Fair to say it's not only modern-day batsmen that are lacking patience, it's true with modern-day fans too. In the era of T20s and more results in Tests, it's hard to find batsmen like Pujara. They need Pujara, Rahane & Vihari to play the way they do for India to keep the series at 1-1.
Will be interesting to see how he plays tomorrow. I doubt India will outright go for the win, but scoring quicker will force Paine to set more defensive fields and might be the best form of defense.
Well written article. Ask any team and they would love to have a Che Pu in their team. Even Aussies would be worried about him then anybody else. May be he is in a lean patch but there is a role set for him to be the backbone of the team and he does that. I don't think any of his partners expect him to up the ante, they all play to their roles. What is the need of scoring runs at a higher rate anyways. Its not like there are prizes for run rates. I think a bowler would be more worn down by just defending or leaving then attacking. An attacking batsmen will keep the bowler more interested. Pujara will bore the bowlers to death. Its just that Aussie bowlers have been impeccable. There were no soft dismissals of Pujara as far as I can see in this series.
Nice elaborate piece on che pu just like the previous one @jarrodkimber. The issue is that we been down this road before with Pujara. He was previously dropped from the team, with strike rate or rather his inability to turn the strike over consistently being pointed out. Maybe someone could just work with him regarding the strike rotation cause we need him and we don't have someone else who could do his job.
People rode the Che Pu bandwagon back in 2018 towards a series victory and now the same are ready to bash him left and right.
Maybe he's moulded himself to bat this way and this team has to live with it and shuffle the middle order around him to suite the match situation. That's the only temporary solution which looks feasible.
I don't really understand the criticisms of Pujara but here's my largely unfair attempt to construct one. India didn't seem to be able to score off the Australian attack. Understandably, because it's been very good. If everyone goes out and tries play solid and cautious, well, maybe they'll tire out the bowlers and be able to get somewhere, but it's more likely the most successful of them will get 50 off 150 before lapses in concentration pick them off one by one. Given Australia got 338 that won't be enough and India will lose. So maybe someone has to figure out how to score off this attack, and the higher up the order it happens the better, because all the other batsmen can copy the player who figures it out. Gill tried, but he didn't get a lot of support. You know, halfway through that rant I almost had myself believing it.
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!
Disagree - people tend to correlate "quick scoring" with slogging. No one is asking Pujara to slog. But Pujara is playing for a "tag". He is billed as "solid", "gutsy" , "the wall" and all those other clichés associated with blocking.
If a batsman has played out a 100 balls, then the onus is on him to take the game forward. No one is asking Pujara to go aerial. But, getting 2 or 3 an over in singles should not be too hard for modern day batsmen. And he shirks his responsibility by playing so long and not capitalizing on that.
The second issue I have with Che Pu is that he keeps bowlers fresh. Yes, Test cricket is a game of "breaking down the bowlers". But you break bowlers as much by scoring, as you do by wearing them down in the field. Che Pu keeps bowlers and fielders interested all the time. Best examples are Smitty and Marnus in the way they countered Ashwin
And finally, for all the Che Pu aficionados out there, I challenge the premise that he is technically one of the best in the world. Technically sound batsmen can evolve themselves into good fast scoring batsmen. Look at Williamson - the guy can block all day and yet play 30 ball-75s in T20s. THAT is my definition of a technically sound batsman. Pujara does his team no favors by spending time without killing the opposition.
Pujara was 16 off 100 balls and scored the remaining 34 of his runs off a fair clip in 74 balls after rahane got out recognizing the need for him to accelerate - perhaps vihari was following pujara's trajectory too much? Rahane could've begun to be more positive earlier, if pujara sees himself as the rock then the other partner needs to be more positive
Fair to say it's not only modern-day batsmen that are lacking patience, it's true with modern-day fans too. In the era of T20s and more results in Tests, it's hard to find batsmen like Pujara. They need Pujara, Rahane & Vihari to play the way they do for India to keep the series at 1-1.
If only puj were English!
Will be interesting to see how he plays tomorrow. I doubt India will outright go for the win, but scoring quicker will force Paine to set more defensive fields and might be the best form of defense.
People moan because they are watching Test cricket but expecting a T20.
Well written article. Ask any team and they would love to have a Che Pu in their team. Even Aussies would be worried about him then anybody else. May be he is in a lean patch but there is a role set for him to be the backbone of the team and he does that. I don't think any of his partners expect him to up the ante, they all play to their roles. What is the need of scoring runs at a higher rate anyways. Its not like there are prizes for run rates. I think a bowler would be more worn down by just defending or leaving then attacking. An attacking batsmen will keep the bowler more interested. Pujara will bore the bowlers to death. Its just that Aussie bowlers have been impeccable. There were no soft dismissals of Pujara as far as I can see in this series.
Nice elaborate piece on che pu just like the previous one @jarrodkimber. The issue is that we been down this road before with Pujara. He was previously dropped from the team, with strike rate or rather his inability to turn the strike over consistently being pointed out. Maybe someone could just work with him regarding the strike rotation cause we need him and we don't have someone else who could do his job.
People rode the Che Pu bandwagon back in 2018 towards a series victory and now the same are ready to bash him left and right.
Maybe he's moulded himself to bat this way and this team has to live with it and shuffle the middle order around him to suite the match situation. That's the only temporary solution which looks feasible.
I don't really understand the criticisms of Pujara but here's my largely unfair attempt to construct one. India didn't seem to be able to score off the Australian attack. Understandably, because it's been very good. If everyone goes out and tries play solid and cautious, well, maybe they'll tire out the bowlers and be able to get somewhere, but it's more likely the most successful of them will get 50 off 150 before lapses in concentration pick them off one by one. Given Australia got 338 that won't be enough and India will lose. So maybe someone has to figure out how to score off this attack, and the higher up the order it happens the better, because all the other batsmen can copy the player who figures it out. Gill tried, but he didn't get a lot of support. You know, halfway through that rant I almost had myself believing it.
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!
Disagree - people tend to correlate "quick scoring" with slogging. No one is asking Pujara to slog. But Pujara is playing for a "tag". He is billed as "solid", "gutsy" , "the wall" and all those other clichés associated with blocking.
If a batsman has played out a 100 balls, then the onus is on him to take the game forward. No one is asking Pujara to go aerial. But, getting 2 or 3 an over in singles should not be too hard for modern day batsmen. And he shirks his responsibility by playing so long and not capitalizing on that.
The second issue I have with Che Pu is that he keeps bowlers fresh. Yes, Test cricket is a game of "breaking down the bowlers". But you break bowlers as much by scoring, as you do by wearing them down in the field. Che Pu keeps bowlers and fielders interested all the time. Best examples are Smitty and Marnus in the way they countered Ashwin
And finally, for all the Che Pu aficionados out there, I challenge the premise that he is technically one of the best in the world. Technically sound batsmen can evolve themselves into good fast scoring batsmen. Look at Williamson - the guy can block all day and yet play 30 ball-75s in T20s. THAT is my definition of a technically sound batsman. Pujara does his team no favors by spending time without killing the opposition.
Finally some sensible writing! Great read, really enjoyed it
Also not to be a grammar Nazi but it's US Capitol building not Capital building :)
Pujara was 16 off 100 balls and scored the remaining 34 of his runs off a fair clip in 74 balls after rahane got out recognizing the need for him to accelerate - perhaps vihari was following pujara's trajectory too much? Rahane could've begun to be more positive earlier, if pujara sees himself as the rock then the other partner needs to be more positive