Quote:
|
Originally Posted by beshideshi
Of course, if you have it in you, you are bound to shine. But not everyone is a Tendulkar, when you throw a 19 year old into the fire called international cricket, chances are he will be burnt in the heat rather than fight the fire.
|
Erm, I don't think so. Why take Tendu as example? Take Shaks, Tamim etc. If they are real deal, theya are indeed gonna Shine. This is BD they are playing for, low expectations, so don't think they will have such tremendous pressure compared to other teams.
Quote:
Also, a player usually has 6-10 years at his peak, if one joins the team at 28, it means he can play till he is 35[ 7 years], I think that is more than enough for one player. Also if one player is hogging the national team spot for 15 years, it means he will stop younger guys from entering and might create a vacuum.[have a look at India, compare Dravid,laxman,Tendulkar, Ganguly with Kohli, Sharma, Uthapa,Yuvraj Raina]
The bottom line is, I don't mind players getting a go at 18-19, but only if he is well developed by that age. Otherwise I would pick 6-7 great years instead of 2-3 terrific years and 10 years of "promise"
|
See, I'm all for him being picked after getting enough practice. But if he's doing well (which he is) for a reasonable period, I don't think age alone should be a factor for getting him in the team.
And I didn't get your Dravid/Tendu/Gangu vs Kohli Sharma Raina analogy
