Why has Team India failed to find a permanent #4 for so long?

[SecondSlip]

We have tried so many options for the #4 slot in our ODI team in the past 5 years but still do not have a permanent solution to this day. Let's take a trip down memory lane and see which options we had tried back then: 

 

1. Rohit Sharma - If anybody remembers, Team India had a ODI series in Sri Lanka prior to World T20 2012 in the same country. Rohit played in all 5 ODIs at #4 and flopped extremely bad, I believe he did not reach double figures even once in that series. There were loud cries to drop Rohit from the team and give chances to Manoj Tiwary. Rohit eventually became India's first choice opener after Sehwag had been dropped and has done a wonderful job since then!

 

2. Yuvraj Singh - After being ruled out of the game for over a year due to cancer, Yuvraj made a comeback into the team during India's home series against Pakistan where all our batsmen barring MSD flopped badly. After that, we played against England where Yuvraj failed again which cost him his place for Champions Trophy 2013. Fast forward to 4 years and Yuvraj has once again lost his #4 slot to Rahul and Pandey. So it's clear that he is no longer an option for Team India and that we need to look beyond him. 

 

3. Dinesh Karthik - Got plenty of chances for the #4 slot in both the Champions Trophy and the tri series in West Indies which happened right after in 2013 but failed and lost his spot. He's just not good enough for international cricket unfortunately. 

 

4. Ajinkya Rahane - After Yuvraj had once again lost his #4 spot (Got dropped from the squad twice in 2013) following failures in our home series against Australia prior to Tendulkar's retirement, Rahane was given a long rope as India's #4 for over 2 years from January 2014 to January 2016. During this time frame, he had scored only 2 centuries and both came when he was used as an opener. The only time when Rahane had helped India win a match as a middle order batsman was during our World Cup match against South Africa in 2015 where he had scored 89 runs from about 70 deliveries. But he did not produce more knocks like these during his 2 year rope and was let go as a middle order option after World T20 2016. 

 

Why have we struggled for so long? Are we selecting the wrong players? Are we making them bat out of position? Can either Rahul or Manish cement #4 as their own or will they also fail like the names mentioned above? 

 

Team India has to solve this issue immediately if we are to win the World Cup in 2019. I feel that this is an important issue that nobody discusses here on ICF! 

[Laaloo]

Because that position is only used to consolidate.

[Laaloo]

I still believe Rahul is our future number 4. The problem is then its tough for Pandey to get in as he has the same issues as Dhoni does. Cant hit from the go. I would love this top 7.

 

Rohit

Dhawan

Kohli

Rahul

Pant for now and can be moved up later on

Jadhav

Pandya

 

[kruiser]

Thats because we have a problem of plenty. Rahane, Rahul, Pandey, Rohit, Dhoni have been tried at this position. If we had no options, Rahul or Manish would have made it their own by now. 

[sandeep]

24 minutes ago, SecondSlip said:

We have tried so many options for the #4 slot in our ODI team in the past 5 years but still do not have a permanent solution to this day. Let's take a trip down memory lane and see which options we had tried back then: 

 

1. Rohit Sharma - If anybody remembers, Team India had a ODI series in Sri Lanka prior to World T20 2012 in the same country. Rohit played in all 5 ODIs at #4 and flopped extremely bad, I believe he did not reach double figures even once in that series. There were loud cries to drop Rohit from the team and give chances to Manoj Tiwary. Rohit eventually became India's first choice opener after Sehwag had been dropped and has done a wonderful job since then!

 

2. Yuvraj Singh - After being ruled out of the game for over a year due to cancer, Yuvraj made a comeback into the team during India's home series against Pakistan where all our batsmen barring MSD flopped badly. After that, we played against England where Yuvraj failed again which cost him his place for Champions Trophy 2013. Fast forward to 4 years and Yuvraj has once again lost his #4 slot to Rahul and Pandey. So it's clear that he is no longer an option for Team India and that we need to look beyond him. 

 

3. Dinesh Karthik - Got plenty of chances for the #4 slot in both the Champions Trophy and the tri series in West Indies which happened right after in 2013 but failed and lost his spot. He's just not good enough for international cricket unfortunately. 

 

4. Ajinkya Rahane - After Yuvraj had once again lost his #4 spot (Got dropped from the squad twice in 2013) following failures in our home series against Australia prior to Tendulkar's retirement, Rahane was given a long rope as India's #4 for over 2 years from January 2014 to January 2016. During this time frame, he had scored only 2 centuries and both came when he was used as an opener. The only time when Rahane had helped India win a match as a middle order batsman was during our World Cup match against South Africa in 2015 where he had scored 89 runs from about 70 deliveries. But he did not produce more knocks like these during his 2 year rope and was let go as a middle order option after World T20 2016. 

 

Why have we struggled for so long? Are we selecting the wrong players? Are we making them bat out of position? Can either Rahul or Manish cement #4 as their own or will they also fail like the names mentioned above? 

 

Team India has to solve this issue immediately if we are to win the World Cup in 2019. I feel that this is an important issue that nobody discusses here on ICF! 

Excellent post.  Love this kind of analytical thoughtful contributions to ICF.  Instead of the usual nonsense that is justified as "banter".  

 

# 4/5 requires a batsman with a lot of different types of skills to fill.  Which team has that great a #4 anyway?  AB DeVilliers is one, but he's a talented freak.  

[Sooda]

I dont think Manish needs to be able to hit from the word if at 4... he should be tried there for at least this entire home season.. Aus, NZ and SL

 

I read an article stating that Kohli should move to 4, and Rahul at 3. I think there is merit in that idea too. But its not ideal and probably last resort idea

[sandeep]

19 minutes ago, Sooda said:

I read an article stating that Kohli should move to 4, and Rahul at 3. I think there is merit in that idea too. But its not ideal and probably last resort idea

I would love to see this implemented.  Primarily as a way to inject a bit more pro-activeness in our batting game-plan for the 1st 20 overs.  Currently our template is for the openers to judge the conditions, get themselves in, and then try to maximize scoring while digging in for the big one.  Shikhar Dhawan is the only one in the top 3, who prioritizes quick scoring over a long innings.  And if we lose either of the openers, Virat is at the crease a bit too early for me, and I wouldn't want to risk our best ODI batsman for the sake of a potential extra 10-20 runs.  

 

I had suggested having Virat at #4 in case of an early wicket more than a year ago - this way we can task at least 2 of the top 3 batsmen to bat with a bit more aggressiveness.  Whether that's KL Rahul at #3, or getting Rishabh Pant in as opener and asking him to bat like QdK or Gilly used to, throwing caution to the wind.   Even if we lose one early wicket, I would be OK to trade 67/1 for 47/0 in our 1st 10 overs.  As long as we have adequate batting depth, and  we don't sacrifice VK's wicket in the pursuit of some early quick runs and put him in the best position to succeed.  Because he is really our best batsman in the middle overs phase.  We want him to bat through those middle 25 overs (from 15-40) as often as possible.  Virat is the reason behind India being the team with the best scoring rate in the middle overs in the last 2 years.  

 

And he can continue come in at #3 in games where we don't lose that early wicket.

Edited September 18, 2017 by sandeep

[Ankit_sharma03]

We tried wrong players - Rahane, Raydu, Project Raina, choker kartik , yuvraj who was a shadow of his past 

Till now Pandey n rahul are the best option , they shud be given some time before we pass a judgment and if they fail well then will be in a bit of trouble 

[Tibarn]

In our lineup #4 is a difficult position to bat in. Our top 3 of Dhawan, Rohit, and Kohli usually score the vast majority of our runs, and, in wins, they are usually play almost the entire innings. 

 

Since these three rarely let us down, there are lesser chances for a #4 to even get to bat. Think about the last WC or the Champions Trophy where Dhawan, Rohit, Kohli would basically be at the batting crease until the death overs. Imagine trying to establish yourself in a batting lineup when you usually get only a handful of overs to even bat, and when you do come in, you are expected to be able to score at a 100+ strike rate without even getting your eye in. 

 

Other teams with weaker top 3s are able to give their lower order experience during bilaterals, which bears fruit latter. Our bilaterals consist of Dhawan/Rohit/Kohli breaking records, our team winning, and everyone reaffirming what everyone already knows: that our top 3 is champion quality.

 

So, on the one hand, due to our top 3's quality, our lower order never gets much match experience/time to develop, and on the other hand, the #4  position requires the most versatile game: an ideal #4 requires the ability to both anchor an innings if the top 3 fails and to hit from the word go if they come in at the end of the innings.

 

A player, whether Pandey, Rahul, Jadhav, etc is expected to be able to do both, when none of them will have sufficient international experience, through our bilateral series, as long as Dhawan/Rohit/Kohli play every match in these bilateral series.

 

Some possible solutions are:         

 

1) Bat Kohli at 4: he is the best bat in the world and is able to both anchor an innings and bat from the word go. This would allow someone like Pandey to come in at 3 and play himself in. The cost would be that our best batsman would have less deliveries to play. 

 

2) Bat Dhoni at 4: Dhoni can possibly do both things required of a #4. This would allow us to fill the bottom part of our order with players in the Pandya Bros mold, who can accelerate from the start. The cost is that we would need the lower order players who take Dhoni's place to be able to handle pressure at the end of an innings, and some players like Pandey would fall out of contention for the ODI team. There is also a risk that Dhoni can't play like he used to, especially by the next WC. There was a cricinfo article that talks about how Dhoni is now struggling to take singles off of spinners. This would make it hard to move him to #4.

 

3) Strategically rest Dhawan/Rohit/Kohli for matches in bilaterals, which should weaken our top 3 and actually let the lower order bat. This should put the onus on whoever plays at 4 to be able to carry the team across the finish line.

 

4) Rely A tours: If our potential #4 can't get experience through international bilaterals, it may be better for them to go on A tours to other countries, so they can get opportunities. 

[sandeep]

@express bowling makes some cogent points about the quality of our top 3.  Agree with him quite a bit.  

 

One thing I wanted to add is perhaps its time that we started thinking about batting units in limited overs cricket differently, giving less importance to their numerical sequence position, and more to the type of role a batsman is expected to play and his skills and effectiveness at doing that.   

 

ODI innings can be thought of as 3 sub-innings - the initial power play, the "middle phase" and the last 10-12 overs in the end, referred to as the "slog overs".  A good batting unit should be constructed in a manner that maximizes its run scoring productivity, as well as its efficiency in terms of being able to put up consistent results - across those 3 phases.  A fourth aspect of LOI batting is factoring in the slight variant in terms of approach that's required when chasing.  Where you need to be able to dynamically adapt your batting method in context to the conditions, game situation in terms of overs spent, wickets lost and required run-rate.   

 

We can contrast the Indian template with the England team's for example.  England have embraced a batting method that aims at maximizing run scoring and puts a premium on attacking batting, especially in the 1st phase.  Their openers and top order will regularly bat with a lot of intent, even if 1 or 2 wickets or lost.  And they will continue the aggressive approach right through the 50 overs, banking on a combination of their significant depth in batting, and the quality of their strikers.   England continue to play attacking cricket with the bat, treating ODI cricket as an elongated T20.  The calculated risk is that either the approach will succeed and the batsmen will continue scoring, or the batting unit is good enough and deep enough to keep playing in the same manner for 50 overs.   

 

This is in stark contrast to the Indian ODI approach.  Our openers quite openly sacrifice those potential extra 20 runs in the 1st 10 overs, unless the bowlers serve them up with clear boundary opportunities or the track is a total road, and they are able to attack without taking too much risk.  i.e. Its a significantly more risk averse approach than England's.  It is a calculated approach that aims at attempts to prevent the possibility of an early collapse leading to a significantly sub-par total - an outcome that is not uncommon for the new-fangled England ODI team.  

 

The price paid by India, for such a risk-averse approach in the 1st phase, is more often than not, made up by the sheer quality of the top order.  Especially if Rohit goes big - he has a singular ability to really hit boundaries at will against all opposition, once he's "in".   Add to that, we have, arguably the world's best and most effective batsman for the middle phase of an ODI batting for us at #3.   The guy is just freakishly consistent and a middle phase batting machine.  And if given a good cushion of wickets in hand, our lower middle-order, bolstered with the addition of Pandya and the gap-hitting proficiencies of Jadhav, is able to be quite productive in the 3rd stage as well.  

 

The problem for Team India, is when our plan A doesn't work.  If we do lose early wickets, our plan B is a big downgrade - and totally dependent on performances that deviate from the standard probabilities.  

 

If Dhawan gets out early, we often end up an additional 10 runs short in the 1st stage.  And if Kohli gets out early, the next guy in the team to play that middle innings quarterback role for us, is the aging Dhoni, who is nowhere near as fluent as Virat.  Some fans have hoped for KL Rahul to play this role, but Manish Pandey, to me, appears to be the best bet at the moment for playing that role for us - anchoring the innings through the middle phase.   I just feel that his temperament and skillset make him a viable candidate - he may not be as effective as VK, but should be good enough.     In any event, my belief is that given the quality of the batsmen in our squad overall, an optimal Indian ODI batting unit does not need more than 2 batsmen best suited for this role.  Especially because our 2 openers can also do the job.  

 

And instead of thinking of #3 and #4 as our "consolidator" batsmen.  We can put numbers aside and think of Virat and Dhoni as the guys designated for these roles, and surround them with free-scoring batsmen above and below.   My earlier post in this thread argues the case for just that.   

 

I strongly believe that unless the Indian team finds a way to get more runs out of the 1st phase of an ODI innings, especially in games where we lose an early wicket, we will not succeed in putting up match-winning totals.  This is the primary reason we lost the ODI series in Australia 4-0.  We lost the toss, had to bat first, and consistently came up 20-odd runs short of what would have been a winning score.  The same thing happened in that CT game against Sri Lanka.  And the home ODI series against South Africa.  

[Muloghonto]

1 hour ago, Laaloo said:

I still believe Rahul is our future number 4. The problem is then its tough for Pandey to get in as he has the same issues as Dhoni does. Cant hit from the go. I would love this top 7.

 

Rohit

Dhawan

Kohli

Rahul

Pant for now and can be moved up later on

Jadhav

Pandya

 

Don't need someone to hit from the go to be a #4. 

You can have a guy with 80-85 strike rate as #4 just fine. If you face the rare situation of being 240/2 after 40 overs, send in your #6 and #7 to accelerate and #4 cans sit that one out. But 99% of the time, #4 comes in at <80 runs on board and more than 30 overs to go. Plenty of time.

 

Pant has done nothing to deserve a spot and he should stay out of LoI for another 2-3 years as his body matures. Or else we will be repeating the same mistakes as we did with PP.

Edited September 18, 2017 by Muloghonto

[Laaloo]

2 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Don't need someone to hit from the go to be a #4. 

You can have a guy with 80-85 strike rate as #4 just fine. If you face the rare situation of being 240/2 after 40 overs, send in your #6 and #7 to accelerate and #4 cans sit that one out. But 99% of the time, #4 comes in at <80 runs on board and more than 30 overs to go. Plenty of time.

The top 4 in the lineup I posted have the ability to bat out a lot of overs. If they bat out 35 overs most of the times, the likes of Pant and Pandya and Jadhav can blast from the go and give us a competitive totals. 

[Muloghonto]

2 minutes ago, Laaloo said:

The top 4 in the lineup I posted have the ability to bat out a lot of overs. If they bat out 35 overs most of the times, the likes of Pant and Pandya and Jadhav can blast from the go and give us a competitive totals. 

Yes, but you also said that the problem with Rahul and Dhoni for #4 is they don't blast from get-go. i am just pointing out that as a #3/#4, you don't need to blast from get-go 99% of the time. And the 1% of the time you need to (as in 2nd wicket fell after 40th over), you are better off sending your #6/#7 for quick runs than your regular #3/#4 anyways...

 

[sandeep]

Banjo this lulli -ghanto jodi derailed a quality thread with his anti-Dhoni agenda.   Ideally Moderators need to remove this nonsense from the thread.  

Edited September 18, 2017 by sandeep

[Laaloo]

4 minutes ago, sandeep said:

Banjo this lulli -ghanto jodi derailed a quality thread with his anti-Dhoni agenda.   Ideally Moderators need to remove this nonsense from the thread.  

My bad. Will move the convo to the other thread. Carry on with your conversation. 

[Rasgulla]

14 minutes ago, sandeep said:

Banjo this lulli -ghanto jodi derailed a quality thread with his anti-Dhoni agenda.   Ideally Moderators need to remove this nonsense from the thread.  

Nothing new this idiot gets free pass unlike other people.. He keeps spreading hate. He is nothing but cancer to this forum. 

[Rasgulla]

20 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

 

As i said, if averaging high was so easy, everyone who's strike rate is down, would automatically end with high average.

 

Pant is way worse than Dhoni in LoIs. Facts show that Pant struggles in 50 over format against B-grade teams. Dhoni is miles and miles better htan him right now. 

 

Don't waste time even explaining that kid we all know what his agenda is.. Logic doesn't apply to that guy.. Be careful or your posts will be deleted 

[sandeep]

22 minutes ago, Laaloo said:

My bad. Will move the convo to the other thread. Carry on with your conversation. 

Please do. 

 

And kudos for acknowledging it.   Takes a man to man up.  

 

 

Maybe there's hope for you yet to come out of your Dhoni obsession.

[sandeep]

22 minutes ago, Laaloo said:

My bad. Will move the convo to the other thread. Carry on with your conversation. 

Please do. 

 

And kudos for acknowledging it.   Takes a man to man up.  

 

 

Maybe there's hope for you yet to come out of your Dhoni obsession.

[Laaloo]

4 minutes ago, sandeep said:

Please do. 

 

And kudos for acknowledging it.   Takes a man to man up.  

 

 

Maybe there's hope for you yet to come out of your Dhoni obsession.

If Dhoni turns down CSK next year, I'll be a fan again.