I am writing after the test victory, of all the things, matches are won by scoring runs and taking wickets. This seems reasonable when the pitches have a lot of side ways movement or spin or bounce. This Brisbane pitch is nothing like that, its definitely bouncy, but not menacing. There is no uneven bounce at least at a frequency to bother batsmen. The pitch is so true, that why you get to see glorious innings from Gill, Shardul, Pant and Washington.
I am sure, he has his role in this team, but that doesn't call for unreasonable glorification of not so great batting. Please don't compare, Rahul Dravid or Kallis with him , though they defended more than they attacked, they punished the bad balls for 2s and 4s. Pujara needs a really bad ball like a half volley on off or leg, or a short ball with a lot of width,
The way I see it, we would have won the match comfortably if not for Cummins and Pujara. Mark Waugh, Ponting are better batsmen than Pujara and better analysts than us.....
People say he took a lot on his body, why others didn't, Gill was punishing most short balls. They were made to look menacing on a pretty even pitch.
How about his handling Lyon, for other batsmen, Lyon was a primary scoring option. Has Starc been in any sort of Rhythm and applied himself well from over the wicket, Pujara has no reprieve, he would have got out without scoring many runs.
He definitely has a role in this team, but cricket can do with few batsmen like him.
If players like Ponting, Mark Waugh, Tendulkar had to play like him they would have scored more runs, but imagine Tendulkar playing like Pujara, Cricket would not have been that popular sport...
HI Himanish
I am writing after the test victory, of all the things, matches are won by scoring runs and taking wickets. This seems reasonable when the pitches have a lot of side ways movement or spin or bounce. This Brisbane pitch is nothing like that, its definitely bouncy, but not menacing. There is no uneven bounce at least at a frequency to bother batsmen. The pitch is so true, that why you get to see glorious innings from Gill, Shardul, Pant and Washington.
I am sure, he has his role in this team, but that doesn't call for unreasonable glorification of not so great batting. Please don't compare, Rahul Dravid or Kallis with him , though they defended more than they attacked, they punished the bad balls for 2s and 4s. Pujara needs a really bad ball like a half volley on off or leg, or a short ball with a lot of width,
The way I see it, we would have won the match comfortably if not for Cummins and Pujara. Mark Waugh, Ponting are better batsmen than Pujara and better analysts than us.....
People say he took a lot on his body, why others didn't, Gill was punishing most short balls. They were made to look menacing on a pretty even pitch.
How about his handling Lyon, for other batsmen, Lyon was a primary scoring option. Has Starc been in any sort of Rhythm and applied himself well from over the wicket, Pujara has no reprieve, he would have got out without scoring many runs.
He definitely has a role in this team, but cricket can do with few batsmen like him.
If players like Ponting, Mark Waugh, Tendulkar had to play like him they would have scored more runs, but imagine Tendulkar playing like Pujara, Cricket would not have been that popular sport...