The dumb math of playing the extra batsman

[zen]

4 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

 

Gill/ who can bowl a bit/Pandya  

 

[Ankit_sharma03]

1 minute ago, Global.Baba said:

Simple Rahane gets replaced by another bat and Jadeja by another bowler. They are judged on their primary skill simple.

Agreed

1 minute ago, Global.Baba said:

 

If Rohit Sharma failed at 6, another batsman gets into his place. Just because Bhuvi or Pandya made 5-10 runs more than him, you don’t bat them at 6.

and where are u going to manage those extra overs so ur fast bowlers can rest ???

1 minute ago, Global.Baba said:

Simple you expect a batsman to score a 100 every time he walks in.

WIth this current setup start from top replacing them coz they dnt look like apart from kohli

and then come to 6

1 minute ago, Global.Baba said:

you expect a bowler to take 5 wickets every time he bowls.

 

You can’t go in expecting  35 runs and 1 wicket from a player. 

 

How is such a simple concept not  getting through?

 

 

What concept?? u want him to make 100 n take 5 wkts ...........u want 2 players in one

But his role is to give cushion to both

 

Does that change the fact that he is new and will gain as player over a period of time?? nooo

Are u specialist consistent that ur so harsh on an all rounder or bits n pieces guy>???? No

What matters name or contribution???? for team contribution but for u Name 

Also do u have plave incase their is an injury to ur bowler in between a match like ashwin 3rd test and ishant in this one???? No 

 

Dikhane ke liye batsman khilana hai khilate rho??? Jo naam ke khila rhe ho wo bhi kuch ukhaad nhin rhe ....1 aur khila ke kya kroge ...dikhawa aur kya 

 

All these book crap doesnt work all time team needs are important and thats why experiments have happened n it turned out well 

[express bowling]

25 minutes ago, Jimmy Cliff said:

With 1 50+ score in 6 innings at an average of less than 30, he is hit or miss so far which is understandable as it's early days in his career. If he is able to upgrade into a proper no. 6 Test bat with an average of around 40, he'd do wonders to the balance of the side and allow us to play an all-rounder at no. 7. Right now, he is not that player so throwing him at the deep end at 6 and expecting him to deliver right away is unfair. 

 

If we are judging by this tough-to-bat England tour then all batsmen from both sides have been hit or miss barring Kohli and Curran and to some extent Butler.

 

Moreover, if we want to play a No.6 batsman, he will be a newbie like Vihari too, who is no better placed in terms of the somewhat valid concerns you have raised.  Vihari snd Nair are in no way different to Pant as No.6 batsmen as far as effectiveness is concerned.

[Ankit_sharma03]

5 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

 

Gill/Bharat/Batsman who can bowl a bit/Pandya  

We are taking pandya coz he can give u 10-15 over

Bit ka matalb hota hai 3-4 , after that part timers get tired and loose control....maar padwani hai

 

Bharat is a keeper

Gill - does he even bowl????

thodi bht bowling to rohit aur kohli bhi daalte hai......dalwa lo 

Dhawan bhi dalta hai and he chucks to ......krwalo

Even vijay bowls a bit......krwalo 

[Ankit_sharma03]

9 minutes ago, Jimmy Cliff said:

Abe what bizarre expectation? I have low expectations which is why I want Pant to continue at 7 and establish himself before he's given the extra responsibility of batting in the top 6. And no one here with half a brain wants Rohit or Dhawan in the Test side. Stop creating faaltu strawmen arguments.

n how have u declared that pant is relatively weeker as batsman to lets say newbies like vihari , nair or others

 

Pant might be even better , the guy has a 100 in eng now........no mean achievement....a specialist like pujara took 8-9 test matches in england to get that and even kohli was abysmal in his 1st tour 

 

Playing pant up the order will only give him more responsibility and add more balance

If u have less expectation so stop looking at results for sometime and jst back him 

[coffee_rules]

Add a Poal! Let's see who thinks we need pandya/6 batsman

[coffee_rules]

2 minutes ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

n how have u declared that pant is relatively weeker as batsman to lets say newbies like vihari , nair or others

 

Pant might be even better , the guy has a 100 in eng now........no mean achievement....a specialist like pujara took 8-9 test matches in england to get that and even kohli was abysmal in his 1st tour 

 

Playing pant up the order will only give him more responsibility and add more balance

If u have less expectation so stop looking at results for sometime and jst back him 

Even Aag Aag Agarkar has a Test 100 in England, that too in Lord's where even Tendulkar has not scored a 100!

[Ankit_sharma03]

Just now, coffee_rules said:

Even Aag Aag Agarkar has a Test 100 in England, that too in Lord's where even Tendulkar has not scored a 100!

and he had the batting talent but he didnt use it his problem how have u assumed pant will go same lane

[coffee_rules]

11 minutes ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

and he had the batting talent but he didnt use it his problem how have u assumed pant will go same lane

I only commented on how Eng test 100 is not important as a cred for a test bat. Pant is a better than Aag is a different matter. We need a proper wicketkeeper, playing Pant there itself is a risk enough, we should thrust him at #6 and expect 100s from him. If he scores one at #7 it will be a bonus.  If the criteria for Pandya is a 5th bowler to rest the main bowlers and score 30 runs, then we can invest that in somebody like Vijay Shankar who has more domestic experience than Pandya and can bat a lot better than Pandya. 

[Jimmy Cliff]

19 minutes ago, zen said:

But note that

• the 6th batsman is not likely to do much better than what Pant, Ashwin, Pandya, Jadeja, etc. can offer at 6 and collectively as a group. The average listed above accounts for relatively difficult playing conditions as well 

That is extremely far-fetched. Even in the last 5 years, we have a couple of batsmen who have been able to average 50+ at 6. There's nothing to suggest that if he back the right player at 6, that he won't do much better than these folks.

 

 

26 minutes ago, zen said:

we lost by playing 6 batsmen despite not winning the toss and bowling first.  Therefore the concept that the team could do well w/ 6 batsmen despite batting 2nd was not proved in this series. In fact, take Rahul's 100 out and this is one of the worst batting performance by the top 6 in relatively batting friendly conditions 

But in this away cycle, we have lost each and every game where we have picked an all-rounder and bowled first (at least 5 games). We simply find it impossible to chase anything above 200 in the 4th innings. Just as we find it extremely hard to put up a size-able lead in the first innings. The 2 games that we have won this year were when we batted first.

 

30 minutes ago, zen said:

when our batting is strong, we play extra batsman. and when our bowling is strong, we play extra batsman. So it could be that playing 6 batsmen could be serving the purpose of providing comfort to fans rather than offering meaningful benefits than what an AR/bowler could in that position in the current set up. In that case, teams cannot be chosen to provide imaginary assurances to fans. There have to be tangible benefits as well

Right now I am just endorsing playing an extra batsman in SENA countries on non-roads. We can continue playing 5 bats in Asia/WI and while playing on roads in SENA (although this TM isn't very good at judging the pitch/conditions either). If we get to a stage where the top 5 start clicking collectively regularly we can always revert to picking an all-rounder.

[express bowling]

1 hour ago, Global.Baba said:

, you don’t play an allrounder just for the sake of it hoping he will become a genuine allrounder.

 

That is incorrect.  Bits and pieces players are not being played in test matches in the hope that they will become great allrounders some day.  They are being played to protect bowlers from potential injury due to overwork in test matches.

 

For 90% international cricketers all over the world ... the focal point is T20 leagues and the huge amount of money and glamour they bring.  They don't want to get injured while toiling hard as bowlers in test matches ... even batsmen don't want to bowl nowadays as bowling makes a cricketer far more susceptible to injury.

 

Hence almost every team is playing a cricketer in tests who is neither a top batsman nor a top bowler  ( basically a bits and pieces player  ) who can bat at 6 or 7 and bowl a bit to give rest to main bowlers.

 

Australia ... Mitch Marsh

India ... Pandya,  Binny

England ... Moeen and many other stop gap guys.

SA ... Phehlukwayo, Morris, McLaren

WI ... Holder, Brathwaite

Pakistan ... Faheem Ashraf

 

 

If these guys are not played then the top pacers will not bowl with intensity for 22 overs a day ... in this age of T20 leagues.

 

Any injury picked up due to this stress may become chronic and affect their T20 careers.

 

If we want quality test cricket in the 2010s from 10 other guys ... we must be prepared for 1 bits and pieces player.

Edited September 11, 2018 by express bowling

[Jimmy Cliff]

25 minutes ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

n how have u declared that pant is relatively weeker as batsman to lets say newbies like vihari , nair or others

 

Pant might be even better , the guy has a 100 in eng now........no mean achievement....a specialist like pujara took 8-9 test matches in england to get that and even kohli was abysmal in his 1st tour 

 

Playing pant up the order will only give him more responsibility and add more balance

If u have less expectation so stop looking at results for sometime and jst back him 

Based on what has happened so far in his career. I believe a guy like him is much better off playing his natural game at 7 rather than being asked to perform the role of a specialist batsman at 6 so early on in his career. If you have any actual evidence that he is a better choice at 6 right now in SENA ahead of specialist batsmen, show it. I will change my mind. 

[zen]

15 minutes ago, Jimmy Cliff said:

That is extremely far-fetched. Even in the last 5 years, we have a couple of batsmen who have been able to average 50+ at 6. There's nothing to suggest that if he back the right player at 6, that he won't do much better than these folks.

 

 

But in this away cycle, we have lost each and every game where we have picked an all-rounder and bowled first (at least 5 games). We simply find it impossible to chase anything above 200 in the 4th innings. Just as we find it extremely hard to put up a size-able lead in the first innings. The 2 games that we have won this year were when we batted first.

 

Right now I am just endorsing playing an extra batsman in SENA countries on non-roads. We can continue playing 5 bats in Asia/WI and while playing on roads in SENA (although this TM isn't very good at judging the pitch/conditions either). If we get to a stage where the top 5 start clicking collectively regularly we can always revert to picking an all-rounder.

I have nothing against playing the extra batsman if a) our batting unit is strong (like in the past), b) the #6 provides added value, and c) as a group the batting can compensate for the diluted bowling, which is, for a change, a strength for Ind now .... Bowling probably used to be our strength in the 70s with the 4 spinners 

 

Anyways, will just make a couple of quick notes related to your post above:

1. Avg 50+ at 6 when many in the top 5 don't is not the same as optimizing the 5 batting slots where you would be playing batsmen who can avg the best in the conditions presented 

2. An ordinary 6th batsmen, supporting an ordinary top 5, will not help Ind to gain lead or chase totals as demonstrated in the last test, which is among our worst batting performances by the top 6 esp. if you take Rahul's 100 out 

 

Right now, I see our team more like the 80s team (than 90s or 20s) where we had a few great to good batsmen and bowlers, who were supported by decent batsmen, bowlers and all-rounders. And who competed as a group to give favorable results .... and therefore, at this point, the 5-4-1-1 combination appears relatively favorable to me

 

View overall figures [change view]

Primary team India

Opposition team England

Start of match date between 1 Jan 1986 and 1 Jan 1987

Ordered by batting average (descending)

Page 1 of 1

Showing 1 - 13 of 13

First Previous

Next  Last

Return to query menu Cleared query menu

Overall figures

Player	Mat	Inns	NO	Runs	HS	Ave	BF	SR	100	50	0	4s	6s
DB Vengsarkar	3	6	2	360	126*	90.00	742	48.51	2	1	1	38	1
KS More	3	5	2	156	48	52.00	374	41.71	0	0	0	17	0
M Amarnath	2	4	0	172	79	43.00	575	29.91	0	2	0	22	0
M Azharuddin	3	6	1	157	64	31.40	398	39.44	0	1	0	18	0
SM Gavaskar	3	6	0	175	54	29.16	452	38.71	0	1	0	22	0
S Madan Lal	1	2	0	42	22	21.00	110	38.18	0	0	0	6	0
RMH Binny	3	4	0	81	40	20.25	168	48.21	0	0	0	10	1
N Kapil Dev	3	5	1	81	31	20.25	58	139.65	0	0	1	13	2
CS Pandit	1	2	0	40	23	20.00	109	36.69	0	0	0	5	0
K Srikkanth	3	6	0	105	31	17.50	210	50.00	0	0	1	15	0
RJ Shastri	3	6	1	74	32	14.80	191	38.74	0	0	1	7	1
C Sharma	2	2	0	11	9	5.50	22	50.00	0	0	0	2	0
Maninder Singh	3	4	1	10	6	3.33	87	11.49	0	0	0	1	0

 

 

Edited September 11, 2018 by zen

[express bowling]

6 minutes ago, Jimmy Cliff said:

Based on what has happened so far in his career. I believe a guy like him is much better off playing his natural game at 7 rather than being asked to perform the role of a specialist batsman at 6 so early on in his career. If you have any actual evidence that he is a better choice at 6 right now in SENA ahead of specialist batsmen, show it. I will change my mind. 

 

Pant is a specialist batsman.

 

Who is your choice at No.6 in SENA   ?

[Jimmy Cliff]

44 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

If we are judging by this tough-to-bat England tour then all batsmen from both sides have been hit or miss barring Kohli and Curran and to some extent Butler.

 

Moreover, if we want to play a No.6 batsman, he will be a newbie like Vihari too, who is no better placed in terms of the somewhat valid concerns you have raised.  Vihari snd Nair are in no way different to Pant as No.6 batsmen as far as effectiveness is concerned.

Personally I'd back a specialist top order batsman like Vihari to do better than Pant while batting in the top 6. Pant with his cavalier game is better suited for the counter attacking number 7 role. This could change a couple of years from now on when he has more games under his belt. 

[Jimmy Cliff]

4 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

Pant is a specialist batsman.

 

Who is your choice at No.6 in SENA   ?

Right now I'd stick with Vihari for the entire Australian tour with Gill next in line ready to replace Rahane or Che once he has a season or two of FC cricket.

[zen]

View overall figures [change view]

Primary team India

Start of match date between 11 Sep 2016 and 11 Sep 2018

Qualifications runs scored greater than or equal to 1000

Ordered by batting average (descending)

Page 1 of 1

Showing 1 - 5 of 5

First Previous

Next  Last

Return to query menu Cleared query menu

Overall figures

Player	Span	Mat	Inns	NO	Runs	HS	Ave	BF	SR	100	50	0	4s	6s
V Kohli	2016-2018	26	46	4	2902	243	69.09	4502	64.46	11	7	3	305	8
CA Pujara	2016-2018	27	47	3	2327	202	52.88	5104	45.59	8	11	3	272	4
KL Rahul	2016-2018	21	35	1	1319	199	38.79	2167	60.86	2	10	4	166	7
M Vijay	2016-2018	20	35	0	1296	155	37.02	2823	45.90	6	3	3	140	12
AM Rahane	2016-2018	24	42	3	1288	188	33.02	2710	47.52	2	6	3	138	8

 

Our top 5 in last 2 years

Edited September 11, 2018 by zen

[Jimmy Cliff]

Anyhoo I need to run some errands and will follow up on this later.

[Jimmy Cliff]

2 minutes ago, zen said:

who would be your top 5? why can't Vihari bat at 5 considering how the top 5 have done in the last 2 years?

 

View overall figures [change view]

Primary team India

Start of match date between 11 Sep 2016 and 11 Sep 2018

Qualifications runs scored greater than or equal to 1000

Ordered by batting average (descending)

Page 1 of 1

Showing 1 - 5 of 5

First Previous

Next  Last

Return to query menu Cleared query menu

Overall figures

Player	Span	Mat	Inns	NO	Runs	HS	Ave	BF	SR	100	50	0	4s	6s
V Kohli	2016-2018	26	46	4	2902	243	69.09	4502	64.46	11	7	3	305	8
CA Pujara	2016-2018	27	47	3	2327	202	52.88	5104	45.59	8	11	3	272	4
KL Rahul	2016-2018	21	35	1	1319	199	38.79	2167	60.86	2	10	4	166	7
M Vijay	2016-2018	20	35	0	1296	155	37.02	2823	45.90	6	3	3	140	12
AM Rahane	2016-2018	24	42	3	1288	188	33.02	2710	47.52	2	6	3	138	8

 

My Top 5 for next Test in SENA (assuming there are no surprises/injuries in the series against WI)

 

Shaw (Have had enough of VJ/Dhawan)

Rahul 

Pujara

Kohli

Rahane (on notice)

 

with Vihari as no. 6

 

[express bowling]

18 minutes ago, Jimmy Cliff said:

Personally I'd back a specialist top order batsman like Vihari to do better than Pant while batting in the top 6. Pant with his cavalier game is better suited for the counter attacking number 7 role. This could change a couple of years from now on when he has more games under his belt. 

 

Vihari seems to have more chinks in his armour than Pant.  Looks weak against the short ball which maybe an issue in Australia.

 

I will still choose Vihari at 5, as he maybe a gritty batsman,  and play Pant at 6.

Edited September 11, 2018 by express bowling