Sport Today

> > How come you didn't include my assertion a few months back that he deserved
> > a chance and Ganguly wasn't giving it to him? :-)
> Actually I gave weightage to the oldest of the posts. Thus I skipped
> my own post too. Sadiq is special so I anyway gave space for his
> comment as well.
> Vikram

> > Das Bangar Laxman SRT SCG Kaif Patel Karthik Kumble Srinath Nehra

> I don't understand this fixation with Karthik. By the repeated mention
> of his name looks like he has created some dometic World record and
> Indian team is missing out a great spinner. For all i know, he is
> another dustbowl spinner who has done reasonably well in domestics
> just like Amit Misra, Sarandeep and other spinners. The tragedy is
> there is now way to know from Domestics who will be a spinner who can
> do well abroad outside the dustbowls.

> Subject: Murali Karthik's figures
> Date: 2001-04-19 02:01:02 PST
> Not too long ago when BB's on this formum were puking against
> Ganguly saying things like he knows nothing about evaluating LAS
> talent in the country. He is biased against Karthik.Here are the same
> Murli Karthik's figures in the Ranji final

> 11 overs 68 runs  0 wickets (10 noballs)
> If he gets whacked in Ranjis how are we to belive that he is the most
> promising LAS in the country as ***ed by BB's on rsc?
> warm regards
> Chief,
> Bondabusters Police HQ

> Subject: Re: One more specialist bowler - Ravi Shastri
> Date: 2000-11-18 14:40:15 PST
> Plateau disingenuity ... since Murali Karthik has
> proven that he is not really a bowler ( by the
> definition of bowler being one who takes wickets ! ).
> 4 real bowlers would have made a difference. Either Zaheer
> or Sharandeep in place of the Murkh would have done the job.
> But rest assured Murkh will continue till he manages to
> take a wicket, when we will be told how great he is.
> If he is droppped before that, of course, it will be SCG's
> regionalism which will be blamed.
> And people wonder why India have a ***team ! The answer
> lies south of the Vindhyas.

> Subject: Re: One more specialist bowler - Ravi Shastri
> Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
> Date: 2000-11-18 18:30:08 PST

> I agree with Shastri. Given that we have 3 bowlers, a good part-timer
> (Sachin) and a passenger (Karthik), we need another bowler.
> Carrying Karthik as a passenger is not going to serve any purpose --
> -Srini

> Subject: Re: India-SL Test 1 -- what Indian team?
> Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
> Date: 2001-08-15 08:53:05 PST
> I was lamenting the disappearance of Murali Karthik from the
> international scene.  I wasn't saying that he should be picked now,
> but more like "I wish he was bowling well, so we would have
> two good spinners to choose from; and even, when is he
> coming back."  And also, a touch of, why isn't the Board doing
> something to help this talented spinner regain his form...

> Shantanu, then responded with his usual brand of profanity, that
> suggested that Karthik had absolutely no place to be considered
> in the Indian team, not just now, but for a very long time...

> At which point, I retorted that having the kind of talent that
> MK has, means that you certainly give the kid all the chances
> to bowl himself back in form; and that if he understood what
> talent was about, that you would give extra talented players
> more chances to prove themselves...

> Subject: Re: whois Murali Karthik??
> Date: 1996/10/11
> ......
> Murali  plays for Railways. Maninder and A.Nother (name escapes me),
> havesaid Murali is a very good prospect to play for India in the
> future.
>  Ciao,
> - gautham -

> Subject: Re: One more specialist bowler - Ravi Shastri
> Date: 2000-11-20 23:10:07 PST
> And why is Karthik a passenger, anyway? :-)
> ....
> Sadiq [ who still thinks Karthik will be fine ] Yusuf