The dumb math of playing the extra batsman

[Clarke]

14 minutes ago, Temujin Khaghan said:

it is norm only when one or two of the 6 batsmen can bowl like jayasurya or stokes...

Neither fits into the 6+1+4 scheme of pure batsmen & bowlers that i'm referring to in that post. Both pass the primary filter of AR: batting avg>bowling avg. 

[Ankit_sharma03]

Lets not forget situation where a bowler gets injured

 

3rd test- ashwin

5th test 2nd innings - ishant

 

more reasons we need a 5th bowling option

[zen]

5 minutes ago, Clarke said:

Neither fits into the 6+1+4 scheme of pure batsmen & bowlers that i'm referring to in that post. Both pass the primary filter of AR: batting avg>bowling avg. 

What were their stats when they started out?

[Clarke]

21 minutes ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

My problem in that bumrah is permanent n he plays all format

WC one yr left, i dnt want him to break down and neither bhuvi

 

Its also not about pandya, i hve been a suppourter of shankar to. Ill travel with both overseas

I dnt remember the last time we won with 6 batsman overseas

Lords- binny 

3rd test against eng - pandya

3rd test against Sa- Pandya

WI- ashwin was batting at 6

2007 perth test- irfan was their 

 

Rather the concentration shud be to find consistent batsman, instead they are given a free ride. 5 batsman or 6 batsman doesnt matter if they dnt perform 

Everyone has a job in team and its batsman job to make runs not lower order to be consistent as they have other jobs to 

 

or else find 2-3 batsman who can be good part timers then play 6 batsman

 

WRT Bumrah, like I said, the purist strategy would require a pool of bowlers to share the workload across a long series. Anderson & Broad managed 5 games because they only play tests AND our fragile batting didn't make them work hard enough, no way our all format bowlers should be treated that way.

 

We may have had the Bangars & Binnys in our one off victories but my primary point is that the legendary teams had top notch purists and that's not a bad formula. We had great batsmen earlier and have really good bowlers now, both of these factors need to come together, whatever the team combination. 

 

I agree that consistent batsmen are needed irrespective of playing 5 or 6 of them, there's no alternative to that. 

[Jimmy Cliff]

30 minutes ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

I dnt remember the last time we won with 6 batsman overseas

Lords- binny 

3rd test against eng - pandya

3rd test against Sa- Pandya

WI- ashwin was batting at 6

2007 perth test- irfan was their 

Hamilton 2009 and Durban 2010. 

[Clarke]

28 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

It was the norm before the T20 leagues started and even international pacers played lots of domestic FC games including County cricket.  Those pacers practiced bowling lots of overs a day and could do that in tests too.

 

T20 league era international pacers hardly play County cricket and other domestic FC games ... Asian pacers don't get a chance to bowl 15+ overs a day in home tests either.  They may lose intensity if they have to bowl 22 overs a day as they are not used to it.  Extra bowler needed more these days.

 

Another thing is ... there were a couple of batsmen who could bowl too in those days.   Nowadays, no batsman wants to bowl.

Chalo someone agrees with me on history (you & Tricho), with the rest it seems we've been watching & reading about cricket in diff dimensions. 

 

I don't fully disagree with the reality you present about bowlers. Having said that, they should be able to bowl ~20 overs a day for 2-3 tests, not 5 and that's where the pool of bowlers comes in. That is the very essence of a test fast/seam bowler, that stamina for running in with the second new ball after the team's managed 3-4 wickets only in 80 overs. 

 

No one though seems to be wary of batting going up **** creek in a bad session. There have been cases when even Yuvraj of all test batsmen rescued the side after a tough first session on a green top blew away the top and middle order. It seems no one remembers VVS' performances at #6. 

[Ankit_sharma03]

6 minutes ago, Jimmy Cliff said:

Hamilton 2009 and Durban 2010. 

those teams had 2-3 part timers.....the problem is we dnt have that anymore 

M ok if u find 2-3 batsman who are good part timers

[zen]

7 minutes ago, Jimmy Cliff said:

Hamilton 2009 and Durban 2010. 

It was a different time when we had batsmen who could bowl effectively too 

[kohli]

40 minutes ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

 

I dnt remember the last time we won with 6 batsman overseas

Lords- binny 

3rd test against eng - pandya

3rd test against Sa- Pandya

WI- ashwin was batting at 6

2007 perth test- irfan was their 

 

We won 2009 Hamilton test,2010 durban test,2011 kingston test,as well as perth 2007 test with 7 batsman and 4 bowler.

Perth 2007 test we played 7 batsman and 3 pacer( including pathan) and 1 spinner.

[express bowling]

6 minutes ago, Clarke said:

 

WRT Bumrah, like I said, the purist strategy would require a pool of bowlers to share the workload across a long series.

 

The problem with that approach is that the pacers can become insecure and reluctant to sit out.  What happens if the replacer performs much better than the replacee, because of a more helpful pitch,  and becomes the main pacer in the next shorter test series or home series, where there is no need for rotation policy  ?

 

Moreover, are there equally good backup pacers  ?   Would it be possible for us to rest Bumrah in a critical match  ?   Can SA rrest Rabada  ?

 

6 minutes ago, Clarke said:

We may have had the Bangars & Binnys in our one off victories but my primary point is that the legendary teams had top notch purists and that's not a bad formula. We had great batsmen earlier and have really good bowlers now, both of these factors need to come together, whatever the team combination. 

 

I agree that consistent batsmen are needed irrespective of playing 5 or 6 of them, there's no alternative to that. 

 

Yes ... we should look for 5 quality batters and 4 quality pacers.

[Global.Baba]

Let us look at this game, Vihari got us 3 bonus wickets and even though I am still 50-50 on him as a batsman but when he came to bat the expectation on him was to score a 100. Not because he is bradman but that’s a way it should be when any frontline batsman comes to play. With Pandya we hail 30-40 as a bonus.

 

Similarly a frontline bowler expectation should be that he takes 5 wicket haul every time he bowls.

 

adding a 6th batsman in absence of a genuine 5th bowler who can bat is the way to go.

[kohli]

9 minutes ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

those teams had 2-3 part timers.....the problem is we dnt have that anymore 

M ok if u find 2-3 batsman who are good part timers

Vihari & nair can be our part timer.

[Ankit_sharma03]

2 minutes ago, kohli said:

Vihari & nair can be our part timer.

1st they need earn a place as batsman ....let them do that 

I hope both play in WI series 

[Clarke]

1 minute ago, express bowling said:

 

The problem with that approach is that the pacers can become insecure and reluctant to sit out.  What happens if the replacer performs much better than the replacee, because of a more helpful pitch,  and becomes the main pacer in the next shorter test series or home series, where there is no need for rotation policy  ?

 

Moreover, are there equally good backup pacers  ?   Would it be possible for us to rest Bumrah in a critical match  ?   Can SA rrest Rabada  ?

 

 

Yes ... we should look for 5 quality batters and 4 quality pacers.

Maybe the players need to be conditioned towards workload management and horses for courses. The english were ready for that at the start of the series, we should grow up as well. Decisions are always dependent on the circumstances, we did see Anderson complete the 5 tests at the age of 36 and from the look of it he could go for another two. 

 

Good thing you mentioned Rabada; when Steyn went missing in the first innings of that iconic test, 3 primary bowlers including Rabada more than covered up for him. Rabada bowled 20/70 & 31/119 overs in that game. 

[zen]

Reading some of the posts gives me the impression that many have not come to the terms with the reality that we are in 2018

 

After guys like Ganguly retired, India even tried out Yuvraj Singh in tests as he could bowl too, along w/ Sehwag and to some extent Tendulkar 

 

It would be similar to WI selecting players now based on how WI did and played its cricket in 1980s 

[Jimmy Cliff]

7 minutes ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

those teams had 2-3 part timers.....the problem is we dnt have that anymore 

M ok if u find 2-3 batsman who are good part timers

 

6 minutes ago, zen said:

It was a different time when we had batsmen who could bowl effectively too 

But with the current batting line up if you're going in with only 5 specialist batsmen you're pretty much losing the game at the toss itself if you field first. We have seen it time and time again. More often than not 3 pacers and 1 spinner would suffice overseas. Pandya can come in when we are playing on roads. Otherwise I'd much rather play 6 batsmen or at least wait until Pant develops into a capable no. 6 who averages ~ 40. 

[Global.Baba]

1 minute ago, zen said:

Reading some of the posts gives me the impression that many have not come to the terms with the reality that we are in 2018

 

After guys like Ganguly retired, India even tried out Yuvraj Singh in tests as he could bowl too, along w/ Sehwag and to some extent Tendulkar 

 

It would be similar to WI selecting players now based on how WI did and played its cricket in 1980s 

Actually WI play 2  “allrounders” in their X1 like Jason Holder and Brathwaite.

 

Infact Holder has achieved a lot more than Pandya in tests :)

 

we we know how their team is doing 

[zen]

8 minutes ago, Jimmy Cliff said:

 

But with the current batting line up if you're going in with only 5 specialist batsmen you're pretty much losing the game at the toss itself if you field first. We have seen it time and time again. More often than not 3 pacers and 1 spinner would suffice overseas. Pandya can come in when we are playing on roads. Otherwise I'd much rather play 6 batsmen or at least wait until Pant develops into a capable no. 6 who averages ~ 40. 

The argument is that 6th batsman is needed since our batting is weak. But if the 6th batsman is that good, he should replace one of the struggling batsman and provide Ind with an improved batting line up .... which is why I said "optimize" the 5 batting slots and the 4 bowling slots first to determine what can work. Without optimizing, and adding w/o subtracting is not benefiting Ind considering its current strengths and weaknesses 

Edited September 11, 2018 by zen

[Ankit_sharma03]

2 minutes ago, Jimmy Cliff said:

 

But with the current batting line up if you're going in with only 5 specialist batsmen you're pretty much losing the game at the toss itself if you field first. We have seen it time and time again. More often than not 3 pacers and 1 spinner would suffice overseas. Pandya can come in when we are playing on roads. Otherwise I'd much rather play 6 batsmen or at least wait until Pant develops into a capable no. 6 who averages ~ 40. 

But we have won with them 

We won With pandya in SA n ENg, binny in eng

 

point is - pujara, rahane , opners has to take charge....if they are not dnt add batsman replace them

to much workload on ur bowler will break them , and incases of injuries in matches it ll be worse

 

Look at the numbers of overs bumrah n shami had to bowl in last test of a long series, after ages u found bowlers who can clock 140+ let them bowl at full steam

 

Pant is good enough as 6th batsman + pandya+ ashiwn/jadeja+ bhuvi is enough batting but provided batsman make runs 

If they are not making drop them not ur plans

why is pandya being dropped for pujara, rahane n dhawan issue

Pujara made 100+ 70 and thats its 

Pandya took a fifer + 50 

Dhawan did nothing

Rahane 1,2 innings

 

So not much to choose....atleast pandya gave balance and even showed more application with bat in 1st 2 test to . If these guys are not makung runs drop them. Also pandya is not the only option keep shankar also in their

[zen]

4 minutes ago, Global.Baba said:

Infact Holder has achieved a lot more than Pandya in tests :)

Pandya is in his first season though .... and won us tests in SL and Eng 

 

 

Quote

 

Actually WI play 2  “allrounders” in their X1 like Jason Holder and Brathwaite.

 

we we know how their team is doing 

 

So they have had to make adjustments considering the strengths and weaknesses of its players and options available