From: sidi@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Sadiq Yusuf)
Subject: Re: Banerjee's selection & cribbing
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston Illinois.
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 22:26:01 GMT

In article <Oct.5.21.22.03.1992.2357@ring8.rutgers.edu> ratan@ring8.rutgers.edu (Santosh Ratan) writes:
>
>Some of us are sick and tired of reading about some netters' cribbing
>regarding the selection of Banerjee in the Indian team. 
>
>What did Amre do when he got his chance last time in Australia??
>                        NOTHING
>

	Oh, I don't know about nothing. Amre took India to a win with a
crucial 55 not out , against SA in India. In Australia he consistently came
in at slog time, and it really isn't fair to judge a bat that way. And
anyway, it's a question of choices. Which bat in India has had better
performances than Amre, and hasn't been picked ( don't say Kambli - Kambli
has been terrific but hasn't been any better than Amre. As good, but not
better ) . That isnt the case with Bannerjee - there are other choices
who've outperformed him in the domestics this year and have still not made
it because Bannerjee makes it on the East Quota ( that's not to say
Bannerjee is terrible - he isnt. He'll probably do OK in SA too, but in
favourable conditions I think any of the pacemen taken would do well - in
fact I think that Ankola would have done terrifically !) 

>These netters have no problem on Amre's selection. I tell you, Anybody
>can do better than what he did. Now, if you compare Banerjee, do you
>remember a ODI in which he slogged real well when needed, and when
>others failed. In a test, in a day he took all the three or four
>wickets, but next day probably Azhar thaougt that his quota of taking
>wickets was over and didn't make him bowl again. I don't remeber a
>single criticism against this action of Azhar. 
>

	Remember both instances very well indeed, and I still say that a
bowler ought never to be picked on his batting. Chetan was terrific as a
bat in the Nehru Cup, but was terrible with the ball - and that's his main
duty. Balwinder Singh Sandhu had a pretty good average when he was dropped
for the last time - but he was dropped because he hadn't performed
regularly with the ball. 
	As for that test, I've heard lots of criticism of Azhar for it, all
of it unjustified. What people don't seem to remember is that Bannerjee was
injured then, wasn't even on the field. ANd if you remembe, he missed a
whole bunch of games (mostly ODI's) right after that test too, due to the
injury. 
 
>And for that matter, Jadeja or Srinath also have proven that they are
>not of international quality either. So why cribbing about Banerjee.
>                        Any reason ????????????
>

	A wrong juxtaposition of words , IMHO. Jadeja and Srinath have *not
proven that they are of international quality* , they haven't proven that
they *are not of international quality* :-) I've seen very little of
Jadeja- only highlights of a couple of the WC games - but I liked what I
saw . In  the highlights of the WI game, he seemed to have time to play the
quicks , and looked fairly comfortable against them. Plus, he didn't do at
all badly in the other games either. Srinath has been disappointing so far,
it's true, but Srinath has more pace than any Indian bowler for a while. He
clearly deserves another chance on that , if nothing else. He's a
tremendous prospect for the future, something you cannot say with certainty
about Bannerjee. Plus , of course, in the run up to the selections, Srinath
was pretty good, some of the other contenders were great (Ankola), and
Bannerjee was mediocre at best. That's why there's been some anger
expressed at Bannerjee's selection.

				Sadiq [ providing the reasons ] Yusuf
 
>Cool it guys
>
>
>                             
>                     


Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket