Try Pant as an opener

[zen]

13 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

You know the price England pays for playing so many batsmen so that everyone can keep hacking right till the end? This is what. Look at the average ER compared to India.

 

 

Irrelevant as in Eng

 

View overall figures [change view]

Opposition team Australia  or England  or India  or New Zealand  or Pakistan  or South Africa  or Sri Lanka or West Indies

Host country England

Start of match date between 7 Mar 2017 and 7 Mar 2019

Totals in terms of bowling team

Ordered by average runs per six balls (reverse)

Page 1 of 1

Showing 1 - 10 of 10

First Previous

Next  Last

Return to query menu Cleared query menu

Overall figures

Team	Mat	Won	Lost	Tied	NR	W/L	Ave	RPO	Inns	HS	LS
Pakistan	5	4	1	0	0	4.000	27.87	5.02	5	319	158
South Africa	6	2	4	0	0	0.500	36.13	5.62	6	339	153
England	19	15	3	0	1	5.000	33.51	5.79	18	356	205
India	7	3	4	0	0	0.750	41.44	5.80	7	338	164
Sri Lanka	3	1	2	0	0	0.500	45.10	5.91	3	321	-
Bangladesh	4	1	2	0	1	0.500	76.75	6.00	4	308	-
New Zealand	2	0	1	0	1	0.000	27.92	6.20	2	310	310
Australia	7	0	6	0	1	0.000	43.62	6.49	7	481	291
Ireland	2	0	2	0	0	0.000	50.55	6.50	2	328	-
West Indies	5	0	4	0	1	0.000	64.00	7.36	5	369

 

 

 

[zen]

7 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

CT happened in ENgland . ENgland boasted pretty much the same line up. What happened then? So that is very relevant. England failed on both occasions. An asian team own twice. Infact in the last CT 3 of the semi finalists were Asian teams. So stop working out theories from cricinfo stats alone. India was the only team to reach CT final last 2 occasions. They reached world cup semi in 2015 . They only lost to eventual winner on their home ground. NO shame in that. It is teams like England/NZ/SA they have to pull up their socks.

No one is saying Eng cannot lose. But playing optimally as per current requirements in Eng per the conditions there .... Stats are used to support the points 

[vvvslaxman]

11 minutes ago, zen said:

No one is saying Eng cannot lose. But playing optimally as per current requirements in Eng per the conditions there .... Stats are used to support the points 

SO you use the same bilaterals to rate them, not their CT history right? This is why you have to stop using filters. India has done better than SENA even with underpar team in England in the last 2 multinational tournaments.  England has sure adopted the approach "positivity positivity positivity" which means from no.1 till no.11 will continue attacking for the entire 50 overs irrespective of the conditions. Do you honestly think someone like Kohli, Dhoni, Noob Shankar, Jadhav can afford to do that with 4 rank tailenders? Just use some context before comparing India's batting with England batting. Kohli is the best batsman on the planet in ODIs by some distance. Even he won't throw his bat around willy nilly like English batsmen. He will construct his innings in his own way. 

 

 

Look at how many six hitting monsters are in the England side compared to any other team. Last 2 year sixes record. Morgan, Bairstow, Buttler, Jason ROy, Adam Hales, Stokes, Moeen Ali. Even Woakes, Rashid can hit sixes.  How can you compared one on one with current Indian line up with zero context. Even the line up that has Sehwag, Tendulkar, Dravid, Ganguly, Dhoni, Yuvraj, Raina may not be able to match their six hitting. 

 

[zen]

19 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

SO you use the same bilaterals to rate them, not their CT history right? This is why you have to stop using filters. India has done better than SENA even with underpar team in England in the last 2 multinational tournaments.  England has sure adopted the approach "positivity positivity positivity" which means from no.1 till no.11 will continue attacking for the entire 50 overs irrespective of the conditions.

How many times will I have to write "Irrelevant"? To spoon feed: 

• Playing conditions are evaluated in Eng and as a team (not individuals) 
• This time, WC has a round-robin format where all teams play each other. Top 4 qualify for SFs 

 

Quote

Do you honestly think someone like Kohli, Dhoni, Noob Shankar, Jadhav can afford to do that with 4 rank tailenders? Just use some context before comparing India's batting with England batting. Kohli is the best batsman on the planet in ODIs by some distance. Even he won't throw his bat around willy nilly like English batsmen. He will construct his innings in his own way. 

• Ind is to take advantage of PPs by playing someone like Pant, who is one of the options being discussed here. Dhawan plays relatively quickly. Kohli does not need to change his game.  In this case, Ind would have two openers who can get of the blocks relatively quickly and set a positive tempo 

 

 

Quote

Look at how many six hitting monsters are in the England side compared to any other team. Last 2 year sixes record. Morgan, Bairstow, Buttler, Jason ROy, Adam Hales, Stokes, Moeen Ali. Even Woakes, Rashid can hit sixes.  How can you compared one on one with current Indian line up with zero context. Even the line up that has Sehwag, Tendulkar, Dravid, Ganguly, Dhoni, Yuvraj, Raina may not be able to match their six hitting. 

• Playing positively does not imply hitting sixes only
• Conditions are expected to be batting friendly

 

 

i can't be SPOON FEEDING you so much. It does not add any value to me .... Don't know why you keep quoting me for all these irrelevant points (and when points are explained in OP itself) 

Edited March 7, 2019 by zen

[vvvslaxman]

17 minutes ago, zen said:

How many times will I have to write "Irrelevant"? To spoon feed: 

• Playing conditions are evaluated in Eng and as a team (not individuals) 
• This time, WC has a round-robin format where all teams play each other. Top 4 qualify for SFs 

 

• Ind is to take advantage of PPs by playing someone like Pant, who is one of the options being discussed here. Dhawan plays relatively quickly. Kohli does not need to change his game.  In this case, Ind would have two openers who can get of the blocks relatively quickly and set a positive tempo 

 

 

• Playing positively does not imply hitting sixes only
• Conditions are expected to be batting friendly

 

 

i can't be SPOON FEEDING you so much. It does not add any value to me .... Don't know why you keep quoting me for all these irrelevant points (and when points are explained in OP itself) 

Sorry i am the one who is spoonfeeding you. England doesn't care if it is "power play" "non power play" They attack all the time. So Why are you not cribbing about India not attacking outside power play? Why do you think only in power play is the only place where you can score quickly? So you attack for 10 overs end up with 70/2 and shut the shop till 45th over? You are missing so many contexts and just stick to this "power play" concept like in the 90s. Nobody cares if it is power play or not, when they want to attack they attack regardless of power play or not. I would rather prefer a batsman who can attack any time during 50 overs rather than only in the first 10 overs. This is 2019. Not 1992 where you send Greatbatch to hit sixes and take it slowly till the end.  Wake up. 

[jf1gp_1]

Time for experiments is over. Play first choice xi which means bat shanker at 7 sort of pandya replacement. Chahal comes in for jaddu. 

[zen]

14 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

Sorry i am the one who is spoonfeeding you. England doesn't care if it is "power play" "non power play" They attack all the time. So Why are you not cribbing about India not attacking outside power play? Why do you think only in power play is the only place where you can score quickly? So you attack for 10 overs end up with 70/2 and shut the shop till 45th over? You are missing so many contexts and just stick to this "power play" concept like in the 90s. Nobody cares if it is power play or not, when they want to attack they attack regardless of power play or not. I would rather prefer a batsman who can attack any time during 50 overs rather than only in the first 10 overs. This is 2019. Not 1992 where you send Greatbatch to hit sixes and take it slowly till the end.  Wake up. 

First at least gather the ability to understand stats and gain context, then think about spoonsfeeding  .... and you are creating your own scenarios, here it is "so you attack for top 10 and shut shop till 45"?   if that is the case, why not talk to your own self. If you want to quote me, use the right context 

 

If I have to create own scenarios, I would say 90s is newer than 80s (if you can understand what it means) 

 

 

[vvvslaxman]

Just now, zen said:

First at least gather the ability to understand stats and gain context, then think about spoonsfeeding  .... and you are creating your own scenarios, here it is "so you attack for top 10 and shut shop till 45"?   if that is the case, why not talk to your own self. If you want to quote me, use the right context 

 

If I have to create own scenarios, I would say 90s is newer than 80s (if you can understand what it means) 

 

 

Okay try something harder. Because in your mind only power play overs are the be all and end all You even filter only first 10 overs not the entire 50 overs. THen just to justify your theory you use all kind of filters,  bilateras,  didn't score on full moon, applicable only in england, didn't score in iCC trophy against SENA country. What sort of a nonsense is this? Do you think all teams make their selection like that? HEy Faf sucks in world cup important match. Let us scout for someone else.  You purely select team based on cricinfo statistics. Not with any logic.

[zen]

13 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

Okay try something harder. Because in your mind only power play overs are the be all and end all You even filter only first 10 overs not the entire 50 overs. THen just to justify your theory you use all kind of filters,  bilateras,  didn't score on full moon, applicable only in england, didn't score in iCC trophy against SENA country. What sort of a nonsense is this? Do you think all teams make their selection like that? HEy Faf sucks in world cup important match. Let us scout for someone else.  You purely select team based on cricinfo statistics. Not with any logic.

 now you are debating only filter is first 10 overs .... when the discussion is about optimizing the PP as well

 

PS no one should have a problem with it unless you are a Tuktuk Sharma fanboy 

Edited March 7, 2019 by zen

[vvvslaxman]

16 minutes ago, zen said:

 now you are debating only filter is first 10 overs .... when the discussion is about optimizing the PP as well

 

PS no one should have a problem with it unless you are a Tuktuk Sharma fanboy 

Take this idea to any random cricket expert of your choice get their feed back. lol Ask Tendulkar Dravid Hayden Vaughan .. tell them "I want to replace Pant with Rohit at the top" . Take this idea and see how they react. 

[zen]

43 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

Take this idea to any random cricket expert of your choice get their feed back. lol Ask Tendulkar Dravid Hayden Vaughan .. tell them "I want to replace Pant with Rohit at the top" . Take this idea and see how they react. 

Oh so Pant is already opening now  .... And even if it is replacing Rohit with someone like Pant, I am sure they would react positively to Ind using another aggressive batsman at the top, Pant as an option is being discussed here, to optimize the PPs once they see the points being made including:

• WC format being round robin group games where you need to plan on winning 7 out of 9 games vs different teams to get to the next stage. Whereas in bilaterals, you win a series by winning 1 game more than the other team, whom you play against multiple times in various conditions 
• WC is in Eng, where it is expected to be batting friendly conditions 
• Rohit's poor 50+ scores conversation rate vs major teams in such events and extremely low SR early on. Doing well vs SL, BD and AFG will not get Ind to the next stage if it loses vs major teams 
• And that by opening with someone Pant or equivalent, Ind is improving its chances
• Dhawan plays in a similarly positive manner and has enjoyed great success in such events

 

Primary team India

Opposition team Australia  or England  or New Zealand  or Pakistan  or South Africa  or Sri Lanka  or West Indies

Start of match date greater than or equal to 1 Jan 1983

Trophy Benson & Hedges World Championship of Cricket  or ICC Champions Trophy (ICC KnockOut)  or MRF World Series (Nehru Cup)  or World Cup

Batting position between 1 and 2

Qualifications runs scored greater than or equal to 200

Ordered by batting average (descending)

Page 1 of 1

Showing 1 - 9 of 9

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
S Dhawan	2013-2017	13	13	1	919	137	76.58	933	98.49	4	4	0
SC Ganguly	1998-2007	15	15	2	869	183	66.84	1040	83.55	4	2	1
SR Tendulkar	1996-2011	31	30	0	1548	141	51.60	1778	87.06	4	9	1
V Sehwag	2002-2011	18	18	2	678	126	42.37	670	101.19	1	5	1
R Lamba	1989-1989	6	6	0	231	61	38.5	354	65.25	0	3	0
RJ Shastri	1983-1992	9	9	1	281	63*	35.12	581	48.36	0	4	0
SM Gavaskar	1983-1987	9	9	1	262	103*	32.75	320	81.87	1	1	0
RG Sharma	2013-2017	13	13	0	414	91	31.84	546	75.82	0	4	2
K Srikkanth	1983-1992	29	29	2	852	93*	31.55	1208	70.52	0	7	3

 

• Above vs all major teams except BD
• Rohit is the worst opener for Ind from the group esp. considering the era he plays in 
• To achieve a similar AVG*SR as Rohit, a SR of 100 only requires an avg of 24. I guess, Pant or other viable options can do much better than that 

 

Edited March 7, 2019 by zen

[vvvslaxman]

country filter, date filter, trophy filter, batting position filter, qualification filter. Yes.. This selection will work in stick cricket not in real cricket. If they want to know how good Rohit is against AUstralia they will check his overall record against them not "tournament record" That way Tendulkar sucks ball in world cup finals, Kohli sucks balls against Australia in world cups.  Kohli sucks balls against Pakistan in final. SO if Pakistan comes to final India has to optimize it by sending him at no.6 . This is such joke of a post i must say.

[zen]

with 3 games to go. let's hope ind tries KL, who also showed good hitting form, and/or Pant
 

Edited March 7, 2019 by zen

[vvvslaxman]

4 minutes ago, zen said:

with 3 games to go. let's hope ind tries KL, who also showed good hitting form, and/or Pant
 

They will try KL Rahul for sure as a backup option. I don't have confidence in Jadhav's fitness. He has permanent hamstring issues.

[zen]

1 minute ago, vvvslaxman said:

They will try KL Rahul for sure as a backup option. I don't have confidence in Jadhav's fitness. He has permanent hamstring issues.

Ideally, I want to see KL-Pant open (among the options available for WC) .... if they both get going, it will be a treat for Ind .... In Dhawan, I am only interested for his awesome ICC record. If he can't replicate that this time, we may have more problems than we would like to believe .... From Rohit, as you know, I am not expecting much    

[vvvslaxman]

10 minutes ago, zen said:

Ideally, I want to see KL-Pant open (among the options available for WC) .... if they both get going, it will be a treat for Ind .... In Dhawan, I am only interested for his awesome ICC record. If he can't replicate that this time, we may have more problems than we would like to believe .... From Rohit, as you know, I am not expecting much    

In T20 you will see that. That too not right now. If they don't get going we will be like 10/2 in all conditions. That will make our middle order even slower. India needs finishers right now. Someone who can hit sixes at will in the back end. Pandya does. But he does only against spinners. We don't have anyone to do go nuts against pace bowlers in the death. All the teams have great finishers. 

[zen]

15 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

In T20 you will see that. That too not right now. If they don't get going we will be like 10/2 in all conditions. That will make our middle order even slower. India needs finishers right now. Someone who can hit sixes at will in the back end. Pandya does. But he does only against spinners. We don't have anyone to do go nuts against pace bowlers in the death. All the teams have great finishers. 

In batting friendly conditions, chance of being 10 for 2 is less. If that happens, other players can take over .... And when guys like Rohit struggle anyways in such event so it is not like we are better off in status quo and when the incumbents have now regressed  

[vvvslaxman]

1 hour ago, zen said:

In batting friendly conditions, chance of being 10 for 2 is less. If that happens, other players can take over .... And when guys like Rohit struggle anyways in such event so it is not like we are better off in status quo and when the incumbents have now regressed  

Good. I don't want Rohit/Dhawan scoring 100s right now. Don't want India to go into world cup with absolutely no practice for middle order. I want more failures from them right till the world cup. We should be alright.

[zen]

14 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

Good. I don't want Rohit/Dhawan scoring 100s right now. Don't want India to go into world cup with absolutely no practice for middle order. I want more failures from them right till the world cup. We should be alright.

MO has enough practise this yr.  Doing good as the scoring rate is manageable. In pressure games in WC, you want them to play with manageable scoring rate or it is too much to do with less scope for mistakes 

 

#4 to #7 

View overall figures [change view] Primary team India  Start of match date between 1 Jan 2019 and 31 Dec 2019  Batting position between 4 and 7  Grouped by team  Qualifications runs scored greater than or equal to 50  Ordered by runs scored (descending) Page 1 of 1 Showing 1 - 1 of 1   First Previous Next  Last  Return to query menu Cleared query menu Overall figures Team Players Mat Inns NO Runs HS Ave BF SR 100 50 0 4s 6s   India 7 10 30 11 946 90 49.78 1128 83.86 0 7 4 87 15

 

Avg*SR = 4200

 

 

Openers

View overall figures [change view]

Primary team India

Start of match date between 1 Jan 2019 and 31 Dec 2019

Batting position between 1 and 2

Grouped by team

Qualifications runs scored greater than or equal to 50

Ordered by runs scored (descending)

Page 1 of 1

Showing 1 - 1 of 1

First Previous

Next  Last

Return to query menu Cleared query menu

Overall figures

Team	Players	Mat	Inns	NO	Runs	HS	Ave	BF	SR	100	50	0	4s	6s
India	2	10	20	1	655	133	34.47	841	77.88	1	4	3	63	14

 

Avg*SR = 2730 

 

 

We need quick starts from the openers .... and also not a bad idea to try KL, who is now an option, and/or Pant in the remaining 3 games 

 

Edited March 7, 2019 by zen

[vvvslaxman]

8 minutes ago, zen said:

MO has enough practise this yr.  Doing good as the scoring rate is manageable. In pressure games in WC, you want them to play with manageable scoring rate or it is too much to do with less scope for mistakes 

 

#4 to #7 

View overall figures [change view] Primary team India  Start of match date between 1 Jan 2019 and 31 Dec 2019  Batting position between 4 and 7  Grouped by team  Qualifications runs scored greater than or equal to 50  Ordered by runs scored (descending) Page 1 of 1 Showing 1 - 1 of 1   First Previous Next  Last  Return to query menu Cleared query menu Overall figures Team Players Mat Inns NO Runs HS Ave BF SR 100 50 0 4s 6s   India 7 10 30 11 946 90 49.78 1128 83.86 0 7 4 87 15

 

Avg*SR = 4200

 

 

Openers

View overall figures [change view]

Primary team India

Start of match date between 1 Jan 2019 and 31 Dec 2019

Batting position between 1 and 2

Grouped by team

Qualifications runs scored greater than or equal to 50

Ordered by runs scored (descending)

Page 1 of 1

Showing 1 - 1 of 1

First Previous

Next  Last

Return to query menu Cleared query menu

Overall figures

Team	Players	Mat	Inns	NO	Runs	HS	Ave	BF	SR	100	50	0	4s	6s
India	2	10	20	1	655	133	34.47	841	77.88	1	4	3	63	14

 

Avg*SR = 2730 

 

 

We need quick starts from the openers .... and also not a bad idea to try KL, who is now an option, and/or Pant in the remaining 3 games 

 

Not enough. Until the last match we were not even sure whethre VIjay Shankar would be a certainty. With 3 matches to go we have finally realized Rayudu is a crappola.  We need more matches to make sure Shankar is a certainty.