The overrated and hyped Rishabh Pant

[Pakhs]

Not really, while doing the averages for WK Bats, you only take the averages in the matches they kept wickets. The physical burden is way more while keeping vs not keeping.

Yes but Sanagkara kept for a long period so his average must have been affected by the same burden.

[Pakhs]

Rizwan has played 14 matches away, including 4 versus. Zimbabwe and BD.

Pant has played 21 matches away, and no matches versus Zim or BD.

You can say whatever you want Pant and Rizwan are actually not the same players. Pant is by nature more inconsistent and up and down batsmen which is reflected by his average. Long term he is probably 38 average range batsmen. But he has ability to win match on his own when its his day.

Rizwan will need to average higher than Pant to have the same value as his model is based on consistency and not on big impact innings.

[Pakhs]

Wrong conception. Rohit Sharma can also walk into Australian team but this doesn't mean he will be better than Smith.

In a similar manner, Rizwan can walk in place of Shreyas Iyer. But Pant is at a level superior as batsman.

Batting/bowling averages are meaningless unless you look at impact.

Jadeja averages same as Stokes with bat. Does that make both equal level with bat?

Its actually not true generally speaking in Tests. Over a period of time specially if the roles are similar average will tell who is better. Jadeja / stokes comparison is wrong as one is number 5 batters the other lower order.

When it comes to Pant and Rizwan. Pant is more hit and miss style batsmen who takes risk and when it comes of impact is greater a luxury you can afford in strong batting line up.

Rizwan model is based on consistency however he must average higher than Pant to be classed equal to Pant due to Pants high risk high reward nature.

So far Rizwan is averaging higher and obviously hands down a better keeper (which people dont consider much these days)

[cricketjoshila]

Yes but Sanagkara kept for a long period so his average must have been affected by the same burden.

Sanga's avg as a Wk was 43.

Now Sanga is a very unique case, he kept during the early part of his career, the formation part. The same stage Rizwan or Pant are going through. They are yet to find their feet.

This is the toughest part, when you are new to the international game.

[U$ofA]

Its actually not true generally speaking in Tests. Over a period of time specially if the roles are similar average will tell who is better. Jadeja / stokes comparison is wrong as one is number 5 batters the other lower order.

When it comes to Pant and Rizwan. Pant is more hit and miss style batsmen who takes risk and when it comes of impact is greater a luxury you can afford in strong batting line up.

Rizwan model is based on consistency however he must average higher than Pant to be classed equal to Pant due to Pants high risk high reward nature.

So far Rizwan is averaging higher and obviously hands down a better keeper (which people dont consider much these days)

But why even compare the two. They are at very different points in their careers. Rizwan is at his peak years. Pant is 5-6 years away.

I agree, very little is made of keeping these days. But what stats are used to judge a keeper?

[shamaan]

Rizwan has played 14 matches away, including 4 versus. Zimbabwe and BD.

Pant has played 21 matches away, and no matches versus Zim or BD.

Rizwan has played 14 but his 4 Innings against Zimbabwe and West Indies he averages less than his his overall average.

[kumjsr]

Its actually not true generally speaking in Tests. Over a period of time specially if the roles are similar average will tell who is better. Jadeja / stokes comparison is wrong as one is number 5 batters the other lower order.

When it comes to Pant and Rizwan. Pant is more hit and miss style batsmen who takes risk and when it comes of impact is greater a luxury you can afford in strong batting line up.

Rizwan model is based on consistency however he must average higher than Pant to be classed equal to Pant due to Pants high risk high reward nature.

So far Rizwan is averaging higher and obviously hands down a better keeper (which people dont consider much these days)

Attacking game doesn't mean hit and miss and inconsistency.

Slower game doesn't mean consistency.

When people say that attacking players are hit and miss they expect either high scores or very low scores from such players. That's not the case with Pant.

Rizwan
Innings: 31
Runs: 1111
100s: 2
50s: 7

Pant
Innings: 51
Runs: 1920
100s: 4
50s: 9

Rizwan's runs per innings: 35.8
Pant's runs per innings: 37.6

Rizwan's innings per 100: 15.5
Pant's innings per 100: 12.75

Rizwan's innings per 50+ score: 3.44
Pant's innings per 50+ score: 3.9

Rizwan's number of innings with 19 or less runs: 11 (35.5%)
Pant's number of innings with 19 or less runs: 18 (35.29%)

[DRsohail]

You talk as if Rizwan avgd above 50? Gow many centuries by Rizwan outside pakistan?

How many 200 pant has , as he told me he wlut have scored 200 here.

[DRsohail]

Attacking game doesn't mean hit and miss and inconsistency.

Slower game doesn't mean consistency.

When people say that attacking players are hit and miss they expect either high scores or very low scores from such players. That's not the case with Pant.

Rizwan
Innings: 31
Runs: 1111
100s: 2
50s: 7

Pant
Innings: 51
Runs: 1920
100s: 4
50s: 9

Rizwan's runs per innings: 35.8
Pant's runs per innings: 37.6

Rizwan's innings per 100: 15.5
Pant's innings per 100: 12.75

Rizwan's innings per 50+ score: 3.44
Pant's innings per 50+ score: 3.9

Rizwan's number of innings with 19 or less runs: 11 (35.5%)
Pant's number of innings with 19 or less runs: 18 (35.29%)

Why does he average,s higher then?

[Sidilicious]

Yes but Sanagkara kept for a long period so his average must have been affected by the same burden.

But he kept wickets in about 33% of the matches he played in. So he cannot be compared to someone like gilchrist who kept for the entirety or a significant majority of their career.

[Buffet]

Attacking game doesn't mean hit and miss and inconsistency.

Slower game doesn't mean consistency.

When people say that attacking players are hit and miss they expect either high scores or very low scores from such players. That's not the case with Pant.

Rizwan
Innings: 31
Runs: 1111
100s: 2
50s: 7

Pant
Innings: 51
Runs: 1920
100s: 4
50s: 9

Rizwan's runs per innings: 35.8
Pant's runs per innings: 37.6

38 runs per inning are pretty high for a keeper. Many good batsmen score 35-40 runs per inning.

This is not average which can be boosted by not taking risks. These are actual runs you have scored. You win matches by outscoring the other team and picking 20 wickets. Adding 38 runs per inning by a keeper is simply top class.

[kumjsr]

Why does he average,s higher then?

Higher number of not outs.

I was replying to the comment where poster claimed that Pant is hit and miss and Rizwan is consistent, which doesn't seem to be case.

[DRsohail]

Higher number of not outs.

I was replying to the comment where poster claimed that Pant is hit and miss and Rizwan is consistent, which doesn't seem to be case.

If Rizwan is not our it means he survived more

[cricketjoshila]

If Rizwan is not our it means he survived more

Their avg contribution to the team total via runs remains same, whether out or not out.

[Romali_rotti]

That's why his average is abov 50.

Err Sehwag avgs under 50 and he has double 100s and a triple 100.

What's your point ?

[DRsohail]

Err Sehwag avgs under 50 and he has double 100s and a triple 100.

What's your point ?

My point is hsi average in SENA and was never a reliable bat in challenging conditions.

[DRsohail]

Their avg contribution to the team total via runs remains same, whether out or not out.

He could have scored more if he bat more in those innings where he was not out? Like he could have scored 150 in last match.

[kumjsr]

He could have scored more if he bat more in those innings where he was not out? Like he could have scored 150 in last match.

Sure.

Point is Rizwan averaging 46 isn't big deal. Even Pant was averaging 45 after 20 matches with more runs and more centuries.

Rizwan is already at peak of his career and age. Pant is yet to get there and already played more many notable knocks for India.

[kumjsr]

Not matter how much a player scores, if they are poor with their attitude towards team, drop them and select different players.

[Mamoon]

Pant is better than Rizwan. You have to be delusional to argue otherwise.

That doesn’t mean Rizwan isn’t an excellent player. He clearly is, but Pant is a once in a lifetime talent.

[jeeteshssaxena]

Australia wouldn't have declared with a lead of 350 if Pant was there, especially after Gabba.

[jeeteshssaxena]

Just imagining the massacre that would have unfolded if Pant got to bat on these pitches.

Lyon would have definitely retired after that series, that's for sure.

[Unleashed]

Pant has already played 4-5 innings which 99% of the test batsman struggle to play once in their lifetime. Rizwan is pretty good but Pant is a level above in test matches.

[kumjsr]

Australia wouldn't have declared with a lead of 350 if Pant was there, especially after Gabba.

Aus wouldn't have declared with lead of 350 in 120 overs against any other team.

[Local.Dada]

Looking at this incredible Aussie team and how they managed to almost win 2-0 and win the series in the end on some of the flattest surfaces against a decent team (Pakistan), puts into perspective those 2 innings played by Pant in SCG and Gabba.

Not to forget his 100’s in Eng, SA and previous Aus tour.

Nitpicking on Pant cannot come from a place of watching or understanding cricket for sure.

[Ab Fan]

As I have said time and again, Pant is the Gilchrist of this era while Rizwan is more on the lines of BJ Watling.

Averages are irrelevant when you have just completed 1000 test runs, they only matter once you reach 3000 test runs mark. In terms of impact and fear factor, Pant is simply at another level.

[sensible-indian-fan]

When did this Rizwan vs Pant comparison start?

Rizman is a fine player.

But comparison with Pant is a joke.

Pant is Gilly 2.0 (not only will he match Gilly but is likely to take Gilly's style of batting to a WHOLE new level).

There is no comparison.

Just no comparison at all.

[andy0204]

Would like to hear an opinion from @Junaids

[Mobashir]

It's nearly impossible to like these kind of individuals.
They have nothing in the head. The new young Indian generation of cricketers is completely lost.

If it wasn't for the big money, guys like Watson would have never come. I am sure he was thinking "what the hell are these guys doing, stopping a match for a no ball appeal".

Classless, Disgraceful Pant, but no-one should really be surprised. This is how they are. Money can't buy respect.

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

It's nearly impossible to like these kind of individuals.
They have nothing in the head. The new young Indian generation of cricketers is completely lost.

If it wasn't for the big money, guys like Watson would have never come. I am sure he was thinking "what the hell are these guys doing, stopping a match for a no ball appeal".

Classless, Disgraceful Pant, but no-one should really be surprised. This is how they are. Money can't buy respect.

What happened now? It seems I missed something.

[jeeteshssaxena]

It's nearly impossible to like these kind of individuals.
They have nothing in the head. The new young Indian generation of cricketers is completely lost.

If it wasn't for the big money, guys like Watson would have never come. I am sure he was thinking "what the hell are these guys doing, stopping a match for a no ball appeal".

Classless, Disgraceful Pant, but no-one should really be surprised. This is how they are. Money can't buy respect.

Did he use sandpaper like Steve Smith? Or maybe he beat up a man to death like Ben Stokes?

[jeeteshssaxena]

These days the best cricketer in the world usually have some sort of controversial things / events associated with them.
This also applies to the best cricketer and wicket keeper bastman in world cricket Rishabh Pant.

[U$ofA]

Did he use sandpaper like Steve Smith? Or maybe he beat up a man to death like Ben Stokes?

You are being unfair by only mentioning Smith. You left out Warner and the other guy whose name I cannot remember. Of course the bowlers, who "knew nothing"!

[Sidilicious]

He is young. He made a mistake. He will learn from it

[finalfantasy7]

Did he use sandpaper like Steve Smith? Or maybe he beat up a man to death like Ben Stokes?

whats your post got to do with mobashir post?

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

You are being unfair by only mentioning Smith. You left out Warner and the other guy whose name I cannot remember. Of course the bowlers, who "knew nothing"!

Bancroft?

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

He is young. He made a mistake. He will learn from it

Yeah. He is a 24 year old baby. 🍼

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

Came across this interesting article today.

'Rishabh is a kid. You can't just call players back like that': Shoaib Akhtar on Pant's angry outburst in RR match

Former Pakistan pacer Shoaib Akhtar called Rishabh Pant a 'kid' and said that as captain, one should have enough maturity to 'be the bigger man'.



Controversy erupted in match 34 of IPL 2022 when against Rajasthan Royals, Delhi Capitals Rishabh Pant lost his cool and asked his batters to walk off when the umpire did not declare a waist-high no-ball. Off the final over, DC required to knock off 36 runs, with Rovman Powell dispatching the first three balls over the ropes, with the third ball bowled by Obed McCoy being a high full-toss. Pant was not pleased as he felt that it should have been called a waist-high no-ball, and signalled Powell and his partner to come back. Assistant coach Shane Watson mediated the proceedings, while Pravin Amre walked onto the field to have a word with the umpire, triggering the first big controversy of this year's IPL.

As a result of his actions, Pant was penalised his entire match fee, while Amre was slapped with a one-match ban. Looking back at the incident, former Pakistan pacer Shoaib Akhtar called Pant a 'kid' and said that as captain, one should have enough maturity to 'be the bigger man'

"I have had several disagreements during my playing career but I never misbehaved with umpires, officials or authorities. I’m saying this because there are times when you need to be the bigger guy. With Rishabh Pant, he is a kid, a youngster. My advice to him is that whenever such a scenario arises, always show grace. I felt that it was a childish mistake from Pant. He is a kid. He’s just become the captain, is passionate… there is no doubt about it. He is extremely talented. He his entire career ahead of him. Shane Watson was trying to save him from controversy," Akhtar told SportsKeeda.

Akhtar highlighted Pant's need to be more gracious through an example of Pakistan's walkout during the 2006 Oval Test against England. On Day 4 of the Test match, the on-field umpires had awarded the England team five runs without mentioning to Pakistan or its captain Inzamam-Ul-Haq that the condition of the ball had been altered. Pakistan refused to take the field in the final session and they forfeited the game to England. Akhtar said that he wasn’t in favour of the decision even back then.

"It was a no-ball, I agree. Pant was right. But when the umpire declared it then you take down your protest. You can’t just call teams back like that. When in 2005 during the Oval Test, Inzamam took the entire team back and walked out, I was very unhappy. I told the chairman this is not the right thing to do. This is against the spirit of the game. Finish the game and do not forfeit," Akhtar pointed out.

https://www.hindustantimes.com/crick...50472-amp.html