Won't it be the solution to play 3 all rounders on a consistant basis with Jadeja at no:6?

[SecondSlip]

1 minute ago, SecondSlip said:

 

 

Edited September 9, 2018 by SecondSlip

[express bowling]

1 hour ago, zen said:

After a few games, if Jadeja does not live up to the high standards, many fans would be asking to replace Jadeja  

 

Disappointing. Strategically we are weak. Ind fans overrate their team and the players. They want the team to win everything. The players, including ATGs, usually don't live up to fan's high standards. Anyone who does well is automatically seen as a solution in the short term till he becomes inconsistent .... the cycle continues 

 

What we fans want is largely immaterial.  You are overestimating fan power.  It is only there as a collective group in the way of viewership increasing or decreasing significantly for a substantial period.

 

We keep discussing these things because we like it.

 

Quote

To improve selection in test cricket, first we have to acknowledge that Ashwin, Jadeja (though he has potential), Bhuvi, etc. are not test all-rounders.

 

Neither is Pandya of today.   I support him purely because of his potential.  

 

There isn't much difference between Pandya, Ashwin and Jadeja as test batsmen in 2018.  Bhuvi's grit as a test batsman is higher than all 3.

 

 

Quote

Being an All-rounder is a responsibility. Unless you are a natural talent, you have to devote time to develop both aspect of your game. These guys are not even consistent in their primary area of strength. Coming out and playing a few good knocks here and there is different than becoming accountable as an all-rounder. A bad performance in your primary area can make your stock fall sharply like what happened to Ashwin in the last game. A good batting performance by him probably would not have saved him from criticism for the failure to deliver with the ball, his primary area  

 

 

This Team management wants to play 5 bowlers and 4 pacers in SENA.  I like the idea because it makes the 3 main pacers bowl with intensity and take 20 wickets relatively cheaply.

 

Jadeja and Ashwin have always been good bowlers in Asia and rarely been good bowlers outside Asia, barring WI.  Ashwin has batted at 6 and neither has this adversely affected his bowling in Asia and nor has batting at 8 improved his bowling outside Asia.

 

If we want to play 5 bowlers then we either have to get a batsman who bowls or  play a bowling all-rounder at 6 or 7  or play a potential all-rounder or bits and pieces player.  

 

There is no way of doing this without giving atleast 1 person twin responsibility.  

 

Playing 6 specialist batsmen is not the solution for us.   Playing 5 really good batsmen is the solution.

[express bowling]

7 minutes ago, SecondSlip said:

We need the batting allrounder to average at least 40 minimum. I am not sure if Jadeja can achieve that so I won't say too much on him. 

We have top batsmen from both sides averaging 8 to 20  in SA and England.  Don't think the batting AR will average 40.

 

In Asia, the AR can average 40.

 

7 minutes ago, SecondSlip said:

Is there anyone in Ranji trophy who is a batsman that will give us 10-15 overs of tight spin bowling? He doesn't even have to be a wickettaker. Just a 5th bowler who comes onto bowl when the 4 fast bowlers need a bit of a break. 

 

I think a wicket taking spinner is needed in the 4th innings.

[express bowling]

1 hour ago, Charlie_ said:

Jadeja at 6? ICF jumping the gun again.

 

Won't be any worse than Pandya of today or Pant of today  or Ashwin or Karthick or Parthiv   (  players who have batted at 6 in SA or England  )

 

Basically,  any of these choices mean choosing a weak 6th batsman to play 5 bowlers.

 

 

[SecondSlip]

15 minutes ago, express bowling said:

We have top batsmen from both sides averaging 8 to 20  in SA and England.  Don't think the batting AR will average 40.

 

In Asia, the AR can average 40.

 

 

I think a wicket taking spinner is needed in the 4th innings.

Ok but who is that batting AR? Who are the options from Ranji Trophy? 

A specialist spinner will struggle to take wickets and score big runs in SENA. That's why it's better to go with a batting AR who bowls spin at #6 who can score big runs and pick up a bonus wicket or 2. We need the 4 fast bowlers to do the bulk of the wicket taking, even in the 4th innings. 
 

[express bowling]

41 minutes ago, SecondSlip said:

Ok but who is that batting AR? Who are the options from Ranji Trophy? 

A specialist spinner will struggle to take wickets and score big runs in SENA. That's why it's better to go with a batting AR who bowls spin at #6 who can score big runs and pick up a bonus wicket or 2. We need the 4 fast bowlers to do the bulk of the wicket taking, even in the 4th innings. 
 

 

I like this idea. But the spinner has to chip in with the ball too.

I follow uncapped Indian fast bowlers more closely than spinners ... their is no very good option as far as I know.

 

Based on domestic FC cricket, the options are 

 

Ravindra Jadeja

Washington Sundar

Jalaj Saxena

Pervez Rasool

 

Deepak Hooda  is there but does not bowl much.

 

 

Only  Sundar and Jadeja have potential as international batsmen.

 

 

Edited September 9, 2018 by express bowling

[zen]

1 hour ago, express bowling said:

 

If we want to play 5 bowlers then we either have to get a batsman who bowls or  play a bowling all-rounder at 6 or 7  or play a potential all-rounder or bits and pieces player.  

 

There is no way of doing this without giving atleast 1 person twin responsibility.  

 

Playing 6 specialist batsmen is not the solution for us.   Playing 5 really good batsmen is the solution.

The point is that we should not put too much pressure on players to turn in to all-rounders, which is a responsibility and requires commitment to focus on both aspects of the game. If we start judging Bhuvi, Ashwin, Jadeja, etc., for AR performances, there is no way they can measure up consistently on it. The fact that they do well with the bat at times is because they have relatively less pressure. These guys are more useful for their primary skills so should focus on that If we are playing them, our approach should be as if we are playing 5 bowlers of which some of them can bat 

 

Similarly, if we have a batsman who can bowl a little. He would be expected to contribute heavily in his primary area 

 

These players would more or less be 80% primary area, 20% secondary area 

 

For AR or bits and pieces players, we are basically looking at 50-50 or 66-33. Therefore if you are playing as a geniune AR or a bits and pieces player, expectations would be to eventually  avg 35-45 with the bat and pick up 2-4 wkts per test or some combination of it 

 

As for Pandya, who has been fast tracked, is going through the learning curve. I would give him time till the WI series by which he would have played 13 tests. The Aus tour would be where he would be expected to deliver and be judged accordingly (less leeway for failures) 

 

For someone like Pant, who can be considered as a WK AR, i.e. being played because he can get runs too, I would give him the WI series (esp if Saha is injured and needs more rest). He would be expected to deliver to a certain extent in the Aus series if he makes it to the 11. In Aus, performances like in Eng would not be accepted 

 

If Pant and Pandya don’t measure up in tests in near future, Ind would still have gained by backing them in tests as they can take the learnings and apply it to LOIs where they are more suitable. Test cricket experience would have helped them to develop in to better cricketers. Ind can look for adequate replacements in tests if necessary or if better options are available 

 

Therefore, it is not always a great idea to be labeling someone an AR unless he is committed to devote adequate time to develop both skills and be judged accordingly. Otherwise there is a risk to lose out on their primary skills by devoting more time to develop the secondary skills of which he does not have to be scrutinized extensively 

 

For such roles, unless genuine options are available, you ideally want to try players who can be utilized in other formats if they don’t measure up in tests. If they do, it is a bonus!

 

 

Edited September 9, 2018 by zen

[express bowling]

22 minutes ago, SecondSlip said:

Ok but who is that batting AR? Who are the options from Ranji Trophy? 

A specialist spinner will struggle to take wickets and score big runs in SENA. That's why it's better to go with a batting AR who bowls spin at #6 who can score big runs and pick up a bonus wicket or 2. We need the 4 fast bowlers to do the bulk of the wicket taking, even in the 4th innings. 
 

 

One interesting fact is ...  Jadeja is averaging  46 with the bat from 20 tests in the last 2 years.   

 

Has  eight 50+ scores from 28 innings and that is good.

 

 

CaHas er averages

	Span	Mat	Inns	NO	Runs	HS	Ave	BF	SR	100	50	0	4s	6s
unfiltered	2012-2018	37	54	13	1282	90	31.26	1996	64.22	0	9	3	133	34	Profile
filtered	2016-2018	20	28	11	787	90	46.29	1193	65.96	0	8	1	65	27

 

[express bowling]

7 minutes ago, zen said:

The point is that we should not put too much pressure on players to turn in to all-rounders, which is a responsibility and requires commitment to focus on both aspects of the game. If we start judging Bhuvi, Ashwin, Jadeja, etc., for AR performances, there is no way they can measure up consistently on it. The fact that they do well with the bat at times is because they have relatively less pressure. These guys are more useful for their primary skills so should focus on that If we are playing them, our approach should be as as if we are playing 5 bowlers of which some of them can bat 

 

Similarly, if we have a batsman who can bowl a little. He would be expected to contribute heavily in his primary area 

 

These players would more or less be 80% primary area, 20% secondary area 

 

AR or bits and pieces players, we are basically looking at 50-50 or 66-33. Therefore if you are playing as a geniune AR or a bits and pieces player, expectations would be to eventually  avg 35-45 with the bat and pick up 2-4 wkts per test or some combination of it 

 

As for Pandya, since he has been fast tracked, is going through the learning curve. I would give him time till the WI series by he would have played 13 tests. The Aus tour would be where he would be expected to deliver and judged accordingly (less leeway for failures) 

 

For someone like Pant, who can be considered as a WK AR, i.e. being played because he can get runs too, I would give him the WI series (esp if Saha is injured and needs more rest). He would be expected to deliver to a certain extent in the Aus series if he makes it to the 11. In Aus, performances like in Eng would not be accepted 

 

Therefore, it is not a great idea to be labeling someone an AR unless he is committed to devote adequate time to develop both skills and not lose out on his primary skills by devoting more time to develop his secondary skills 

 

 

 

I don't think the label of an all-rounder puts addition pressure on a player if he has a primary area of strength where he is performing.

 

Ashwin has been labelled an all-rounder and has batted at 6 in quite a few tests in the last 3 years.  But his bowling in Asia is still as good.  And his bowling outside Asia was never good.

 

Main thing is ... if  we want to play 5 bowlers then we will have to have an all-rounder at 6.  Is there any other solution ?  And we don't have a quality batting all-rounder as of today.

 

 

 

[zen]

2 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

 

I don't think the label of an all-rounder puts addition pressure on a player if he has a primary area of strength where he is performing.

 

Ashwin has been labelled an all-rounder and has batted at 6 in quite a few tests in the last 3 years.  But his bowling in Asia is still as good.  And his bowling outside Asia was never good.

 

Main thing is ... if  we want to play 5 bowlers then we will have to have an all-rounder at 6.  Is there any other solution ?  And we don't have a quality batting all-rounder as of today.

True. But by labeling someone like Ashwin as an AR, we are not really playing an AR. We are playing 5 bowlers of which some of them can bat 

 

If that is the fact, why put pressure (whatever it is), by putting unnecessary labels and when we know they are more like 7-9 level batsmen 

[SecondSlip]

26 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

I like this idea. But the spinner has to chip in with the ball too.

I follow uncapped Indian fast bowlers more closely than spinners ... their is no very good option as far as I know.

 

Based on domestic FC cricket, the options are 

 

Ravindra Jadeja

Washington Sundar

Jalaj Saxena

Pervez Rasool

 

Deepak Hooda  is there but does not bowl much.

 

 

 

In your opinion, who do you think is the best option at #6 out of these names?

[express bowling]

3 minutes ago, zen said:

True. But by labeling someone like Ashwin as an AR, we are not really playing an AR. We are playing 5 bowlers of which some of them can bat 

 

If that is the fact, why put pressure (whatever it is), by putting unnecessary labels and when we know they are more like 7-9 level batsmen 

 

I think they themselves are putting the labels as it would be easier to garner a spot in the 11 outside Asia for spinners and in Asia for pacers ... if there are twin skills.   Plus, the possibility of bigger IPL contracts is there if this labelling can spill over to LOIs.

[express bowling]

15 minutes ago, SecondSlip said:

In your opinion, who do you think is the best option at #6 out of these names?

 

Only Jadeja and Sundar have potential as international batsmen.   Sundar will need some more time to get ready.

 

Only current option is Jadeja ... who is averaging 46 with the bat in 20 tests in the last 2 years. 

Edited September 9, 2018 by express bowling

[zen]

3 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

I think they themselves are putting the labels as it would be easier to garner a spot in the 11 outside Asia for spinners and in Asia for pacers ... if there are twin skills.   Plus, the possibility of bigger IPL contracts is there if this labelling can spill over to LOIs.

They have to justify it too by working towards a career test avg in 35-45 range ..., otherwise they are like donkeys in zoo painted to look like zebras  

[SecondSlip]

3 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

Only Jadeja and Sundar have potential as international batsmen.   Sundar will need some more time to get ready.

 

Only current option is Jadeja ... who is averaging 46 with the bat in tests in the last years. 

Maybe we can play a lower order like this in SENA tests from now on: 

6. Rishabh Pant (WK)
7. Ravindra Jadeja 
8. FAST BOWLER #1 
9. FAST BOWLER #2 
10. FAST BOWLER #3 
11. FAST BOWLER #4 
 

[express bowling]

24 minutes ago, zen said:

True. But by labeling someone like Ashwin as an AR, we are not really playing an AR. We are playing 5 bowlers of which some of them can bat 

 

If that is the fact, why put pressure (whatever it is), by putting unnecessary labels and when we know they are more like 7-9 level batsmen 

 

If I may add to my earlier post  ...

 

Look at the advantage of carrying the label of an all-rounder.  

 

Ashwin becomes the automatic choice as the lone spinner in SENA  because he is perceived as the better all-rounder.  (  And I have been guilty of thinking this too ).

 

But fact is ...  in the last 2 years, Jadeja averages 46 and Ashwin averages 24 with the bat in test cricket.  

 

And apart from yesterday's innings, Jadeja played a crucial knock on a green bouncy track in Dharsmsala against the quick Aussies.

Edited September 9, 2018 by express bowling

[express bowling]

2 minutes ago, SecondSlip said:

Maybe we can play a lower order like this in SENA tests from now on: 

6. Rishabh Pant (WK)
7. Ravindra Jadeja 
8. FAST BOWLER #1 
9. FAST BOWLER #2 
10. FAST BOWLER #3 
11. FAST BOWLER #4 
 

 

If Pant comes good then it would be a nice option.

 

Fast Bowler at 8 could be Bhuvi in favourable conditions and Pandya on flat tracks.

 

Main thing is Pant coming good.  Saha can't bat at 6 and even 7  can be dicey for him. (  although he is the best keeper by a country mile )

[zen]

5 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

If I may add to my earlier post  ...

 

Look at the advantage of carrying the label of an all-rounder.  

 

Ashwin becomes the automatic choice as the lone spinner in SENA  because he is perceived as the better all-rounder.  (  And I have been guilty of thinking this too ).

 

But fact is ...  in the last 2 years, Jadeja averages 46 and Ashwin averages 24 with the bat in test cricket.  

 

And apart from yesterday's innings, Jadeja played a crucial knock on a green bouncy track in Dharsmsala too against the quick Aussies.

I can see the advantages of the label but unless they have a career batting avg in 35-45 range, they are like donkeys in the zoo painted to look like zebras 

 

Jadeja and Ashwin have played substantial games where their career batting avg is 30 or less. Bhuvi should be closer to 20 or in low 20s .... because of these labels, we are unnecessarily discussing them as ARs but I do see potential in Jadeja as a relatively consistent #7-8 batsman as he seems to have improved in the batting dept 

 

 

 

 

[SecondSlip]

10 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

If Pant comes good then it would be a nice option.

 

Fast Bowler at 8 could be Bhuvi in favourable conditions and Pandya on flat tracks.

 

Main thing is Pant coming good.  Saha can't bat at 6 and even 7  can be dicey for him. (  although he is the best keeper by a country mile )

Not Pandya please. We need a specialist front line bowler who will take wickets regularly. 

 

 

[express bowling]

9 minutes ago, zen said:

I can see the advantages of the label but unless they have a career batting avg in 35-45 range, they are like donkeys in the zoo painted to look like zebras 

 

Jadeja and Ashwin have played substantial games where their career batting avg is 30 or less. Bhuvi should be closer to 20 or in low 20s .... because of these labels, we are unnecessarily discussing them as ARs but I do see potential in Jadeja as a relatively consistent #7-8 batsman as he seems to have improved in the batting dept 

 

 

ATG all-rounders like Hadlee, Botham and Kapil had low batting averages too.  Imran's improved a bit after he quit bowling and became a batsman.  

 

Akram, Flintoff, Pollock, Stokes ... all have low batting averages.

 

There hasn't been any bowling all-rounder  in the last 45 years who has averaged over 35 with the bat after sufficient test matches barring Imran.