Ajit Agarkar has played 188 ODIs for India. Here is a guy who was a batting regular for Sharadashram before switching to become a full time bowler. He has a 100 at Lords. And yet, he cannot be trusted enough to become a full time batsman for India.
Yuvraj Singh has played 179 ODIs for India. He has 49 wickets with an economy rate of 4.99. And yet, he cannot be trusted to bowl 10 overs for India every game.
India plays 7 batsmen and that leaves their bowling line thin. They play 5 bowlers and are effectively playing one batsman short.
So my question is - are we better off playing specialist batsmen and bowlers or is India a better balanced team playing only bits and pieces cricketers?
Does playing 8 bits and pieces players, 2 specialist bowlers and a keeper give India better balance than playing 6 specialist batsmen and 5 specialist bowlers or 7 specialist batsmen and 4 specialist bowlers?
Thursday, August 30, 2007
A question of balance
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
Bits and pieces players will only perform occasionally, that too, when the conditions suit them.
In the absence of true all-rounders in the team, India's best bet is to play specaialists. Maybe one bits and pieces player could be included as the requirement may be.
The fact is, India is in such a position due to poor fielding and dropped catches. In all matches, if we look back, the dropped catches have cost India winsome runs. The series could have been different for those.
And they always begin 50 runs down on fielding...with some self-determination, they can always curtail that to 20 at least.
Also, the bowlers haven't been consistent.
Catches, consistent lines of bowling and fielding are costing India the series. The batting has more or less done OK against great bowling and fielding from England, except in the first match.
Specialists will have to be India's best chance unless they are playing in such places where a specific bits and pieces player is worth playing.
Soulberry,
Thing is - having plenty of bits and pieces players give you depth - in both batting and bowling.
And with the Indian psyche obsessed with depth - even specialist batsmen freeze when we play 6 batsmen, maybe loading up the team with ODI specialists aka bits and pieces guys, may be the way to go .
Cheers
The point homer is that Agarkar is India's most successful ODI bowler ever, while Yuvraj Singh is possibly India's best lower middle order ODI bat ever....
As specialist batsmen and bowlers, they are the best we have. Besides, Powar and Chawla are played as specialist bowlers.
This is a team of specialists. The point of playing 5 bowlers is precisely so that the 5th bowlers overs can be bowled by a specialist.
And that is precisely what Dravid has tried to do - to play specialists - to play 5 bowlers (because we are a weaker bowling side than a batting side as was amply demonstrated today)
i would go in with 7 batsmen and 4 bowlers. 5 bowlers look good when we have an allrounder as good as Pathan. try him out. Give him confidence.
Why Dravs is persisting with 5 bowlers is beyond comprehension, and its worthless to expect some sense from likes of Agarkar (95 highest score in ODs, 109 @ Lord's in Tests) and Powar.
They are just incompetent with the bat. Great they can hold the bat too. I am being ridiculously writing them off, but look at the way # 9 plays for England and the way #9 plays for India.
Bits and pieces players never work. England is a great example of it. Ronnie Irani, Mark Elham, Ed Joyce, Ashley Giles and countless other players supposed to be ODI specialists (and yes Holioke too).
May be time for Dravid to go as ODI captain.
With greatest of respect.... that last comment is bizarre....
Ajit Agarkar and Ramesh Powar are not bits and pieces cricketers. They are bowlers. They haven't claimed otherwise, neither have the selectors.
Besides, bowling is India's weakness. Therefore it makes sense to play more bowlers - 5 of them and not have 4 moderate bowlers and part timers at 5th bowlers.
I don't see how that last comment is related to the bits and pieces men comment or to the one above that.
Its not time for Rahul Dravid to go, neither is it time for India to play 6 bowlers.
It is time however for the bowlers to bowl well and not dish out four balls twice an over. If they bowl like that it doesn't matter what composition India play, they'll invariably always lose.
Munaf and RP are relatively new, but for Agarkar and Zaheer as the senior pacemen - they have not delivered.
Agarkar has taken 4/192 in 29 overs in the series so far, while Zaheer has 2/143 in 29 overs.
Compare Zaheer with say Anderson from the Test series. Then look at Anderson's Natwest record - 11/149 in 39 overs.
Indias two senior bowlers have conceded 6/335 in 58 overs if you add RP Singh and Munaf Patel to that, you get
15/624 in 106 overs in this series. They've gone at 6 an over and that includes todays low scoring game in bowler friendly conditions
These are specialist fast bowlers not bits and pieces men.
Did i say anywhere India has any bits and pieces players ? India never has any bits and pieces players in its ODI history in this decade as far as my memory goes.
Trying to create smoke when no fire. 5 bowlers ? for ? playing with 5 bowlers dont win you matches, when 4 cannot do. And how many of your 5 bowlers have a cricketing acumen of a Stuart Broad to play sensible cricket ? None.
Likes of Powar and Agarkar, who are decent batsmen, have forgot their batting skills since ages.
I dont know about your cricketing knowledge Karthikeya Date, but I am very sure the logic and situations on the tour suggest India to play 4 bowlers.
Munaf is not new to the cricket any more. A young bowler like Broad in his 13th game impacts the game in a big way, then why the hell Munaf cant ? Simple , he has no attitude. His batting, bowling is pathetic. Fielding ? Does he know wots that ?
And KD, you talk of Dravid s captaincy. Agarkar was brought back fr his last over in 46th over. Logic ? He is the "best death bowler" in India, yet he was not given ball and even more shocking was RPSingh not finishing off his 10 overs. When he had RP to bowl, who has been India s only consistent bowler in the ODI series, why did he persist with Chawla who bowled more than necessary wides and leaked runs.
Well I dont know how you look at this, but simple cricket common sense suggests this is flawed tactics.
You are obsessed with 5 bowlers and specialists and in the eye of it, you find my comment related to bits and pieces players, whereas I never even mentioned India has bits and pieces players.
Smell a starbucks coffee KD.
"Bits and pieces players never work. England is a great example of it. Ronnie Irani, Mark Elham, Ed Joyce, Ashley Giles and countless other players supposed to be ODI specialists (and yes Holioke too)."
Since neither India nor England are playing bits and pieces men in this series, and since you referred to Agarkar and Powar's batting earlier in that post, i assumed you were suggesting that they were picked as bits and pieces men.
May be i was mistaken... no other conclusion seemed to make sense though.... i did not intend to be offensive in that comment... im sorry if it seemed that way
i disagree about the 4 bowler idea though.. the problem with it is as follows: 10 overs have to come from Yuvraj/Ganguly/Tendulkar. Unless the main bowlers have bowled well and taken a few wickets, the 5th bowlers come on against set batsmen who set about them - the sort of thing part time bowlers are not trained to be able to counter.
With India's bowling, one of the four bowlers invariably goes for runs. Hence, he can't complete his 10 overs. So the 5th bowler options have to account for more than 10 overs - which gives the opposition more part time bowling to score against.
The argument in favor of 5 bowlers is simple - the bowling is weak, hence it needs the extra bowler more than the batting needs the extra batsman. The argument against playing 5 bowlers in my view is that if you don't have 5 good bowlers to play, its probably better to make do with 4 and play the extra batsman.
That remains a stopgap situation. for you need 5 bowlers. Irfan - sure i hope he returns. He adds depth to the side. But he's playing India A cricket...
The post world cup disarray is showing up towards the end of this long tour all in all
which 5th bowler, whoever you assume to be has made any difference ? tell me. Has he made any difference to the scoreline in the first 3 games ? Bowling has never been India s strong hold ? Has it been ?
When Pathan was at his peak, we played 6 batsmen, 4 bowlers and 1 allrounder (an ideal scenario). Now wiithout Pathan n with pseudo allrounders like Agarkar, its difficult to accomodate 5 bowlers when we have a buffoon like Dinesh Karthik in the team.
Yeah i agree. But the 5 bowler strategy allows India to play 2 spinners in ODI's. The spinners are doing well precisely because they bowler after the powerplays. With just two front line seamers, the spinners would have to bowl in the powerplays which would limit their effectiveness.
This is where things can get so difficult for a captain. Rahul Dravid is facing it, and Ganguly and Tendulkar did before him too - the absolute and utter unpredictability of how the bowlers will do on a given day.
Post a Comment