He could have replaced Dravid or Yuvraj, who have not been able to perform well.
I don't think it is fair to not give chance for so many games only because few times in the past a batsman doesn't do good.
Similarly it is not wise to presume that a batsman will do good, because he played well with pakistan in test (like Yuvi or Dravid).
The selectors need to make selection carefully without being overconfident or being unfair.
2007-12-28 14:59:33 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Cricket
plz remind this to dilip vengsakar~
2007-12-31 10:25:02 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Having selected as an opener, it was unfair by not playing him.
They should have defenitely played virender Sehwag in the first 2 test matches and if he fails to perform, they should have thought about other options.
2007-12-28 17:41:27 · answer #2 · answered by vakayil k 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes..that was a blunder, Sehwag not included in the 1st test...After all he would be Dravid replacement in the near future. so whats a big deal....?
2007-12-28 16:03:10 · answer #3 · answered by Aparytai 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You make an interesting point and I agree with the gist.
For example, I read or saw on TV sometime ago, about Kaif's performance (remember him). He had one of the best performance overseas. To me, it meant that it makes sense to pick him for overseas performances.
I just don't know about Sehwag though!!!
2007-12-28 15:09:42 · answer #4 · answered by Raja 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
dude r u serious virendra sehwag sucks like h-e-l-l no offense but he should have been replaced by dravid not yuvaraj ok
2007-12-28 15:22:37 · answer #5 · answered by Shikhar G 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You are right
2007-12-28 19:12:28 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
you have to tell this factor to indian cricket selectors.
2007-12-28 15:02:13 · answer #7 · answered by tdapower 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
segwag sucks
2007-12-29 03:51:30 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
she should play
2007-12-28 16:23:08 · answer #9 · answered by john 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋