How badly would have Kohli been missing another spinner right now?

[Trichromatic]

Clearly pacers are no good and trustworthy even to maintain pressure.

[Trichromatic]

Not a spinner, but any good consistent bowler.

 

In our case, spinner (jaddu/kuldeep) happens to that bowler.

[sensible-indian]

Most ICFers wanted 3 pacers and Pandya. 

 

They said playing 2 spinners is madness, defensive, risky, etc.

 

Now look what happened. 

 

4 pacers and we are depending on a spinner for all the wickets.

[Gollum]

Team selection wasn't an issue, our quicks are letting us down big time. So much swing on offer, if only 1 of them could take some responsibility. Bhuvi here would have at least matched Curran. 

[Khota]

1 minute ago, sensible-indian said:

Most ICFers wanted 3 pacers and Pandya. 

 

They said playing 2 spinners is madness, defensive, risky, etc.

 

Now look what happened. 

 

4 pacers and we are depending on a spinner for all the wickets.

Speak for yourself. I wanted 3 spinners and as a minimum 2. For the millionth time every sport is about mismatch. Wars are about mismatch. India creates a mismatch with 2 to 3 spinneres. Lot of people on ICF are sheeple.

[sensible-indian]

1 minute ago, Khota said:

Speak for yourself. I wanted 3 spinners and as a minimum 2. For the millionth time every sport is about mismatch. Wars are about mismatch. India creates a mismatch with 2 to 3 spinneres. Lot of people on ICF are sheeple.

I said most.

 

Not all. 

 

 

[sensible-indian]

6 minutes ago, Gollum said:

Team selection wasn't an issue, our quicks are letting us down big time. So much swing on offer, if only 1 of them could take some responsibility. Bhuvi here would have at least matched Curran. 

Bhai difference is that the extra seamer is not going to win you the game. 

 

However an extra spinner can. 

 

Our strength is spin. 

 

3 pacers and 2 spinners. 

 

If ppl want pandya, get him in place of seamer. 

 

Only on total green tracks, we should look at a single spinner. 

 

Even there, pitch can turn in 2nd innings like Lord's. History of pitch matters too. 

[sensible-indian]

Amazing tricho. 

 

Ishant takes a wicket. 

 

Yessssss

[Khota]

4 minutes ago, sensible-indian said:

Bhai difference is that the extra seamer is not going to win you the game. 

 

However an extra spinner can. 

 

Our strength is spin. 

 

3 pacers and 2 spinners. 

 

If ppl want pandya, get him in place of seamer. 

 

Only on total green tracks, we should look at a single spinner. 

 

Even there, pitch can turn in 2nd innings like Lord's. History of pitch matters too. 

Pandya has no role to play. None whatsoever.

[sensible-indian]

3 minutes ago, Khota said:

Pandya has no role to play. None whatsoever.

I wouldn't pick pandya too but in case ppl want him.

[Gollum]

9 minutes ago, sensible-indian said:

Bhai difference is that the extra seamer is not going to win you the game. 

 

However an extra spinner can. 

 

Our strength is spin. 

 

3 pacers and 2 spinners. 

 

If ppl want pandya, get him in place of seamer. 

 

Only on total green tracks, we should look at a single spinner. 

 

Even there, pitch can turn in 2nd innings like Lord's. History of pitch matters too. 

From next test onwards sure we may need to play 2 spinners (unless mamba). But looking at the pitch I didn't think spinners would play an attacking role. In hindsight may be we can come to a different conclusion but when they chose their XI with no Moeen I assumed it wouldn't favor spinners. I wanted Kuldeep over Ashwin but otherwise I was ok with the XI. We need to admit that this isn't a spinning pitch by any stretch of imagination, Ashwin has bowled very well. Conditions may change next session and he may be rendered toothless again. 

 

But this test the quicks have disappointed me, I really thought they had turned a corner. 

Edited August 3, 2018 by Gollum

[Gollum]

@sensible-indian see man this was a pacer's pitch. Ashwin bowled wonderfully well but this was always tailor made for a 4 pronged Indian pace battery. 

[Ankit_sharma03]

When ur playing a game u shudnt be thinking that way- what if i had that, always work with what u have

[sensible-indian]

1 minute ago, Gollum said:

@sensible-indian see man this was a pacer's pitch. Ashwin bowled wonderfully well but this was always tailor made for a 4 pronged Indian pace battery. 

Pitch is ideal for 4 pronged pace attack... Problem is we dont hav 4 pacers who can be reliable.... Especially after bhuvi and bumrah... 

 

So why not go with 3 pacers and 2 spinners who are reliable...

 

Here jaddu cud hav used the rough to destroy a few lefties

 

[rkt.india]

42 minutes ago, Khota said:

Speak for yourself. I wanted 3 spinners and as a minimum 2. For the millionth time every sport is about mismatch. Wars are about mismatch. India creates a mismatch with 2 to 3 spinneres. Lot of people on ICF are sheeple.

Exactly India played 2 spinners overseas several times and won all the matches.

[rkt.india]

29 minutes ago, Gollum said:

From next test onwards sure we may need to play 2 spinners (unless mamba). But looking at the pitch I didn't think spinners would play an attacking role. In hindsight may be we can come to a different conclusion but when they chose their XI with no Moeen I assumed it wouldn't favor spinners. I wanted Kuldeep over Ashwin but otherwise I was ok with the XI. We need to admit that this isn't a spinning pitch by any stretch of imagination, Ashwin has bowled very well. Conditions may change next session and he may be rendered toothless again. 

 

But this test the quicks have disappointed me, I really thought they had turned a corner. 

i always wanted Ashwin because of lefties. Kuldeep is too inconsistent and would have leaked runs. What's is effective about Ashwin is his accuracy in this game which has lacked on previous tours or may be that is because of help the pitch has offered to him.

[Trichromatic]

39 minutes ago, sensible-indian said:

Amazing tricho. 

 

Ishant takes a wicket. 

 

Yessssss

I said in 2nd post, more than type of bowler, it matters that your top 4 play.

 

16 minutes ago, sensible-indian said:

Pitch is ideal for 4 pronged pace attack... Problem is we dont hav 4 pacers who can be reliable.... Especially after bhuvi and bumrah... 

 

So why not go with 3 pacers and 2 spinners who are reliable...

 

Here jaddu cud hav used the rough to destroy a few lefties

 

If Bumrah and Bhuvi were then 4 pacers are no brainer on this pitch.

 

Otherwise if any pacer is not upto mark then better to get spinner in place of weakest pacer.

[sensible-indian]

4 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

Exactly India played 2 spinners overseas several times and won all the matches.

 

I can name tests in the last 5 years where 2 spinners  would hav helped. 

 

Durban 2013

Lords 2014

Oval 2014

Adelaide 2014

Sydney 2015

Wellington 2013 (cos they so weak against spin) 

Centurion 2017

 

 

Edited August 3, 2018 by sensible-indian

[rkt.india]

36 minutes ago, Khota said:

Pandya has no role to play. None whatsoever.

Pandya and Kohli partnership is what kept us in the game when we were 100/5, could easily have been 150 all out. Those runs and most importantly the time that partnership had consumed made sure that difficult time was seen off. In these conditions, 5th bowler is a luxury because your main bowlers are effective enough.  You do need a decent enough batsman at 7 and his bowling is a bonus. we can even play an extra batsman in place of Pandya but will Nair or Pujara do enough.

[rkt.india]

2 minutes ago, sensible-indian said:

Name the tests in the last 5 years. 

 

I can name tests in the last 5 years where 2 spinners  would hav helped. 

its not just about last 5 years.  It is about history.