Print

[ProCricketer1982]

150 runs in it..

Roots not even close to Pujara. 150+ as pro said

[joeljonno]

150 runs in it..

You think Pujara will score over 150 more runs than Root in the series between Eng and Ind?

[procricket]

You think Pujara will score over 150 more runs than Root in the series between Eng and Ind?

5 test series comfortably yes

I did not know until yesterday Stokes has as many fc hundreds as Root and is younger

[joeljonno]

5 test series comfortably yes

I did not know until yesterday Stokes has as many fc hundreds as Root and is younger

First you diss Joe Root, then your forum starts playing up. Coincidence?   

How about a bet then if Pujara and Root play all 5 matches?

Either ...

If Root scores most runs in the series, I win.
If Pujara scores 150 runs more than Root in the series, you win.
(if it is inbetween, it is a draw).

Or, on my calculations: 150/5 matches = 30 a match /2 inns = 15 runs per innings.

If Root averages more than Pujara, I win.
If Pujura averages 15 more than Root, you win.
(if it is inbetween, it is a draw).

This way should negate the rain factor.

Loser needs to put a comment, such as "joeljonno was right, Root won" or "procricket was right, Pujara is streets ahead" in your footer for 3 months from the day after the last test?   

[procricket]

No worries matey where have i dissed Root.

Just stating plain facts..

Stokes has as many Fc hundreds as Root.

Pujara scored more fc hundreds in a season than Root in his whole career to date.

I wish there was a bookie i would bet with cash but no worries.

[cricketbadger]

Seems to be a lot of people suddenly questioning Root after a quiet Ashes series, being very very fickle. He's young, and the people who have the best knowledge and insight clearly think he is pretty special as they keep playing him. His record for Yorkshire last year warranted his selection. Let's not forget when comparing him and Stokes and the fact Stokes has more 100's, one of these 2 opens the batting against a new ball, fresh bowling attack. The other bats middle order against an older ball generally and tired bowlers.

Then comparing Pujara and Root, the experience is a massive issue as people have mentioned. Pujara has played much more first class cricket. Can he or does he play all forms of the game for his country? Root can and does, also bowls some handy part time offies as well. Pujara has played the majority of his test cricket on slow flat Indian wickets which he will know like the back of his hand. Granted he made a ton in SA, but yes he's a good player so it's expected. Dot forget Root made a big ton against the aussies on the biggest test stage at Lords.

But really, who cares who is the better player? They both represent their country and are clearly very good players, one probably more advanced and established in his career with experience and age also.

Dave, i can picture your house decorated with Pujara wallpaper and posters

[procricket]

No mate that would be Brad Hodge bud..

It has been a comparison thread I have always had my doubts about Root

Hope he proves himself soon though

[CrickFreak]

I think they both are great find. I was really impressed by the way Root batted in his debut game against India, huge challenge to play India in India. Many have failed (Khwaja, Hughes etc to name a recent failures).

Stats -
Root - 15 tests, 955 runs, 36 average, 2 hundreds
Pujara - 17 tests, 1590 runs, 66 average, 6 hundreds (out of that 4 are 150+ scores)
Going by number of tests, Pujara is far ahead.

Agreed Pujara has played more first class cricket and it clearly shows in his temperament.
But first class cricket can only help so much. Else guys like Rohit Sharma would have played 50 tests by now and scored 5000 runs. His first class record is also impressive. And I am sure there are many more everywhere.

The difference between Pujara and Root is technique, positive intent and mental strength.  And since I have seen Pujara (since he debuted), it has not changed much and prolific run scoring. Pujara has improved match after match whereas Root has not shown that same progression after playing almost equal number of tests.

[FattusCattus]

In Dave's defence, he has been questioning Roots ability for a while.

I certainly feel that Joe needs to string 2 or 3 scores together to reinforce the initial good feeling about him. His 180 seems to stand out amongst a cluster of lower test scores which is a little weird.

[smilley792]

I don't think roots been the same since the helmet issue.


His gm grill disentegration didnt bother him that innings(that 90* would have been classed as a great innings if finch hadn't have made 154) but since, he's been in a masuri and hasn't been in the greatest form.
Has the change unsettled him? Or just coincidence in a poor patch?

[Alvaro]

First class cricket is a bit different though. With points for being ahead in the first innings in India having a significant weight, this means pitches must be dead a lot of the time. Ravindra Jadeja has THREE FC triple hundreds and also plays for Suarashtra. No one could question Root's supremacy over him. Perspective is required rather than a reliance on stats.

[Manormanic]

Stokes has as many Fc hundreds as Root.

But averages 10 runs per knock less, having played a far greater proportion of his career games at a lower level.  Also a fair statistic!

[cricketbadger]

No mate that would be Brad Hodge bud..

Bumped into him in Melbourne a few weeks ago

[Vic Nicholas]

Comparing Pujara to Root is madness, it really is.

From Pujara's debut against Australia in 2010, he has looked like a star in the making.

[jamielsn15]

Comparing players at the start of their careers, without taking into account so many variables, cannot be conclusive. Different opponents, home or away, FC experience, etc. Can have a massive impact to name a few.

some take to test cricket easily, as pujara has. Others grow into it, as many if the greats have. Either way, both will score in excess of 8000 runs, in my opinion. I'm sure we all agree that doesn't happen by accident, it takes a great deal of application.