Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
rtmohanlal

Has the time arrived to side line Shami more and more????

Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

he actually proved the difference in our win or loss. With third seamer averaging 38, you cant expect to win a big overseas test series.  Had he matched Bumrah and Ishant in bowling averages, result could have been different. 

No, He wasn't different in our win or loss. We lost in lords before we bowled. We should have won 1st and 4th test where he bowled pretty well. His stats in lords are poor but he was best bowler that day. I remember his spell to woakes where he was clueless facing him but runs were there on board and both him and curran went to slog. In first test he was okay, Four test he was best, Second & Fifth test he was really unlucky which stats won't show but you will have to watch replay. Many boundaries were edges passing near from slips & obviously when bumrah and ishant bowl and create pressure the batsman will look to score bit more runs against shami and pandya so they will be more attacking while facing him & pandya than ishant or bumrah. Yes he needs to improve alot and that's job of bowling coach but i won't say he was difference in win or loss.

Share this post


Link to post

Shami was one of the main reasons for the  big difference of 4-1. As of now he has been  only  successful in SAF of SENA, that too because of the conditions so helpful to bowling in his 2nd series there. In the first series in SAF he was  utter flop too. So , all in all he has been till now the bowling version of Pujara. Proven mediocrities like him are not at all going to help in the process of winning more matches in SENA. 

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, rtmohanlal said:

Shami was one of the main reasons for the  big difference of 4-1. As of now he has been  only  successful in SAF of SENA, that too because of the conditions so helpful to bowling in his 2nd series there. In the first series in SAF he was  utter flop too. So , all in all he has been till now the bowling version of Pujara. Proven mediocrities like him are not at all going to help in the process of winning more matches in SENA. 

First all were flop in 2013-14 South Africa tour. Ishant averaged 62, Zak 45 & Shami 43 with all having similar economy of around 3.4-3.5. He was successful because conditions were helpful in South Africa? Yes agreed but if he would have failed then you would have said useless all time in SENA countries. His failures can be considered in England. In Australia he wasn't really great but was best bowler during 2014 series on highways. 

Edited by Nikola

Share this post


Link to post
23 minutes ago, rtmohanlal said:

Shami was one of the main reasons for the  big difference of 4-1. As of now he has been  only  successful in SAF of SENA, that too because of the conditions so helpful to bowling in his 2nd series there. In the first series in SAF he was  utter flop too. So , all in all he has been till now the bowling version of Pujara. Proven mediocrities like him are not at all going to help in the process of winning more matches in SENA. 

 

In the first round of SENA tours for Shami  (  end 2013 to end 2014 )  ,  our pace bowling unit was in total disarray ... with no leader of the attack and a bunch of rookies, including Shami, having a tough time in foreign conditions.

 

No Indian pacer did well on those tours. The only exception was Bhuvi in England 2014 as England is the best place to bowl for genuine swing bowlers.

 

 

Edited by express bowling

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

In the first round of SENA tours for Shami  (  end 2013 to end 2014 )  ,  our pace bowling unit was in total disarray ... with no leader of the attack and a bunch of rookies, including Shami, having a tough time in foreign conditions.

 

No Indian pacer did well on those tours. The only exception was Bhuvi in England 2014 as England is the best place to bowl for genuine swing bowlers.

 

 

Yeah idk how he is responsible for loss of series. The test matches which we should have won are 1st and 4th test in which he performed best compared to other bowlers. In 4th test pitch wasn't helpful for pacers but he got 6 wickets + run out of root so surely he gave everything for us to win. Ashwin was real difference in 4th test. In 5th test shami and even bumrah were bit unlucky.

Share this post


Link to post
58 minutes ago, Nikola said:

No, He wasn't different in our win or loss. We lost in lords before we bowled. We should have won 1st and 4th test where he bowled pretty well. His stats in lords are poor but he was best bowler that day. I remember his spell to woakes where he was clueless facing him but runs were there on board and both him and curran went to slog. In first test he was okay, Four test he was best, Second & Fifth test he was really unlucky which stats won't show but you will have to watch replay. Many boundaries were edges passing near from slips & obviously when bumrah and ishant bowl and create pressure the batsman will look to score bit more runs against shami and pandya so they will be more attacking while facing him & pandya than ishant or bumrah. Yes he needs to improve alot and that's job of bowling coach but i won't say he was difference in win or loss.

He was there when Sam Curran scored those runs at Edgabaston and Southampton.  we let them score 240 from 86/6 in Southampton.  

Share this post


Link to post

Sharmaji, is only bowler i dont like. But honestly, I was prooven wrong this series.

This is only series where I cant find fault with Sharmajii or any pacer. Number wickets never tell how many times Shami went past the edges of English bats. We were so good in our bowling that even English experts are still cimparing how their pacer need to work hard and be like Indian bowlers.

Edited by mishra

Share this post


Link to post
21 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

He was there when Sam Curran scored those runs at Edgabaston and Southampton.  we let them score 240 from 86/6 in Southampton.  

 

England have packed their team with batsmen till 9.  This is because they know their conditions and the ball used.

 

The Dukes ball becomes softer after 40 overs or so and batting becomes easier unless there is massive cloud cover etc.

 

The English have outplayed us tactically as they are playing in their own known conditions at home.

 

We, on the other hand, have a very top heavy batting line-up away from Asia.  

 

This has been the main difference in the series.

 

The other factor being ... we did not include a genuine swing bowler in the squad in the absence of Bhuvi.  When the ball gets softer but still swings, a genuine swing bowler could have helped.  Which is why I wanted Rajpoot for England.

 

This Team management is tactically weak and not that observant.

 

 

 

 

Edited by express bowling

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

Guest, sign in to access all features.

×