25 plus and mature a bit.
Then there are special talents coming from U-19, Like Kohli, Rohit, Pujara etc to
Gill and Shaw.
Check the number of domestic matches played by them before they got a break.
If there is a special talent like Gill.. who scored in U-19, he has to show that he can repeat the same in domestic side and then A tours to prove that he is ready and real deal.

Shaw scored century on debut in all 3 domestic tournaments, Ranji, Irani and Challenger, record previously held by Sachin Tendulkar.

It may or may not work, but the policy is very consistent, and with very less bias. Average 50 plus, score big centuries for a couple of years for players aged above 22-23 years.
If you are U-19 superstar, do it for at least 1 years in Ranji to show that you are ready.

The idea is to produce battle ready Test Cricketers, not someone who will play a couple of innings with hitting some lifts in the leg side and hoicks..and be hyped as a world beater.
Offcourse batting legacy matters
This same process was repeated in domestics for Vinoo Mankad and Vijay Manjrekar, Sunil Gavaskar and Gundappa, Vengsarkar, Azhar, Ganguly, VVS laxman, dravid etc.
Laxman for example was selected at the age of 22 only when he scored 1000 plus runs consecutively for 3 years.
Same thing for Dravid as well.
Only exception was Sachin who was selected after 10 matches, but he scored like 6 centuries in those matches aged 16.
You don't create test batsmen of international quality by just selecting them after 3 good innings.


And I like this consistency and merit based system, which was there even when we were minnows. We always trusted our system and never looked outside for inspiration.

Success is 99% perspiration and 1% inspiration.

Brilliant post.

 

[stevewittry]

The selection criteria in India is pretty simple and straightforward for batting.. and has been like that since 1990's onward.. even when we were really poor team.
1. Score Runs in domestic Ranji test cricket.
2. Score runs consistently, big scores that too.. like 1000 runs in a season.
3. Do it for 2-3 years consistently.
4. Repeat the same on A tours.

Now, coming to names you have taken :
1. Vihari.. his domestic average is 60, and he scored 5000 runs in domestic cricket.
2. Rayadu : Check his record, he was an U-19 Superstar and scored plenty of runs in domestic cricket.
He scored like 1000 runs on England A tour U-19.. as well as in domestic.
3. Kedhar Jadhav.. I believe he plays for Maharashtra(not Mumbai).. again similar record. Scored runs in multiple seasons.
4. Saha is a Bengal stalwart who has really scored some tough runs for Bengal domestics and his decline now is age related. He did not get chance at young age because of Dhoni.

Now some of these players do it when they are 25 plus and mature a bit.
Then there are special talents coming from U-19, Like Kohli, Rohit, Pujara etc to
Gill and Shaw.
Check the number of domestic matches played by them before they got a break.
If there is a special talent like Gill.. who scored in U-19, he has to show that he can repeat the same in domestic side and then A tours to prove that he is ready and real deal.

Shaw scored century on debut in all 3 domestic tournaments, Ranji, Irani and Challenger, record previously held by Sachin Tendulkar.

It may or may not work, but the policy is very consistent, and with very less bias. Average 50 plus, score big centuries for a couple of years for players aged above 22-23 years.
If you are U-19 superstar, do it for at least 1 years in Ranji to show that you are ready.

The idea is to produce battle ready Test Cricketers, not someone who will play a couple of innings with hitting some lifts in the leg side and hoicks..and be hyped as a world beater.
Offcourse batting legacy matters
This same process was repeated in domestics for Vinoo Mankad and Vijay Manjrekar, Sunil Gavaskar and Gundappa, Vengsarkar, Azhar, Ganguly, VVS laxman, dravid etc.
Laxman for example was selected at the age of 22 only when he scored 1000 plus runs consecutively for 3 years.
Same thing for Dravid as well.
Only exception was Sachin who was selected after 10 matches, but he scored like 6 centuries in those matches aged 16.
You don't create test batsmen of international quality by just selecting them after 3 good innings.


And I like this consistency and merit based system, which was there even when we were minnows. We always trusted our system and never looked outside for inspiration.

Success is 99% perspiration and 1% inspiration.

Well ... couple of things.

1. While I agree with the entry level criteria for inducting a new player to international cricketer on the basis of domestic performance and players like Vihari/ Rayadu meeting this benchmark, my problem is with translation of domestic successes into international arena and how much of time to be given to players to establish themselves in international stage. Players such as Vihari, Saha and Jadhav have been there for years and they have achieved nothing in international cricket. Yet the selectors have persisted with them series after series without looking for a more worthy replacements.

2. It does not take long for someone who has some level of credibility in selection processes to realize who among these players are best fit for international success and have the right temperament. The likes of Vihari, Jadhav, Rayadu, Saha .... do not have it in them to be a success story in international cricket and India must move on from them sooner.

3. The stats at domestic level must be reviewed more critically. The quality of cricket and level of competition is nowhere near international standards. They can be seriously misleading. Someone like Jadeja has three triple hundreds in domestics and had exceptional numbers but was a specialist fielder and walking wicket when he stepped into international cricket.

 

[hoshiarpurexpress]

Well ... couple of things.

1. While I agree with the entry level criteria for inducting a new player to international cricketer on the basis of domestic performance and players like Vihari/ Rayadu meeting this benchmark, my problem is with translation of domestic successes into international arena and how much of time to be given to players to establish themselves in international stage. Players such as Vihari, Saha and Jadhav have been there for years and they have achieved nothing in international cricket. Yet the selectors have persisted with them series after series without looking for a more worthy replacements.

2. It does not take long for someone who has some level of credibility in selection processes to realize who among these players are best fit for international success and have the right temperament. The likes of Vihari, Jadhav, Rayadu, Saha .... do not have it in them to be a success story in international cricket and India must move on from them sooner.

3. The stats at domestic level must be reviewed more critically. The quality of cricket and level of competition is nowhere near international standards. They can be seriously misleading. Someone like Jadeja has three triple hundreds in domestics and had exceptional numbers but was a specialist fielder and walking wicket when he stepped into international cricket.

I disagree. Vihari has good solid game and he has failed in relatively fewer matches.
Coming to Jadeja, even if the attack is bad it takes some effort to score 300 runs.
You need to be fully concentrated for like 6-7 hours. One lapse and you are gone.That means he has acumen for batting and he is primarily a bowling all rounder. He has much better bowling record but he is a handy batsmen.
He was never picked as all rounder even after scoring triples initially he was picked only because of his bowling.
Rayudu was a super talented batsman who lost his primary years due to a goon called shiv Lal Yadav. Still he averaged 50 plus in odis.
Off course there will be failures at international level but you need to give them a fair chance.

 

[Dingolfy]

Well ... couple of things.

1. While I agree with the entry level criteria for inducting a new player to international cricketer on the basis of domestic performance and players like Vihari/ Rayadu meeting this benchmark, my problem is with translation of domestic successes into international arena and how much of time to be given to players to establish themselves in international stage. Players such as Vihari, Saha and Jadhav have been there for years and they have achieved nothing in international cricket. Yet the selectors have persisted with them series after series without looking for a more worthy replacements.

2. It does not take long for someone who has some level of credibility in selection processes to realize who among these players are best fit for international success and have the right temperament. The likes of Vihari, Jadhav, Rayadu, Saha .... do not have it in them to be a success story in international cricket and India must move on from them sooner.

3. The stats at domestic level must be reviewed more critically. The quality of cricket and level of competition is nowhere near international standards. They can be seriously misleading. Someone like Jadeja has three triple hundreds in domestics and had exceptional numbers but was a specialist fielder and walking wicket when he stepped into international cricket.

Check how long did India persist with Rohit Sharma, Kohli for them to be at this level. Even Yuvraj failed in a lot of games after his initial performances in 2000 champions trophy. Domestic to international transition is not that easy especially for batsmen and you need to give them some time to settle.

 

[Bhaijaan]

Not a fan of this. Sometimes you have to fast track a special talent.

These are the negatives of structured and matured systems where selections cannot happen at the command of a supreme leader.

India has 30 provinces. Cricket is immensely political. Cannot run it at the size and scale of India's level going purely by instincts.

Following a system is the only way to go. Mostly it is beneficial but yes the age of unearthing special talents at teenage level and fast tracking them into international level is pretty much gone.

 

[hoshiarpurexpress]

Not a fan of this. Sometimes you have to fast track a special talent.

These are the negatives of structured and matured systems where selections cannot happen at the command of a supreme leader.

India has 30 provinces. Cricket is immensely political. Cannot run it at the size and scale of India's level going purely by instincts.

Following a system is the only way to go. Mostly it is beneficial but yes the age of unearthing special talents at teenage level and fast tracking them into international level is pretty much gone.

Bhaijaan fast tracking is still happening.
Gill is 21 years old.
Shaw debuted as 18 years old because he was considered special.
They were considered special talents and fast tracked.
Kohli debut was at age 22.
Rohit Sharma 20.
Different players mature at different age.
Pujara also debut at 22.
Vihari debut at 26 as he matured later. Same for Mayank at age 27.
So if there is a special talent to be picked, now there is a path way through "A" team tours. If some one is really really special.. they get in a bit early.

 

[King_Kohli]

[MENTION=152959]hoshiarpurexpress[/MENTION] bro,

"The selection criteria in India is pretty simple and straightforward for batting.. and has been like that since 1990's onward.. even when we were really poor team.
1. Score Runs in domestic Ranji test cricket.
2. Score runs consistently, big scores that too.. like 1000 runs in a season.
3. Do it for 2-3 years consistently.
4. Repeat the same on A tours."

Rohit Sharma Test selection never followed above rules.
He consistently picked for many OS tours, he didn't play red ball cricket in domestic level.
Every time they picking based on his LOI form and every time failing in OS tours.

We need to change our selection process. You cant pick test players based on white ball form, all non specialist test players has to play FC to prove their selection.

One format selection based on other format is ridiculous.

 

[hoshiarpurexpress]

[MENTION=152959]hoshiarpurexpress[/MENTION] bro,

"The selection criteria in India is pretty simple and straightforward for batting.. and has been like that since 1990's onward.. even when we were really poor team.
1. Score Runs in domestic Ranji test cricket.
2. Score runs consistently, big scores that too.. like 1000 runs in a season.
3. Do it for 2-3 years consistently.
4. Repeat the same on A tours."

Rohit Sharma Test selection never followed above rules.
He consistently picked for many OS tours, he didn't play red ball cricket in domestic level.
Every time they picking based on his LOI form and every time failing in OS tours.

We need to change our selection process. You cant pick test players based on white ball form, all non specialist test players has to play FC to prove their selection.

One format selection based on other format is ridiculous.

No system is absolutely perfect. Rohit was always considered a special talent. I had heard his name even before he played U-19 WC which India lost the final to Pakistan.. i think 2006 one.
Even Virat in his interviews has said he had heard a lot about Rohit.
But Rohit also has a domestic Ranji average of 60 plus I believe.. check cricinfo stats.
And he looked so good when batting.. so offcourse sometimes selectors also get sucked into that. Finally in LOIs he is special.

 

[RamLakhan]

I think more than the selections done by selectors, the problem is with the management/coach/captain of how they are selecting the final XI from the squad and how well they are utilized! I think the selection of Rayudu, Shankar, etc, for the previous world cup was imposed by Kohli/Shastri on the selectors! Also there were some atrocious selections (internal selections) in the last South Africa tour (and perhaps England too)... This has nothing to do with the grooming of talents from root level, I think that's going on fine (of course there could be some corruption & politics which we never know, as it runs in most fields in India)

 

[Corridor of Uncertainty]

India gets its proven domestic players in to the team.

Some make the transition to international level and some don't.

But overall it is a good strategy. Yes, one can have opinions on one players vs another, but selection is always part numbers, part feeling so people will differ.

On India's bench, the evidence of its strength is yet to come so I won't make hasty judgments. One match ago, they had poverty of resources, suddenly they have bench strength.

Pakistan waited before handing caps to the likes of Rizwan and it worked out. The youngster strategy for them stopped working a long time ago - maybe from Amir's time.

 

[Space Cat]

I really like that India give guys a good decent crack in the test side before casting them off as even the best of talents can take some time to adjust. Shuffling guys around in ODIs every match i didn't agree with so much.

 

[Space Cat]

Also Kedar Jadav played some matching winning knocks when he was first picked in the side. He proved to be not so flash outside of home wickets but he earned himself the chance.