Rohit Sharma is my man
February 3, 2008
He’s batting on 14 from 22 and I have no doubt that he must be backed as one of the key cogs of future Indian batting lineups. Perhaps I’m getting overly excited but I’m willing to stick my neck out. We’ve seen the new generation of young batsmen: Gambhir, Uthappa, Yuvraj, Raina. Despite the talent, with all of them there’s something or the other missing. Sharma seems to be the complete package. Good off both the back and front foot, he’s got a nice fluidity about his batting. He just needs to pass the test of time.
P.S. As I write this, Gambhir has just been dropped twice in the slips; once by Hussey and then by Ponting. What’s happened to Australian slip catching? It’s almost like the degeneration of West Indian fast bowling.
February 3, 2008 at 7:43 am
I didn’t watch him today but it’s not nearly enough to judge him. In the 20-20 in South Africa, he seemed to have a deflating presence in the crease, as if the weight of the world was on him. The anti-Karthik. I will stick my neck out for Raina.
February 3, 2008 at 8:15 am
I know that a short cameo is not enough to judge but he has the look of a great batsman.
February 3, 2008 at 11:20 am
And I actually thought he did not have enough strokes around the wicket to survive, especially limited overs cricket. A bit of a Jaffer. But too small a sample size.
February 4, 2008 at 2:58 am
I just need to see him pulling and driving on the on-side. He’s got enough on the off-side and looks technically excellent.
February 4, 2008 at 12:10 pm
every youngster selected for this series shold look this series as make or break series and put price tag on his wicket…like over my dead body…
they have got the golden opportunity and the collective experience of 20k runs has been sacrificed for them to be in the team and they should respect that…
February 4, 2008 at 6:48 pm
Yes, this is a huge opportunity for them. Runs and wickets against Australia count. Personally, I would still have Dravid in the middle order to add stability especially with Yuvraj injured.
February 10, 2008 at 10:15 am
I think your man’s limitations are showing. If he is as talented as claimed he should be able to find some gaps and runs. I don’t think there is anything extraordinary in the pitch, just good, tight bowling.
February 11, 2008 at 6:15 pm
The pressure got to to him. He was playing some very nervous pokes outside off to Johnson with no percentage in them. So he doesn’t handle pressure too well. However, he’s just 20 and that’ll come with experience. The pitch wasn’t too easy at that stage either in terms of scoring. Eventually, he did open up with some convincing drives off Symonds.
I still maintain that he’s the next big thing for Indian batting. I haven’t been this excited about a new Indian batting prospect since Dravid in 96 (Badani runs him close). The thing is that it’s not just talent. He’s got a great technique and deals with the short ball comfortably.
And he satisfies an unwritten rule that exciting new Indian batsmen must satisfy for me – he’s great to watch. Those free-flowing drives can be breathtaking.
P.S. I admit that I’m unfairly discriminatory against hardworking, effective, ugly batsmen like Chanderpaul; worryingly perhaps, I don’t feel much guilt.
February 11, 2008 at 10:23 pm
Again we must be clear about our disagreement here. My point is not that he is not a good batsman or cannot find a place in the test team. It is just that I feel he is not as good as you and everyone else is making him to be. I still have a nagging feeling that he does not possess enough versatility on the offside: he has the strokes but he does not seem to pick the length and find a shot for every ball the way Tendulkar does. Ok, I am not saying he should stand up to a Tendulkar comparison but only to a poor man’s Tendulkar moniker. Tell me, is his offside driving better than Dinesh Karthik’s? And I am put off by that flail cut with zero feet movement.
I am glad you brought up the Dravid comparison. The Lord’s 95 was an exhilrating innings and deserved the acclaim you are giving Sharma here. Rohit cannot play that kind of an innings just yet. I hope to be proved wrong.
February 12, 2008 at 5:31 am
I put down those ‘flail’ offside shots to nervousness and pressure in the MCG game. As far as offside play is concerned, either I’m giving him too much credit or you aren’t giving him enough. We need to see more. We haven’t seen him in a real Test match situation yet (the kind that allowed Dravid to flower and fully express himself) but I have no doubt that he will play innings that are exhilarating.
There is one very interesting aspect of batting in which he seems to almost match Tendulkar. And that is his balance at the crease. Of course, it’s an unfair comparison at this stage. Also, he looks like he has extra time to play his shots. These are things that prompt me to say that he has the look of a great player. This helps too.
On a side note, his stance is almost identical to Sanjay Manjrekar’s.
February 12, 2008 at 4:25 pm
The balance and time to play shots are striking; that’s why we are expending so much energy discussing him! We need to see more from him especially as you say in a test match. Innings like yesterday’s 70 do not prove anything as except for a couple of cuts, Uthappa could have played all those other shots. Thoughtful selectors will recognize that he deserves to be on par or ahead of Yuvraj in the pecking order for test selection but alas that won’t come to pass.
But I am curious as to why he averaged just 27 in this season’s Ranji; is there a weakness we don’t know about? (Aside: Isn’t it shocking that a good team like Bombay gets to play just 7 matches in a season? They play 16 here in England.) In any case we need to keep this thread going and keep it updated. And do a similar one for Raina for he is my man.
Simple thought experiment for now: is Rohit a more talented batsman than Michael Clarke (disregard ability to handle pressure)?
February 13, 2008 at 1:27 am
That 70 does tell us that he has a good eye and good footwork against spin. Not much else though. He has to be first in the queue in that Test pecking order you mentioned.
Maybe he likes pitches with bounce and the ball coming on to the bat rather than slow, low dustbowls (a la Dravid). Even Sehwag had a poor domestic record this season but look at the way he batted in the second innings at Adelaide. Just 7 matches in a season definitely seems too few.
The thought experiment is interesting. I would risk saying yes because I think Sharma possesses more batting assets that cannot be coached (e.g. balance, time). Of course, talent alone does not a great player make.