Bhuvi Kumar exposed

[rkt.india]

11 minutes ago, Trichromatic said:

If he does then that won't solve our problems.

He was never a bowling alrounder. He made this team based on his batting exploits for MI and Baroda. Axar is bowling alrounder who will average 20-25 with bat and 30 with ball.

[Forever Indian]

I echo @rkt.india's point that Pandya is a batting allrounder and the issue is India is trying to use him as a 3rd seamer. Unless he is a proper bowler you cannot expect consistency from him which is required from your frontline 3 pacers. Unless the pitch is a spin paradise you require 3 frontline pacers in the team, and with Pandya being played as the 3rd seamer we have only 2 frontline pacers who are having to bowl upfront, bowl the middle overs as well as come back and bowl in the death.

 

Ideally Shami or someone new like Siraj or Shardul should be the third pacer.

Edited October 30, 2017 by Forever Indian

[swastikpanda2]

31 minutes ago, Trichromatic said:

If he does then that won't solve our problems.

We didn't had much problem with our 5th bowler when Jadeja was there. The problem started when Pandya replaced Jadeja and Jadeja replaced a third seamer in team. We lost T20 world cup 2016 and CT 17 because of this balance problem.

Why do we need to play a batting all rounder at 7 when we our batsmen don't play explosive from start?? Most often our No.7 does not get to bat. I find this team balance very disturbing, we mostly under utilise the batsman we play at No. 7 and always need the 5th bowler 7 out of 10 times.

I would replace Kedar with Pandya, and let him be the 6th bowler and focus on his batting to be India's finisher.

 

8 hours ago, rkt.india said:

He has been very good off late. Had an off day. I will have him on his death bowling alone. He is not far behind Bumrah in death overs. Today too his last two overs won us the game, 15 in two overs at that time, amazing stuff that too with wet ball.

Agreed Bhuvi should not be replaced. We didn't had a good death bowler for a long time. Taking wickets is not only enough, if that had been the case than we should not have let Aussies score above 330 in that Semi Final when U Yadav took 4 wickets.

 

 

[rkt.india]

33 minutes ago, swastikpanda2 said:

We didn't had much problem with our 5th bowler when Jadeja was there. The problem started when Pandya replaced Jadeja and Jadeja replaced a third seamer in team. We lost T20 world cup 2016 and CT 17 because of this balance problem.

Why do we need to play a batting all rounder at 7 when we our batsmen don't play explosive from start?? Most often our No.7 does not get to bat. I find this team balance very disturbing, we mostly under utilise the batsman we play at No. 7 and always need the 5th bowler 7 out of 10 times.

I would replace Kedar with Pandya, and let him be the 6th bowler and focus on his batting to be India's finisher.

 

Agreed Bhuvi should not be replaced. We didn't had a good death bowler for a long time. Taking wickets is not only enough, if that had been the case than we should not have let Aussies score above 330 in that Semi Final when U Yadav took 4 wickets.

 

 

Jadeja as a 5th bowler was a problem in itself. He was only good for Turners. His average of 35 is as bad as Pandya's.

[sandeep]

17 hours ago, Malcolm Merlyn said:

Avg of 36 over the entire career suggests that the player is a mediocre one.

Rather make personal comments learn to read stats.

What was Tendulkar's batting average in ODIs before he started playing as an opener?  Players often evolve and grow in their career, and you should have the ability to apply proper context instead of blindly parroting "Stats" in support of an ill-informed confirmation bias.

[Malcolm Merlyn]

What was Tendulkar's batting average in ODIs before he started playing as an opener?  Players often evolve and grow in their career, and you should have the ability to apply proper context instead of blindly parroting "Stats" in support of an ill-informed confirmation bias.

I have posted his performances since 2015 as well.No improvement.

So what position will BK bowl now?

[Hell Raiser]

Bhuvi is very economical. He rarely goes for runs. Thats what he is very good at. He just had a bad day yesterday. You can't criticize him for having one bad day.

Although the area he definitley needs to improve is his ability to take wickets. Wickets are very important if you want to restrict teams or put constant pressure on them.

[sandeep]

4 minutes ago, Malcolm Merlyn said:

I have posted his performances since 2015 as well.No improvement.

So what position will BK bowl now?

On a relative bad day for BK, if you look at his bowling in the last 10 overs of yesterday's match, he came through for us.   What were his figures in that last spell?  

 

Anyway, if you believe that there is "no improvement" in BK since 2015 - when he was just coming back from injury btw - then there is nothing that I can tell you, that will change your mind.   If you can't see what level of control and consistent pace the guy is bowling with, then I can't help you.   

 

As of right now, given Shami's fitness issues, BK is the first option after Bumrah in ODIs and T20s.   You can whinge away about him all you want.  

[swastikpanda2]

1 hour ago, rkt.india said:

Jadeja as a 5th bowler was a problem in itself. He was only good for Turners. His average of 35 is as bad as Pandya's.

Average does not matter for a 5th bowler. Your top 4 bowlers should be taking most of the wickets. He has a economy of 4.9 in Odi compared to 5.62 of Pandya. I have seen Jadeja running through his 10 overs while giving 45-50 runs, giving 1 wicket. Jadeja is a still good 5th bowler in LOI.  Indian team made a mess by playing him in place of one of top 4 bowlers.

[sandeep]

1 minute ago, swastikpanda2 said:

Average does not matter for a 5th bowler. Your top 4 bowlers should be taking most of the wickets. He has a economy of 4.9 in Odi compared to 5.62 of Pandya. I have seen Jadeja running through his 10 overs while giving 45-50 runs, giving 1 wicket. Jadeja is a still good 5th bowler in LOI.  Indian team made a mess by playing him in place of one of top 4 bowlers.

5th bowler in a top ODI team has to be someone who can bat at #6 or higher.   Jadeja can't.  

[rkt.india]

6 minutes ago, swastikpanda2 said:

Average does not matter for a 5th bowler. Your top 4 bowlers should be taking most of the wickets. He has a economy of 4.9 in Odi compared to 5.62 of Pandya. I have seen Jadeja running through his 10 overs while giving 45-50 runs, giving 1 wicket. Jadeja is a still good 5th bowler in LOI.  Indian team made a mess by playing him in place of one of top 4 bowlers.

but jadeja was not good enough as a batsman.

[swastikpanda2]

25 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

but jadeja was not good enough as a batsman.

Yes agreed.
Our batting was too much calculative and strike rotation oriented rather than going "berserk" mode like that of present England team. So we used to lose less wickets and hence seldom needed the service of Jadeja as a batsman but often needed his economical bowling.

Not advocating for Jadeja's place in this team. Just saying that Jadeja/ Axar are good as your 5th bowler( bowling allrounder). And Pandya should be 6th bowler (batting all rounder).

Edited October 30, 2017 by swastikpanda2

[swastikpanda2]

41 minutes ago, sandeep said:

5th bowler in a top ODI team has to be someone who can bat at #6 or higher.   Jadeja can't.  

Why does the 5th bowler needs to bat higher? He should be batting at No.7. Jadeja can bat. The thing is that idiot doesn't bat with high Sr in LOI. That's why he is rightfully replaced with Axar or should be someone like Sundar.

[Vilander]

4 hours ago, Trichromatic said:

Not really, he was selected in 2 series and captain didn't play him in matches. That's hardly saving him for tests.

he and Umesh did not do well in the one game they got, their death overs were poor and India lost. There is quality difference between B's and Shami/yadav in ODI. similar to what is seen from Shami/Yadav in tests.

[sandeep]

13 minutes ago, swastikpanda2 said:

Why does the 5th bowler needs to bat higher? He should be batting at No.7. Jadeja can bat. The thing is that idiot doesn't bat with high Sr in LOI. That's why he is rightfully replaced with Axar or should be someone like Sundar.

Its an arms race.  The top teams have figured out that 400 is the new 300 now in ODIs.   If you want to compete to be the best ODI team, you better have quality batting down to #8.  That means having a top-shelf keeper-bat and 2 allrounders.   For ODIs or for tests, Jadeja can't be batting higher than #8.  He's not good enough.   

 

Right now, we have a declining keeper-bat, and only one legit allrounder.  Not to mention our pooosy strategy when batting in the 1st 15.   That's we are not dominating ODI cricket in this age of batting, in spite of having some of the best individual batsmen in the business.  Our sum is actually less than its individual parts.   And dum-arsery fans are happy celebrating arbitrary personal landmarks like x thousand runs, phalaana  number of centuries and such BS.  

[Vilander]

Bhuv has a game and that is not suitable for flat wickets, where he is not able to consistently hit and wicket and seam. Shami obviously does this much better almost too good in it, but Bhuv is as accurate and better in death overs. 

 

If Bhuv needs a replacement that one has to be better than him on all aspects, it has to be a new bowlers. Shami can come into the ODI team based on the situation. 

[swastikpanda2]

24 minutes ago, sandeep said:

Its an arms race.  The top teams have figured out that 400 is the new 300 now in ODIs.   If you want to compete to be the best ODI team, you better have quality batting down to #8.  That means having a top-shelf keeper-bat and 2 allrounders.   For ODIs or for tests, Jadeja can't be batting higher than #8.  He's not good enough.   

 

Right now, we have a declining keeper-bat, and only one legit allrounder.  Not to mention our pooosy strategy when batting in the 1st 15.   That's we are not dominating ODI cricket in this age of batting, in spite of having some of the best individual batsmen in the business.  Our sum is actually less than its individual parts.   And dum-arsery fans are happy celebrating arbitrary personal landmarks like x thousand runs, phalaana  number of centuries and such BS.  

The Top teams you are speaking about have Roy (SR 104), Alex Hales (SR 97), Warner (sr 97), Finch (sr 90) and We have Dhawan (sr 92), Rohit Sharma (sr 86). You made the sense in last part. Dhawan and Rohit are not gonna anywhere. They will play same tuk tuk single tuk tuk with occasional boundaries. So we have to choose our team combination with our line up not looking at English lineup. If we are not gonna play explosive then better play a batsman short and bowler extra to defend the total.

 

Even if we are imitating English then also we should be playing Pandya in top 6 like Stokes does and have to find our Moeen Ali ( Krunal Pandya). What the hell are we doing with just 5 bowlers?? English have 6 bowlers (stokes, woakes, ali, rashid, wood, plunkett).
We have one of the ****ed team balance right now in the world even after having quality players. That's for sure.

Edited October 30, 2017 by swastikpanda2

[Silva]

All bowler have off days, but BK and Bumrah are at a bigger disadvantage since they are the only players in the playing 11 that can bowl at the death and in the first 10 pp overs. So if they are going for runs they can't be temporarily taken out of the attack and replaced by a 3rd seamer. This is why I really hope Siraj gets a few games and has an instant impact the way bumrah did when he got his first international Call up.

[rkt.india]

Bumrah, BK, and Shami are our top 3 pacers in ODIs. Ideally, all three must play most of our important games.  Pandya as a 5th bowler is a huge compromise for us at the moment. 

[Forever Indian]

5 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

Bumrah, BK, and Shami are our top 3 pacers in ODIs. Ideally, all three must play most of our important games.  Pandya as a 5th bowler is a huge compromise for us at the moment. 

Also with flat decks mostly in ODIs these days, it makes more sense to have 5 frontline bowlers rather than 4, so the fifth bowler should be a bowling allrounder or bowler rather than a batting allrounder.