Shikhar Dhawan!!!

[Ultimate_Game]

57 minutes ago, wanted_desi said:

Look at Kapil Dev's strike rate. What a natural talent Kapil was.

True. He was a genius and people still don't realize how gifted he really was. I read somewhere he played a knock of 80 something in WI in WI off 30 odd deliveries in a series before the 1983 WC. That knock helped India win the match and really built belief in the Indian team that they can compete in odis.

 

Edit: It was a knock of 72 off 38 deliveries before the days of PP and field restrictions. And look at the WI bowling lineup consisting of Michael Holding, Andy roberts, Winston Davis and Malcolm Marshall!  

 

Here's the scorecard of the match...

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/current/match/64209.html

 

If this isn't special I don't know what is  

[Gambit]

Stats for Indian batsmen in knockout games in all ICC events:

 

Ganguly's record is phenomenal (more in CT than WC) and Tendulkar, contrary to perception, has been amazing as well (50+ avg). Kohli needs to significantly improve his record (28 avg).

[TNAmarkFrmIndia]

11 hours ago, Ultimate_Game said:

I'm sorry but if you score a 100 in a T20 while nearly chasing 240+ successfully means you do have some ability and at the very least deserves a run with the team. If Rahane can hang around like bad smeall for 6 years without doing anything, why not give Rahul a chance? He deserves it and based on what he's shown he's pretty good.

And we're gonna give him a long rope based on one match where Evin Lewis scored a 49 ball century. 

 

So if Rahane hung around for 6 years, we should waste even more years on another similar batsman? What's the logic in that? There's enough talent in India that we can have more or less separate teams for Tests and ODIs. I'm pretty sure there's other emerging batsmen we can focus on for the limited overs format than a player whose List A strike rate is a pathetic 72.97.

[Ultimate_Game]

6 hours ago, TNAmarkFrmIndia said:

And we're gonna give him a long rope based on one match where Evin Lewis scored a 49 ball century. 

 

So if Rahane hung around for 6 years, we should waste even more years on another similar batsman? What's the logic in that? There's enough talent in India that we can have more or less separate teams for Tests and ODIs. I'm pretty sure there's other emerging batsmen we can focus on for the limited overs format than a player whose List A strike rate is a pathetic 72.97.

KL Rahul in his short career so far has shown enough up side to be backed. He's done quite well and TBH in no shape or form can be compared to Rahane.

[TNAmarkFrmIndia]

1 hour ago, Ultimate_Game said:

KL Rahul in his short career so far has shown enough up side to be backed.

Like when? His only ODI century is against Zimbabwe.

[sandeep]

46 minutes ago, TNAmarkFrmIndia said:

Like when? His only ODI century is against Zimbabwe.

His T20 century in Florida against the Sean Pauls has all the youngsta-beauty lovers splooging over his potential.  

[sandeep]

9 hours ago, Gambit said:

Stats for Indian batsmen in knockout games in all ICC events:

 

Ganguly's record is phenomenal (more in CT than WC) and Tendulkar, contrary to perception, has been amazing as well (50+ avg). Kohli needs to significantly improve his record (28 avg).

Gangu's numbers are padded by scores against the likes of Kenya, Nambia etc and that massive 100 against a toothless SL in the 1999 world cup.   He was a very good ODI opener for the 1990s, statistically appears great, but I wouldn't put him up there.   Dot ball machine, poor strike rotator,  but very good boundary hitter.  

[Ultimate_Game]

8 minutes ago, sandeep said:

Gangu's numbers are padded by scores against the likes of Kenya, Nambia etc and that massive 100 against a toothless SL in the 1999 world cup.   He was a very good ODI opener for the 1990s, statistically appears great, but I wouldn't put him up there.   Dot ball machine, poor strike rotator,  but very good boundary hitter.  

Even Tendulkar has lots of WC runs against minnows. IMO if you take only runs against Test teams, Dhawan would be heads and shoulders above any other Indian batsman in ICC tourneys.

[sandeep]

1 minute ago, Ultimate_Game said:

Even Tendulkar has lots of WC runs against minnows. IMO if you take only runs against Test teams, Dhawan would be heads and shoulders above any other Indian batsman in ICC tourneys.

Who would you rather have bat for you? Assume both players are 100% fit and at their best.  Let's not get too carried away with "numbers".   

 

 

[Gambit]

17 minutes ago, sandeep said:

Gangu's numbers are padded by scores against the likes of Kenya, Nambia etc and that massive 100 against a toothless SL in the 1999 world cup.   He was a very good ODI opener for the 1990s, statistically appears great, but I wouldn't put him up there.   Dot ball machine, poor strike rotator,  but very good boundary hitter.  

These are performances in knockout games. No Namibia etc here.

[sandeep]

Just now, Gambit said:

These are performances in knockout games. No Namibia etc here.

We played Kenya in 2003 Semifinal.   That qualifies as "knockout", but only on paper.

[Gambit]

8 minutes ago, Ultimate_Game said:

Even Tendulkar has lots of WC runs against minnows. IMO if you take only runs against Test teams, Dhawan would be heads and shoulders above any other Indian batsman in ICC tourneys.

In knockout games, Dhawan trails Tendulkar, Ganguly and and Gambhir.

[Gambit]

Just now, sandeep said:

We played Kenya in 2003 Semifinal.   That qualifies as "knockout", but only on paper.

Yes, that's only one game. He has a 100 against RSA in 2000 CT SF as well, apart from some other notable performances.

[Ultimate_Game]

Just now, Gambit said:

In knockout games, Dhawan trails Tendulkar, Ganguly and and Gambhir.

It's more about the number of matches played. This is Dhawan's only 3rd ICC tourney whereas others on the list played lots more. Gambhir is another one I like for his penchant for showing up in big matches - top scorer in the two world cups (2007 T20 and 2011 WC) we won  

 

I see a lot of similarities between Dhawan and Gambhir... both left handed openers from Delhi and both raise the bar when it counts  

[Ultimate_Game]

11 minutes ago, sandeep said:

Who would you rather have bat for you? Assume both players are 100% fit and at their best.  Let's not get too carried away with "numbers".   

 

 

At the moment if I've to have an India XI to play in an ICC tourney I would've Dhawan and Sehwag open with Tendulkar at 3, and Gambhir as the reserve opener. I simply cannot leave Dhawan out based on his performances in big tourneys and tougher opponents. Once can be fluke, twice can be lucky but when someone does it 3 times in a row over the span of 4 years it shows the guy has a clutch gene and I would have him in the team no matter what.

 

[sandeep]

4 minutes ago, Gambit said:

Yes, that's only one game. He has a 100 against RSA in 2000 CT SF as well, apart from some other notable performances.

Not knocking Dada.  He was a great player for us.  I have a very special regard for his blitzkreig 40-odd in that famous Yuvi-Kaif Natwest Chase.  Underrated innings.  

 

But if you are talking clutch openers in a big game, I would put Gambhir ahead of him.   Maybe partly because I have a very strong dislike for poor strike rotators.  Oh for the days when Veeru-Gambo used to open and take street-smart singles at will, and of course Veeru punishing anything remotely resembling a scoring opportunity.   

[sandeep]

1 minute ago, Ultimate_Game said:

At the moment if I've to have an India XI to play in an ICC tourney I would've Dhawan and Sehwag open with Tendulkar at 3, and Gambhir as the reserve opener. I simply cannot leave Dhawan out based on his performances in big tourneys and tougher opponents. Once can be fluke, twice can be lucky but when someone does it 3 times in a row over the span of 4 years it shows the guy has a clutch gene and I would have him in the team no matter what.

 

Veeru, Gambhir, Dhawan, Tendy, Gangu  - damn that's a murderer's row of openers.  

 

Agree with you on Veeru, and squeezing Tendy in at #3.  Its a toss up for me between Dhawan and Gambo though - Gambo was/is quite clutch himself.  And sooooooo much better against spin.   

 

Hmm, actually I would go with Veeru/Tendy and Gambo at #3.  

[Gambit]

13 minutes ago, Ultimate_Game said:

It's more about the number of matches played. This is Dhawan's only 3rd ICC tourney whereas others on the list played lots more. Gambhir is another one I like for his penchant for showing up in big matches - top scorer in the two world cups (2007 T20 and 2011 WC) we won  

 

I see a lot of similarities between Dhawan and Gambhir... both left handed openers from Delhi and both raise the bar when it counts  

Here are the overall numbers without minnows, where Dhawan stands out.

 

Here are the knockout numbers against non-minnows

 

 

Look at the numbers Tendulkar, Ganguly, Gambhir and Yuvraj have. Most of these guys upped their game in knockout matches.

[Ultimate_Game]

2 minutes ago, sandeep said:

Veeru, Gambhir, Dhawan, Tendy, Gangu  - damn that's a murderer's row of openers.  

 

Agree with you on Veeru, and squeezing Tendy in at #3.  Its a toss up for me between Dhawan and Gambo though - Gambo was/is quite clutch himself.  And sooooooo much better against spin.   

 

Hmm, actually I would go with Veeru/Tendy and Gambo at #3.  

I cannot ignore Dhawan's clutch gene anymore. As an example everybody and his dog agree that ABDV and Amla are "great" batsmen but if you have to select a team for a must win match, I would prefer someone like Dhawan over them. Dhawan is a beast in ICC tourneys and he doesn't bash minnows. He smashes the big boys for fun in the bigger tourneys.

 

I want Sehwag in there with instructions to go after the bowling with Dhawan as his partner. I would have Kohli in at 3 and Tendulkar at 4 - revised my original batting order as Kohli is a beast at 3 and I wouldn't play him anywhere else. Gambhir is the backup opener or backup no. 3 batsman and unfortunately Ganguly doesn't make the cut.

[Ultimate_Game]

4 minutes ago, Gambit said:

Here are the overall numbers without minnows, where Dhawan stands out.

 

Here are the knockout numbers against non-minnows

 

 

As uspected Dhawan is a beast against big boys  And his 3 matches in "knockout" matches is too small a sample size. But I would argue in a tourney like CT, every match is a knockout match. There are no freebies and margin of error is extremely small as Aus and SA can vouch for it. Unlike WC where you can sleep-walk through most of the group matches where a few losses don't have an impact, every match in CT counts.