Zaheer khan : Their is a concern with Bhuvi's rhythm & follow through , it can be lack of game time or niggle

[express bowling]

8 hours ago, mancalledsting said:

you look at his economy rate- it is second best after Bumrah. For me economy rate is more important in ODIs than average as being economical can bring wickets and means that opposition score is restricted. No point being like Umesh and getting 4 wickets for 70 runs (yeah average of 17.5 looks great but id rather take Bhuvi's 5rpo for 1 wicket). . You don't have to take 10 wickets to win an ODI but you do have to take 20 wickets to win a test. Hence taking wickets in ODIs and having a low average not as important as economy (unlikfrests). 

 

Bhuvi has 39 wickets from 40 ODIs in the last 3 years , with an ER of 5.2.

 

Problem with this is that, even if a particular bowler stays relatively economical, if the batter stays not out he will take the other bowlers for runs later. This is what happened in CT 17 final and many other matches.

 

In ODIs, Umesh is not the answer either. 

 

 

Quote

So you agree Bhuvi is our second best bowler- 

 

This has happened because we have not chosen backups pacers who have the requisite qualities to be good ODI pacers.

 

Bhuvi has to be in the ODI team now as there is little time left to create an effective backup before the WC 19.  And he gives the captain a sense of control and good death over bowling.

 

My only point is ...  in the future, we should look to develop ODI pacers who can take wickets and are not sprayguns. Kaul, Umesh and Chahar are not the answers.

 

And Shami is a pacer who could have been part of the ODI set up too.

 

Edited November 2, 2018 by express bowling

[Vilander]

The WC plan is slowly derailing. Middle order conundrum, Dhoni, and now the fast bowlers. 

[Vilander]

I think WC is down to will of the boards and team management. India is simply not showing the requisite will here. Try new guys and plug the weak spots. 

Edited November 2, 2018 by Vilander

[mancalledsting]

On 11/2/2018 at 3:15 AM, express bowling said:

 

Bhuvi has 39 wickets from 40 ODIs in the last 3 years , with an ER of 5.2.

 

Problem with this is that, even if a particular bowler stays relatively economical, if the batter stays not out he will take the other bowlers for runs later. This is what happened in CT 17 final and many other matches.

 

In ODIs, Umesh is not the answer either. 

 

 

 

This has happened because we have not chosen backups pacers who have the requisite qualities to be good ODI pacers.

 

Bhuvi has to be in the ODI team now as there is little time left to create an effective backup before the WC 19.  And he gives the captain a sense of control and good death over bowling.

 

My only point is ...  in the future, we should look to develop ODI pacers who can take wickets and are not sprayguns. Kaul, Umesh and Chahar are not the answers.

 

And Shami is a pacer who could have been part of the ODI set up too.

 

if other bowlers were similarly economical then cumulative effect would be wickets through collective suffocation of flow of runs- hence Dhoni was a good ODI captain but a horrible test captain. Other bowlers only get taken for runs as they are below standard- not because Bhuvi didn't take wickets. 

 

agree about the future- but my point is centred on WC2019. First we have to develop a better bowler than Bhuvi who can be our firm number 2 after Bumrah before putting Bhuvi on the bench. I don't think Bhuvi held back development of other bowlers, selections like Deepak Chahar, Jaydev Unadkat and repeat selections of Umesh and Shami did. Picking Shardul thakur also held back other bowler but he had to be given a trial- trials won't always be successful. But don't see how we can pin this on Bhuvi. 

[mancalledsting]

On 11/1/2018 at 11:23 PM, zen said:

When extrapolated: 

 

4 for 70 = 175 All out

1 for 50 = 250 for 5 

 

 

again- this narrow thinking is result of taking statistics and interpreting them irrespective of context. finer analysis would really observe what's happening at the ground level. 

 

in reality his 70 runs gets added on to the score conceded by remaining bowlers and his wickets often come after being taken apart and the other team having already established a good total. Most of his wickets are a result of people being confident to over attack him and give their wickets away rather than him getting them out. By that time significant damage already caused. 4-70 only useful if those 4 wickets come before 50 runs conceded because that means you used your wickets to create a dent in the opposition total. Umesh helps establish the oppositions total. Like his wicket of Steve smith in 2015 WC semi final- damage already done by then. His superior average won't save us in those instances. 

[zen]

29 minutes ago, mancalledsting said:

again- this narrow thinking is result of taking statistics and interpreting them irrespective of context. finer analysis would really observe what's happening at the ground level. 

 

in reality his 70 runs gets added on to the score conceded by remaining bowlers and his wickets often come after being taken apart and the other team having already established a good total. Most of his wickets are a result of people being confident to over attack him and give their wickets away rather than him getting them out. By that time significant damage already caused. 4-70 only useful if those 4 wickets come before 50 runs conceded because that means you used your wickets to create a dent in the opposition total. Umesh helps establish the oppositions total. Like his wicket of Steve smith in 2015 WC semi final- damage already done by then. His superior average won't save us in those instances. 

• 1 for 50
• 4 for 70 i.e. 3 wkts more for 20 runs 

 

To me this exercise is like playing a flute in front of a buffalo. But anyways will give it a shot:

 

Your claim: 

 

Quote

in reality his 70 runs gets added on to the score conceded by remaining bowlers and his wickets often come after being taken apart and the other team having already established a good total.

• There are 5-6 bowlers bowling, so if the total has already been established it would mean that everyone has failed with the opposition looking to make the situation worse. the wkts could help to stem the flow of runs 

 

[mancalledsting]

12 minutes ago, zen said:

• 1 for 50
• 4 for 70 i.e. 3 wkts more for 20 runs 

 

To me this exercise is like playing a flute in front of a buffalo. But anyways will give it a shot:

 

Your claim: 

 

• There are 5-6 bowlers bowling, so if the total has already been established it would mean that everyone has failed with the opposition looking to make the situation worse. the wkts could help to stem the flow of runs 

 

20 runs extra conceded by one bowler not a big deal? you do understand that it adds 2 RPO on to a bowler's economy rate in ODIs right? (just to put it into perspective for you)

 

before getting on a high horse would be good to understand other persons point of view in the first place. how would wickets stem the flow of runs when they are taken after the runs have already been conceded and there are only a few overs left? these are the circumstances in which most of Umesh's multiple wicket halls come. 

Edited November 3, 2018 by mancalledsting

[zen]

5 minutes ago, mancalledsting said:

20 runs extra conceded by one bowler not a big deal? you do understand that it adds 2 RPO on to a bowler's economy rate in ODIs right? (just to put it into perspective for you)

 

before getting on a high horse would be good to understand other persons point of view in the first place. how would wickets stem the flow of runs when they are taken after the runs have already been conceded and there are only a few overs left? these are the circumstances in which most of Umesh's multiple wicket halls come. 

To make it easy for you, do your math on how the team is progressing every 10 overs and where wkts are falling .... and since the bowler is conceding 70 runs, can we take it that it is a batting friendly pitch?

[express bowling]

1 hour ago, mancalledsting said:

if other bowlers were similarly economical then cumulative effect would be wickets through collective suffocation of flow of runs- hence Dhoni was a good ODI captain but a horrible test captain. Other bowlers only get taken for runs as they are below standard- not because huvi didn't take wickets. 

 

There is always going to be the weaker 5th bowler if we want a decent No.7 batsman ...  and one other bowler can have a bad day.  Happens all the time.

 

When Dhoni was in his pomp as an ODI captain, ODI rules were different and it was possible to suffocate runs.  2 new balls and new power-play rules have changed things in this regard.

 

In the Asia Cup 2018 final, we managed to stop them at 220 odd, despite a flying start, because we took regular wickets later.  If we had not then no matter how accurate our bowlers would have been, we would have conceded many more runs.

 

Quote

agree about the future- but my point is centred on WC2019. First we have to develop a better bowler than Bhuvi who can be our firm number 2 after Bumrah before putting Bhuvi on the bench. I don't think Bhuvi held back development of other bowlers, selections like Deepak Chahar, Jaydev Unadkat and repeat selections of Umesh and Shami did. Picking Shardul thakur also held back other bowler but he had to be given a trial- trials won't always be successful. But don't see how we can pin this on Bhuvi. 

 

I am not pinning this on Bhuvi at all.  It is a fault of the selectors and the Team management that they have not been able to create effective backup pacers.

[mancalledsting]

45 minutes ago, zen said:

To make it easy for you, do your math on how the team is progressing every 10 overs and where wkts are falling .... and since the bowler is conceding 70 runs, can we take it that it is a batting friendly pitch?

start by making things easy for yourself

[zen]

1 minute ago, mancalledsting said:

start by making things easy for yourself

As expected, you can't show it .... thank you! 

[mancalledsting]

46 minutes ago, zen said:

As expected, you can't show it .... thank you! 

I can see this victory in your own head means a lot to you, enjoy! As it happens I didn't know what the hell you were talking about..what was I supposed to be showing?

Edited November 3, 2018 by mancalledsting

[mancalledsting]

1 hour ago, express bowling said:

 

There is always going to be the weaker 5th bowler if we want a decent No.7 batsman ...  and one other bowler can have a bad day.  Happens all the time.

 

When Dhoni was in his pomp as an ODI captain, ODI rules were different and it was possible to suffocate runs.  2 new balls and new power-play rules have changed things in this regard.

  

In the Asia Cup 2018 final, we managed to stop them at 220 odd, despite a flying start, because we took regular wickets later.  If we had not then no matter how accurate our bowlers would have been, we would have conceded many more runs.

 

 

I am not pinning this on Bhuvi at all.  It is a fault of the selectors and the Team management that they have not been able to create effective backup pacers.

Dhoni won CT2013 which coincided of inception of those new rules. He used similar tactics to reach semis of WC 2015. He was never an attacking wicket taking captain. 

Asia cup final vs Bangladesh- I wouldn't draw any conclusions about specific tactics based on playing Bangladesh as India normally defeat them come what may across all eras