Re: How much longer do we let Kaneria “develop” into a world class bowler
Dig sahab, your assertion that Danish is bowling a “lot” more overs than others to get the same wickets simply isnt borne out by the numbers. While thats true of present form, overall the numbers arent THAT different from Qadir. He has a better strike rate than Qadir, and his economy rate is inferior by 0.2. Not significant enough to draw such sweeping inferences.
If you look at the stats GA posts, there is a clear drop in form, which indicates that overall hes not the bowler you paint him to be, even if hes not doing well right now. However GA your idea seems to be that once that happens to you, whether its saqlain or qadir, thats it. You’re finished. How about Kumble then, our present master bowler
around the time kaneria is in his career, kumble had a much more atrocious spell. An average of 43 (!) and a strike rate of 97 (!) in 1997 following a not so stellar 96. Does that mean that hes been exposed and hes predictable and people know how to play him so he should be confined to ignomity and India needed to find a new, unknown spinner? Come on.
Saqlain shouldnt have been confined to the dustbin because he got predictable because every bowler is predictable really, in the sense of having a finite set of balls. Im sure he’d have come back better. Infact having limited variation sometimes doesnt keep you from taking wickets, Kumble is a prime example of that. Every bowler isnt warne.
Finally GA, your claim that he rarely gets top order batsmen out also isnt true. Infact 70% of his wickets are top or middle order batsmen (for comparison, Kumble has 68%)
Kaneria:
Kumble: