Comments on: Success has many fathers but failure … http://www.thesillypoint.com/blogs/2007/04/23/success-has-many-fathers-but-failure/ "cricket without boundaries" Wed, 09 Jun 2010 17:18:13 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: granderbharata http://www.thesillypoint.com/blogs/2007/04/23/success-has-many-fathers-but-failure/#comment-1631 granderbharata Tue, 24 Apr 2007 18:08:03 +0000 http://www.thesillypoint.com/blogs/?p=128#comment-1631 wow you should be a professional writer or something. Irfan just lost his rythem. His batting has been improving with time but his bowling has gone down hill wow you should be a professional writer or something.

Irfan just lost his rythem.

His batting has been improving with time but his bowling has gone down hill

]]> By: ©hinaman http://www.thesillypoint.com/blogs/2007/04/23/success-has-many-fathers-but-failure/#comment-1626 ©hinaman Mon, 23 Apr 2007 16:52:43 +0000 http://www.thesillypoint.com/blogs/?p=128#comment-1626 Tracing back Irfan Pathan's performance over the last two years tells us what went wrong. http://awmyth.wordpress.com/2007/04/06/who-destroyed-pathan-the-bowler/ Team India has a batsman in the top order who is incapable of hitting, when scoring quick runs is necessary. He tried himself as an opener, as No3 and No4. But it is against his natural game. An extra batsman had to be found who could hit at the top like, er...Ganguly. Things were hunky dory, we had supersubs, an extra batsman was always handy. 17 successful run chases later, unfortunately, the supersubs were scrapped, India lost the luxury of that extra batsman. They had to look for one from within the playing XI. Irfan was targeted to take that role. Whatever coaching was brainwashed into him, washed away his basic attributes of a bowler. (The proof that India always needed an extra batsman is confirmed by the 7+4 strategy in the worldcup. So what really happened to Irfan Pathan was 1. Chappell had to get rid of Ganguly. 2. Rahul Dravid became captain and hence fixed in the team. 3. As an ODI batsman, Dravid is an excess baggage. Chappell tried to make Pathan carry double loads, his own and that of a top order strike batsman. It was too much for a youngster. He burnt-out long before his time. Solution: http://www.thesillypoint.com/blogs/?p=19 take away the responsibility of being a strike batsman coach him to be a bowler, who will bat to his capabilities at No8. He will be the match winner again. Somehow I do not think that will happen. Tracing back Irfan Pathan’s performance over the last two years tells us what went wrong.
http://awmyth.wordpress.com/2007/04/06/who-destroyed-pathan-the-bowler/

Team India has a batsman in the top order
who is incapable of hitting,
when scoring quick runs is necessary.
He tried himself as an opener, as No3 and No4.
But it is against his natural game.

An extra batsman had to be found
who could hit at the top like, er…Ganguly.
Things were hunky dory, we had supersubs, an extra batsman was always handy.

17 successful run chases later,
unfortunately, the supersubs were scrapped,
India lost the luxury of that extra batsman.

They had to look for one from within the playing XI.

Irfan was targeted to take that role.
Whatever coaching was brainwashed into him,
washed away his basic attributes of a bowler.

(The proof that India always needed
an extra batsman is confirmed by the 7+4 strategy in the worldcup.

So what really happened to Irfan Pathan was
1. Chappell had to get rid of Ganguly.
2. Rahul Dravid became captain and hence fixed in the team.
3. As an ODI batsman,
Dravid is an excess baggage.
Chappell tried to make Pathan carry double loads, his own and that of a top order strike batsman.

It was too much for a youngster.
He burnt-out long before his time.

Solution:
http://www.thesillypoint.com/blogs/?p=19
take away the responsibility of being a strike batsman
coach him to be a bowler,
who will bat to his capabilities at No8.
He will be the match winner again.

Somehow I do not think that will happen.

]]>