The folly of choosing some specialist bowlers just because they are left armers or can bat a bit

[express bowling]

The fast bowling trio of Bumrah, Shami and Ishant have created ripples in test matches in the last couple of years. They have taken the highest number of wickets in a calender year for a pace bowling trio in the history of test cricket , in 2018.  And have won us test matches and test series abroad too. But none of them are left armers and none among them can bat.

 

Looking at the legendary pace attacks from the WI,  which dominated cricket from 1976 to 1995  ... which included Roberts, Garner, Holding, Croft, Marshall, Ambrose, Walsh etc. ... there wasn't a single left armer among them. And only Marshall could bat somewhat. 

 

The great Aussie teams of the 1994 to 2008 period, did not feature any successful left armers in test matches either. Nor did they have any regular left arm pacers in ODIs in the 1990s.  Warne and Lee were decent with the bat but not all-rounder level. And they were picked because they were exceptional bowlers and not because they could bat a bit.

 

The left arm variation makes sense only if there are 2 or more pacers who are of similar quality ... and we pick the left armer for variation. Reducing the quality of a pacer, just because he offers a variation, does not make sense.

 

Similarly, a specialist bowler should primarily be picked based on his bowling skills. Yes ... among the 4 specialist bowlers ... it would be nice if atleast one, who would bat at 8, can bat somewhat. But he too should first be a top bowler, like Ashwin or Jadeja in tests in Asia.

 

Also, make the top bowlers hone their batting skills in the nets. Kumble worked on this aspect during his tenure. This is much better than picking a bad bowler just because he can bat a bit.

 

We suddenly see our LOI team bowlers being picked because of their batting skills. And there seems to be a quota for a left arm seamer irrespective of his quality.

 

I think left armer Khaleel has potential in the long term if he can learn to sustain pace and stops reducing pace intentionally. Also, he must stick to his strength of hitting the deck hard, as getting disconcerting bounce was the USP which got him early success. But he must be allowed to play one or two seasons of domestic FC cricket and allowed to develop as a bowler.

 

But stop preferring Khaleel over other pacers just because he is a left armer.

 

Kuldeep Yadav, who has had superlative success in all 3 formats and has won us many games, is suddenly out of favour supposedly because he is not a good batsman. And this does not make any cricketing sense.  Picking Washington Sundar, Shardul Thakur etc. because they can bat a bit, makes no sense.

 

This has resulted in a bowling attack which has 4 out of 5 bowlers like Sundar, Khaleel, Krunal, Shardul, D.Chahar. 

 

Please pick specialist bowlers based primarily on their bowling ability and not because of other aspects.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 7, 2019 by express bowling

[Ankit_sharma03]

I dnt think this is as bad a bowling

 

A. this is anyways the B string lineup. They are seen as missing pieces of puzzle as bumrah, bhuvi, chahal wud be sure shot selections...kuldeep will depend on his form as if he has an ipl last yr i dnt think he ll get selected. Chahal gets unnecessarily flaked i feel

B. They all are inexperienced

C. Without bumrah neways our attack wud look weak he is X-factor 

D. Saini was injured , even if Saini was fit his lack of variation isnt a good thing in t20s and he struggled in last few t20s 

 

• Deepak Chahar n Krunal have done really well in their given chances....Infact washington to have done well as bowler . All have them have been pretty good
• K gowtham i feel wud be more suited then Sundar, even though sundar has done well as bowler
• As much as i like Rajpoot, Prasidh....they have been inconsistent in IPL. Khaleel did quite well last seaosn
• mavi has come from injury knowing indian selector they wnt select him straightaway
• I dont see many options in terms of fast bowling in T20
• In terms of spinner i feel we can look at gopal, gowtham , chahar

 

Edited November 7, 2019 by Ankit_sharma03

[Nikhil_cric]

Good thread. Left arm fast bowlers are overrated. Only exceptionally good left arm bowlers do well in international cricket - Boult swings the kookaburra more than any other contemporary bowler and Starc is 6'5" bowls 90 mph average pace in test cricket - and they both average around 27-28 . For some reason , left arm fast bowlers don't bowl around the wicket to right handers consistently. That should actually be more effective than the traditional over the wicket line. 

[raki05]

4 hours ago, express bowling said:

The fast bowling trio of Bumrah, Shami and Ishant have created ripples in test matches in the last couple of years. They have taken the highest number of wickets in a calender year for a pace bowling trio in the history of test cricket , in 2018.  And have won us test matches and test series abroad too. But none of them are left armers and none among them can bat.

 

Looking at the legendary pace attacks from the WI,  which dominated cricket from 1976 to 1995  ... which included Roberts, Garner, Holding, Croft, Marshall, Ambrose, Walsh etc. ... there wasn't a single left armer among them. And only Marshall could bat somewhat. 

 

The great Aussie teams of the 1994 to 2008 period, did not feature any successful left armers in test matches either. Nor did they have any regular left arm pacers in ODIs in the 1990s.  Warne and Lee were decent with the bat but not all-rounder level. And they were picked because they were exceptional bowlers and not because they could bat a bit.

 

The left arm variation makes sense only if there are 2 or more pacers who are of similar quality ... and we pick the left armer for variation. Reducing the quality of a pacer, just because he offers a variation, does not make sense.

 

Similarly, a specialist bowler should primarily be picked based on his bowling skills. Yes ... among the 4 specialist bowlers ... it would be nice if atleast one, who would bat at 8, can bat somewhat. But he too should first be a top bowler, like Ashwin or Jadeja in tests in Asia.

 

Also, make the top bowlers hone their batting skills in the nets. Kumble worked on this aspect during his tenure. This is much better than picking a bad bowler just because he can bat a bit.

 

We suddenly see our LOI team bowlers being picked because of their batting skills. And there seems to be a quota for a left arm seamer irrespective of his quality.

 

I think left armer Khaleel has potential in the long term if he can learn to sustain pace and stops reducing pace intentionally. Also, he must stick to his strength of hitting the deck hard, as getting disconcerting bounce was the USP which got him early success. But he must be allowed to play one or two seasons of domestic FC cricket and allowed to develop as a bowler.

 

But stop preferring Khaleel over other pacers just because he is a left armer.

 

Kuldeep Yadav, who has had superlative success in all 3 formats and has won us many games, is suddenly out of favour supposedly because he is not a good batsman. And this does not make any cricketing sense.  Picking Washington Sundar, Shardul Thakur etc. because they can bat a bit, makes no sense.

 

This has resulted in a bowling attack which has 4 out of 5 bowlers like Sundar, Khaleel, Krunal, Shardul, D.Chahar. 

 

Please pick specialist bowlers based primarily on their bowling ability and not because of other aspects.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I don't know how selctors can't have such rational thinking. Absolute valid points. Batsmen and bowlers should judge on their respective batting and bowling skills whether they are right hand or left hand and whether batter can bowl or bowler can bat or not. Till 2017 Kul-Cha were running through the lineups even when we were scoring par score or lesser. Suddenly dropping them and filling in mediocre bowler doesn't make sense also kuldeep and pant looks completely out of favor players  by this TM, especially kuldeep who is such a match winner across all formats.

[express bowling]

3 hours ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

I dnt think this is as bad a bowling

 

A. this is anyways the B string lineup. They are seen as missing pieces of puzzle as bumrah, bhuvi, chahal wud be sure shot selections...kuldeep will depend on his form as if he has an ipl last yr i dnt think he ll get selected. Chahal gets unnecessarily flaked i feel

 

We have to create good back ups in case there is any injury.  Both Bumrah and Bhuvi are carrying injuries.

 

And no way should Kuldeep be left out from our T20 squad.  The guy has 35 wickets from 18 T20Is and is a genuine wicket taker.

 

And on what parameter is Shardul selected  ?

 

Quote

• Infact washington to have done well as bowler .

 

If Sundar is not batting in the top 7 then his is playing as a specialist bowler.

 

Question is ...  would he quality as one of the two top T20 spinners in India.

 

Quote

•  
• As much as i like Rajpoot, Prasidh....they have been inconsistent in IPL. Khaleel did quite well last seaosn

 

They should have been included in our A-team List A squads and allowed to develop.

 

Prasidh, I believe, can be a very good long term option.

 

Quote

• mavi has come from injury knowing indian selector they wnt select him straightaway

 

Did not even get selected in Deodhar Trophy squads.

 

 

Edited November 7, 2019 by express bowling

[Ankit_sharma03]

30 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

We have to create good back ups in case there is any injury.  Both Bumrah and Bhuvi are carrying injuries.

 

And no way should Kuldeep be left out from our T20 squad.  The guy has 35 wickets from 18 T20Is and is a genuine wicket taker.

kuldeep is injured to

Quote

 

And on what parameter is Shardul selected  ?

Yup he is a bad one 

But another side what are our option in t20 fast bowling

Quote

 

If Sundar is not batting in the top 7 then his is playing as a specialist bowler.

Question is ...  would he quality as one of the two top T20 spinners in India.

as a bowler only he has done well if u see his perfomances till now.

 

Still we shud give gowtham, chahar a go to before Wc......also kuldeep form needs to be checked. About quality he has done well in given chances lets see how well others does but i do want others to get a chance

Edited November 7, 2019 by Ankit_sharma03

[Ankit_sharma03]

30 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

Prasidh, I believe, can be a very good long term option.

Same here but he is also injured n knowing our selectors they need perfomances that wud force them to select these guys

 

30 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

 

Did not even get selected in Deodhar Trophy squads.

 

 

that tournament selection was utter crap

[express bowling]

1 hour ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

Yup he is a bad one 

But another side what are our option in t20 fast bowling

 

Prasidh is better than Shardul. And should be tried if fit.  He is in very good limited over form too.  And try Mavi quickly in A-team List-A matches to see where he stands now. Rajpoot should be in the picture too.

 

 

 

 

Quote

as a bowler only he has done well if u see his perfomances till now.

 

I like Sundar as a young prospect. But he is more of an all-rounder than a specialist bowler ... and I don't mind him playing as the 7th batsman cum 5th bowler in some matches.

 

Quote

Still we shud give gowtham, chahar a go to before Wc......also kuldeep form needs to be checked. About quality he has done well in given chances lets see how well others does but i do want others to get a chance

 

Kuldeep should be given a long rope because class is permanent. Others can be tried by rotation but not by ditching a proper wicket taking bowler like Kuldeep.

[maniac]

Express bhai, how is it any different from selecting a player just for the sake of filling the allrounder quota?

[Stan AF]

This issue of picking half batsmen/half bowlers has been plaguing us ever since dhoni became our limited overs captain. Kohli/Rohit have basically inherited this trait from him.

[maniac]

1 minute ago, Stan AF said:

This issue of picking half batsmen/half bowlers has been plaguing us ever since dhoni became our limited overs captain. Kohli/Rohit have basically inherited this trait from him.

We gotta admit we got lucky with Jadeja the test spinner. He was shoved down our throats in every format till he discovered his niche in tests as a bowler.  Pretty sure any spinner would have found the same success with that backing. 

[Ankit_sharma03]

5 minutes ago, maniac said:

We gotta admit we got lucky with Jadeja the test spinner. He was shoved down our throats in every format till he discovered his niche in tests as a bowler.  Pretty sure any spinner would have found the same success with that backing. 

easier said then done....he had the skill for test as well

• He keeps it tight
• bowls at quick pace
• doesnt give much hint in action that which ball turn in or away 
• He has improved a lot 

Ojha had the backing but in the end didnt go anywhere....they backed mishra was for some time after his debut 5 wkt haul....didnt go anyhwere. Back Krunal, sundar, Chahal i dnt think they l find success in test as in the end u need skills to for that format 

Edited November 7, 2019 by Ankit_sharma03

[express bowling]

15 minutes ago, maniac said:

Express bhai, how is it any different from selecting a player just for the sake of filling the allrounder quota?

 

ODI and T20 formats force teams to have a 5th bowling option. No such rule regarding a good 8th batting option or a left arm seamer option.

 

This means atleast 1 among the top 7 batters must have the ability to bowl 10 overs  ... or 2 among the top 7 batsmen must have the ability to share 10 overs among them.

 

And this means we are forced to select atleast 1 batsman with some bowling ability. Maybe even 2.

 

And this means that we may be forced to compromise the quality of either 1 or maybe even 2 batsmen ... if the best available batsmen don't have bowling ability.

 

On the other hand, there is no rule that forces the top 4 bowlers to have some batting ability.

 

I agree that in tests ... choosing all-rounders for the sake of it should be avoided unless there is some cricketing logic to it ... like having a 5th bowling option on a very flat where having just 4 bowlers may lead to them being overworked and even 1 lesser quality batter may do well.

Edited November 7, 2019 by express bowling

[Ankit_sharma03]

1 minute ago, express bowling said:

 

ODI and T20 formats force teams to have a 5th bowling option. No such rule regarding a good 8th batting option.

 

 

Not only 5 but 6 bowling options these days as with 4 fielders outside rule n 2 new balls in ODI part time spinners have found it tough and most of our batsman are part time spinners only 

 

Edited November 7, 2019 by Ankit_sharma03

[maniac]

1 minute ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

easier said then done....he had the skill for test as well

• He keeps it tight
• bowls at quick pace
• doesnt give much hint in action that which ball turn in or away 
• He has improved a lot 

Ojha had the backing but in the end didnt go anywhere....they backed mishra was for some time after his debut 5 wkt haul....didnt go anyhwere. Back Krunal, sundar, Chahal i dnt think they l find success in test as in the end u need skills to for that format 

Ojha has a 100+ wickets for india in no time.

 

He was cast aside due to the whole chucking crackdown.

 

There are dime a dozen spinners of Jadeja’s quality in domestics. I mean a journeyman cricketer like Nadeem walks in and picks up 3 wickets in his first game.

 

Jadeja has done well no one can take that away from him but he was shoved down our throats in every format till he found success.

 

Some players don’t get the same backing. Don’t you think Jayant Yadav who got a 100 and wickets in his first 2 series would have evolved in a star? There are plenty of such examples

[express bowling]

2 minutes ago, Ankit_sharma03 said:

Not only 5 but 6 bowling options these days as with 4 fielders outside rule n 2 new balls in ODI part time spinners have found it tough and most of our batsman are part time spinners only 

 

 

I was talking about the rule.

 

And did elaborate in my post that a 6th bowling option is often required.

[Ankit_sharma03]

8 minutes ago, maniac said:

Ojha has a 100+ wickets for india in no time.

 

He was cast aside due to the whole chucking crackdown.

So chucking had a huge role in wkts, and he was send back he re worked on his action he came back n didnt go anywhere

Quote

There are dime a dozen spinners of Jadeja’s quality in domestics. I mean a journeyman cricketer like Nadeem walks in and picks up 3 wickets in his first game.

If he was better he wud have made it....cant blame dhoni for bias on this as nadeem is from his state only. jadeja has the best avg in Indian condition which is 20 .....nadeem bowls in domestic with avg of 28. Nadeem i dnt think is that quick in air which makes jadeja lethal 

 

u think its easy to have avg of 20 when ashwin, kumble, bhajji cudnt achieve it 

 

Quote

Jadeja has done well no one can take that away from him but he was shoved down our throats in every format till he found success.

What option did we have at that time ....we needed someone who can bat n bowl

 

Irfan - who lost his fitness n had poor attitude

Yusuf- poor attitude, poor fitness, can only bash spin which was figured soon, poor fielder.....at max a 5 over bowler

Binny- very poor bowler....but was a better batsman, fielding jaddu was ahead

Hardik- as soon as he came jadeja lost his place in LOI 

Quote

Some players don’t get the same backing. Don’t you think Jayant Yadav who got a 100 and wickets in his first 2 series would have evolved in a star? There are plenty of such examples

jayant bowling didnt look threatning even in Indian conditions....he got injured and others went ahead

 

Obv some will get more backing but only when captain sees something in them....jadeja has proved his captain right. 

Edited November 7, 2019 by Ankit_sharma03

[putrevus]

I want to know which great guy thought that Khaleel is talented bowler.

[sandeep]

10 hours ago, express bowling said:

The left arm variation makes sense only if there are 2 or more pacers who are of similar quality ... and we pick the left armer for variation. Reducing the quality of a pacer, just because he offers a variation, does not make sense.

 

Completely agree with you.  For important games.  For meaningless bilaterals against Windies and Bangladesh? meh.  Not the worst thing to give longer rope to a guy, even if it is to rule him out going forward.

 

[Frustrated]

38 minutes ago, putrevus said:

I want to know which great guy thought that Khaleel is talented bowler.

I m sure, wasim akram with his right hand would still be a better bowler than this garbage 'Khaleel'.