Quote:
Originally Posted by Rachael  The obvious problem with Sehwag is a complete absence of footwork: he's got a good eye.... but he's completely reliant on it. I'm also not sure he is anything special when it comes to playing the ball late, or with soft hands, either of which can (as Laxman demonstrates) partially compensate. |
While I wouldn't say that Sehwag's as good as Laxman, I do recall hearing about how he played several nice late cuts during his 319, but he's most definitely not a soft-handed player. But there are some other points in his favour. He's got such power that he doesn't need that much width to cut, he places it well, he's always in a good position to play the wide one (reminds me of Goodwin and Slater in that respect), he's got serious killer instinct (10 150+ scores), and he really lifts himself for the big games (as shown by his outstanding records against Australia and South Africa).
Quote:
Sehwag's not a player I'd ever choose to watch, but I do recollect the feedback an admiring Boycott gave on TMS a year or so back: the gist was "nice chap, but only interested in going for glory in his own merry way".
If I had to pick a batsman to bat for my life... Sehwag would be a long way down the list...
|
While he's certainly not the Dravid/Steve Waugh bat-for-your-life type of player, he's certainly one of the first names I'd put down if you want someone to attack from the start (as is sometimes necessary) or to wrest the initiative from the fielding side. As for being a glory-hound- well, maybe, but I don't think you could ever accuse him of playing for his average or anything like that.