Let's keep track of number of dot balls wasted by Rohit Sharma in each innings.

[zen]

Just now, vvvslaxman said:

I take it you don't have an answer lol  How the heck someone wasting 90 balls will end up wiht 95? He scored 95 runs in 2 balls?  Do you even make any sense?

Logically, you look at balls faced (had the opportunity to play 90 balls) and runs scored (par RR was 7+) 

 

If you want to rely on 95 of 2 balls, that only proves your reliance on "irrelevant points"  .... enjoy flop sharma thread 

 

 

 

[jusarrived]

19 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

Point is at the end of the day they reached our total convincingly even with 2 down, even after scoring at a lesser rate. Do you honestly think Indian no.6 could have pulled that off what Turner pulled off? We have a weak middle order, extremely weak lower order. If India has to get somewhere in this world cup runs have to come from the top. 

Our middle order cannot chase big totals , but as bad as they are they can still score big batting first on flat pitches 

[vvvslaxman]

2 minutes ago, zen said:

Because they played good cricket as per the requirement of the chase .... and Ind ended up with a total that did not account for dew with Rohit wasting 90 balls when batting was relatively easier for India  

Oh you edited your answer lol. If the requirement was so high how come they were not going bang bang at the top. 

 

Australia 261/4 start of 40th over

Handscomb & Turner (someone who has T20 I strike rate of 100)

facing Bumrah, Bhuvi, Kuldeep all top bowlers in world cricket

 

In 7.5 overs they scored 98 runs losing 2 wickets

 

India 267/3 start of 40th over

Pant & Rahul (supposed to be super stars)

facing maxwell, zampa, jhye richardson

 

In 10 overs 91 runs losing 6 wickets

 

It is consistent with India's pathetic lower order hitting these days. Always below par in death overs. Even the one who hits don't go all the way.

 

Jadhav 10(12)

Rahul 26(31)

 

[vvvslaxman]

4 minutes ago, jusarrived said:

Our middle order cannot chase big totals , but as bad as they are they can still score big batting first on flat pitches 

No they can't our middle order sucks. They score 5.78 on an average in the last 10 overs. That is way below par across different eras. You wonder why INdia desperately needs Pandya who is way below many international hitters? This is why. He is the only one who can connect a few and hit sixes.  Rest are all one-dimensional hacks. Indian batting ends at no.3 Dhoni, Jadhav, Rayudu, Rahul are all waste of space.

[zen]

2 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

Oh you edited your answer lol. If the requirement was so high how come they were not going bang bang at the top. 

 

Australia 261/4 start of 40th over

Handscomb & Turner (someone who has T20 I strike rate of 100)

facing Bumrah, Bhuvi, Kuldeep all top bowlers in world cricket

 

In 7.5 overs they scored 98 runs losing 2 wickets

 

India 267/3 start of 40th over

Pant & Rahul (supposed to be super stars)

facing maxwell, zampa, jhye richardson

 

In 10 overs 91 runs losing 6 wickets

 

It is consistent with India's pathetic lower order hitting these days. Always below par in death overs. Even the one who hits don't go all the way.

 

Jadhav 10(12)

Rahul 26(31)

 

 

If you feel lower order is so bad, let's make Rohit play there and see how he does .... We have options who can perform better at the top than Rohit .... win-win 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Cricketics]

This thread is nice flash back of how Rohit Sharma and criticism about him used to be part of every thread back in 2007-2012 when people were frustrated of seeing him in the team. ICF was lit then and still is. 

 

Nice memories. Thanks Zen :) Rohit Sharma has kept ICF extremely active. 

 

 

[zen]

6 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

No they can't our middle order sucks. They score 5.78 on an average in the last 10 overs. That is way below par across different eras. You wonder why INdia desperately needs Pandya who is way below many international hitters? This is why. He is the only one who can connect a few and hit sixes.  Rest are all one-dimensional hacks. Indian batting ends at no.3 Dhoni, Jadhav, Rayudu, Rahul are all waste of space.

Calling others hacks does not make Tuktuk a better batsman or justify his modus operandi .... and you once called him FLOP SHARMA

 

 

Edited March 11, 2019 by zen

[Jimmy Cliff]

46 minutes ago, jusarrived said:

Amlas strike rate is higher than Rohit inspite of all the six hitting .

While batting in the top 3, Rohit strikes at 92 compared to Amla's SR of 88. Just for comparison, Kohli strikes at 93 and Dhawan strikes at 94. Pretty much in the same ballpark .

 

 

I wonder if there is any data that shows how many times has Rohit scored slower than the innings run rate compared to others.

[vvvslaxman]

Just now, zen said:

Calling others a hack does not make Tuktuk a better batsman or justify is modus operandi .... and you once called him FLOP SHARMA

 

 

 I called him flop sharma. Then why do you call me tuk tuk fan? lol Thanks for sharing that. That confirms i have no real agenda. I call it as i see it. You certainly have an agenda.

[zen]

5 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

 I called him flop sharma. Then why do you call me tuk tuk fan? lol Thanks for sharing that. That confirms i have no real agenda. I call it as i see it. You certainly have an agenda.

Because you flip flop .... flop sharma yesterday, tuktuk fan today, flop sharma tomorrow .... and the time invested by you (when you should be playing with your grandkids) 

Edited March 11, 2019 by zen

[vvvslaxman]

48 minutes ago, zen said:

Because you flip flop .... flop sharma yesterday, tuktuk fan today, flop sharma tomorrow .... and the time invested by you (when you should be playing with your grandkids) 

Not flip flop. He has been doing well. Ranking confirms that. When someone sucks i call they suck. I don't come up with weird ideas and create weird reasons to support it.

[zen]

4 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

Not flip flop. He has been doing well. Ranking confirms that. When someone sucks i call they suck. I don't come up with weird ideas and create weird reasons to support it.

Good so eventually you will be on the same side 

[rkt.india]

8 hours ago, zen said:

 

If you feel lower order is so bad, let's make Rohit play there and see how he does .... We have options who can perform better at the top than Rohit .... win-win 

 

 

 

 

 

 

what are those options?

[vvvslaxman]

1 hour ago, rkt.india said:

what are those options?

wait for a comical response

 

[Clarke]

Let's be honest here, Rohit did change gears and got out trying to accelerate. He does have a bit of a problem in getting the momentum going but that pales in comparison to our middle order problems.

 

I am not sold on Rohit in big matches & tournaments, crunch games, hint of movement etc. But he's what we got for now and has a very good opening record.

[Lannister]

I see a lot of posters are comparing Sharma with other players. They are not even in the same league. This is the dot ball percentage by Australian batsmen in the same match.  

 

Khawaja

Balls faced: 99

Dots: 34

 

Handscomb

Balls faced: 105

Dots: 34

 

Turner

Balls faced: 43

Dots: 10

 

Khawaja and Handscomb are still new to ODI internationals and they are already showing better match awareness than Sharma did in his entire career. 

[Lannister]

12 hours ago, vvvslaxman said:

Dot balls are bad for players like Amla, Pujara, Rahane. Not for six hitting monsters llike  Rohit sharma, Gayle.  They will more than make up.   India lacks big hitters especially six hitters. All are "innings builders".  There is nobody anywhere remotely close in India to Rohit sharma when it comes to pulling ball fast bowlers for sixes or straight driving them for sixes.  You need players who can produce big overs on demand. Not generic singles players like Amla. Too bad we have only one Rohit sharma. Thought KL Rahul would become a bit more consistent. But he is an useless show pony. Play well one innings, disappear for the next 10. 

Sharma's six hitting ability balances out with the amount of time he usually takes to get going. There's too much uncertainty surrounding his nature of play and more often, it's going to put pressure on the other batsmen. Gayle is someone who can launch from the first over itself. So they are not similar. 

[vvvslaxman]

5 hours ago, Lannister said:

Sharma's six hitting ability balances out with the amount of time he usually takes to get going. There's too much uncertainty surrounding his nature of play and more often, it's going to put pressure on the other batsmen. Gayle is someone who can launch from the first over itself. So they are not similar. 

Overall not once because of his "slowness" India lost. Never a question. When the target is above 300 they go appropriately as needed he played accordingly. Keeping wickets in hand is the ideal scenario for current Indian line up. JUst for 15 extra runs losing a wicket upfront exposing the middle order (Dhoni, Rayudu...) will be suicidal. Sehwag by nature very aggressive. But he also has mediocre stats because of that. You cannot go in with single track.  Until India finds a group of individuals who can produce centuries in the middle order India cannot risk wickets tumbling upfront. Thanks to Kohli's immense consistency INdian middle order is often saved. Even against honkong our team struggled to accelerate once the top 2 was gone.

Edited March 12, 2019 by vvvslaxman

[zen]

Looking forward to seeing whether Tuktuk has learned his lessons or continues to be a liability for team Ind .... If Tuktuk plays like this, Ind will not win consistently on such surfaces  

[Lannister]

Quote

Match 5:

Balls faced: 89

Dot balls: 50

Equivalent overs: 8.2 overs

Team's result: ?

Is this guy for real? 50 dot balls? What's the point of playing him?