Going by the experiences of other countries (especially Asian countries) shouldn't it be easier to develop batsmen than bowlers?
In another thread, someone asked that being a team from Asia, why is our bowling developing way faster than our batting.
The reasons that I think behind this are:
1) Our batsman are too much used to playing on batting tracks where good batting technique is not a neccessity. So, when they go abroad, they find it difficult to score freely in addition to facing quality opposition.
2) Before, during and just after World Cup 1999, we had a very experienced & well established batting line up; who had experience of playing cricket either domestically or internationally - so their batting was obviously far better than our current batting line up. (I'm not comparing batsman of 2 generations here)
3) Condition of our domestic cricket - our national players who are playing at the International level, did not play in our national league last few years (or may be just the last year?) So the youngsters who are coming in to the national team, they lack the experience of playing 4 day matches even for the domestic sides.
Another question was why there is no ODI century till now after Mehrab's maiden ODI hundred. Until now, I don't have answer to that question. Aftab Ahmed, on the last 5th ODI vs Zimbabwe went very close to a hundred and Rajin Saleh also before that against India.