You're looking at it from completely wrong angle bhai.
We can never and shouldn't compare batsman with the bowler. Both are different skillset, yes you can make valid argument that Ashwin-Jadeja are all-rounders but even with this analogy you have to look at, if they are batting all rounder or bowling all rounder (again its completely 2 different skills) For example Ben Stoke/Shakib are batting all rounder and Ashwin/Jaddu are bowling all rounder. Vihari on the other hand pure batsman who knows how to ball off spin, even our Vadapav Rohit and Koach can also bowl, so Vihari comparison with any bowler or all rounders doesn't make sense, hope this make sense?
If you want to judge Vihari then compare with him Pujara-Rahane-Iyer etc. IMHO his comparison should be with Pujara if we are going with like to like technique/mindset.
On nepotism issue.. Don't confuse favoritism with nepotism. There is virtually zero nepotism when selecting Indian team, yes on state level it exits (not much) but not in national level. Just look at some big names Rohan Gavaskar, Stuart Binny, Arjun tendulkar, you would understand everything.
Yes, this certainly makes a lot of sense. I think the comparison was not fair for Hanuma Vihari. He is obviously a good player and can certainly help the team in many ways.
But, in my personal opinion, this player lacks a certain 'hunger'. Like you know, you can look at a player and say that he has that special something, Hanuma Vihari is not that player. And it is clear, in the Indian team he doesn't fit perfectly, I am talking about the position that he wants to play in and the position the Indian team needs him to play. But it's probably just me, not everyone thinks like this!!
