diff sets of batsman

[Vk1]

When we go with 3+1 or 4+1 fast bowlers for overseas and traditionally bowled 2 or 3 spinners at home with 2 fast bowlers only.. why not apply the same logic for batsman? Pick batsman who can score heavily at home and replace them with new set of batsman who are better in handling overseas conditions..  say dhawan and Rohit for home tests and pick Priyank Panchal and Eswaran if they technically good enough in Overseas? (  I dont mean to replace all condition batsman like Kohli.. ) Applies to other SC teams as well.. and to overseas teams coming to SC. Is this method too risky?

[WC2011INDIA]

That's how it should be, but then that would mean coaches have to deal with more players and have to actually do more work. The current team management can't handle the present set of players, so handling 2 set of cricketers for separate conditions is daunting. Bewda will be confused and drink more.

[express bowling]

We should pick all-condition players

 

Be it batsmen, fast bowlers or spinners 

 

Pick players who have the game to do well both home and away.

 

If the overseas experts don't play home tests ... meaning they are playing only in tough conditions ... then they will never develop reputation and confidence.

 

Let's say we decide on Gill and Padikkal as the openers for tests ... we should play them everywhere.

 

Home expert Umesh playing tests in India, has resulted in this doubt over Saini and Siraj when injuries happened. Are they good or not ? If they had played at home too, we would have had a better idea.

Edited December 30, 2020 by express bowling

[Vk1]

51 minutes ago, express bowling said:

We should pick all-condition players

 

Be it batsmen, fast bowlers or spinners 

 

Pick players who have tgd game to do well both home and away.

 

If the overseas experts don't play home tests ... meaning they are playing only in tough conditions ... then they will never develop reputation and confidence.

 

Let's say we decide on Gill and Padikkal as the openers for tests ... we should play them everywhere.

 

Home expert Umesh playing tests in India, has resulted in this doubt over Saini and Siraj when injuries happened. Are they good or not ? If they had played at home too, we would have had a better idea.

 

Playing with all condition batsman is the ideal case and has been the trend so far.  But with modern day hustle n bustle of T20/ODI formats, it is increasingly difficult to find them.  We have already lost enough in SENA this decade, I dont want this to get repeated. If Priyank Panchal / Eswaran / Padikkal can play well in SENA but are inferior to Dhawan/ Mayank / Rohit in India. so be it.

[express bowling]

29 minutes ago, Vk1 said:

 

Playing with all condition batsman is the ideal case and has been the trend so far.  But with modern day hustle n bustle of T20/ODI formats, it is increasingly difficult to find them.  We have already lost enough in SENA this decade, I dont want this to get repeated. If Priyank Panchal / Eswaran / Padikkal can play well in SENA but are inferior to Dhawan/ Mayank / Rohit in India. so be it.

 

 

The best players of quality seam bowling in our country are ....

 

Kohli

Pujara

Gill

Rahane

Pant

Jadeja

 

H.Pandya has the potential 

Padikkal has the potential 

 

All the rest don't look convincing to me. This includes Panchal and Easwaran. 

 

I know I have stated a couple of names which a few people will not agree with.

 

But I am just giving my observation 

 

[Ankit_sharma03]

Not a bad idea but only when u hve so many player who work in opposing condition as to all 

 

• Umesh is a classic who shud play in India only
• Rahane was another guy who wasnt that good in subcontinent but he wasnt that awfull as Rohit has been overseas to be dropped

 

As far as batting goes some player needs few tours to adapt to alien condition so ill say atleast see players for 2 cycle. Another problem with this Idea is player who play aborad will hardly have good numbers as u go in a country after long so sometimes it doesnt work for Eg Rahane 2nd cycle overseas wasnt as good as 1st. 

Vihari n Pandya avg wud have been far better if they wud have played more home test and at the end if numbers are low pressure on players starts to mount

Edited December 30, 2020 by Ankit_sharma03

[RajBan]

2 hours ago, Vk1 said:

When we go with 3+1 or 4+1 fast bowlers for overseas and traditionally bowled 2 or 3 spinners at home with 2 fast bowlers only.. why not apply the same logic for batsman? Pick batsman who can score heavily at home and replace them with new set of batsman who are better in handling overseas conditions..  say dhawan and Rohit for home tests and pick Priyank Panchal and Eswaran if they technically good enough in Overseas? (  I dont mean to replace all condition batsman like Kohli.. ) Applies to other SC teams as well.. and to overseas teams coming to SC. Is this method too risky?

The problem is Indian cricket establishment have lacked intelligence to think that way. Also it helps to protect the brand value of few by force fitting people who have no business to be there.

[G_B_]

How about we pick players with a solid defence against pacers? That is a core skill you need.

 

 

[express bowling]

3 hours ago, G_B_ said:

How about we pick players with a solid defence against pacers? That is a core skill you need.

 

 

 

 

These days, anyone who has the ability to play 140 k+ balls try to develop into T20 batsmen too, so that they get lucrative IPL contracts ... and this messes with their defenses.

 

Vihari was thought to be one such batsman but he does not seem to be that fluent against 140 k+ balls.

 

In the age of T20s, it won't be easy to find a new Dravid or Pujara. No one wants be a batsman in that mould.

 

 

[Vk1]

19 minutes ago, Cricspin said:

 

 

Thing is Dravid batted in high gear plenty of times in ODI when needed and that did not affect is test skills. Better even Sachin attacked a lot and still could defend and build an innings in tests. These new generation players need more discipline, patience,  concentration and hunger for excellence and not just treat cricket as a cash cow.  Attacking batting and bad test match skills dont have to go together. 

 

 

They batted in ODIs.. current players prepare for T20s where you need to prepare to slog from ball 1

[Vk1]

Perhaps we can think of middle order finishers of 90s n 2000s ( likes of Yuvi/Bevan/ Ajay Jadeja )  who could never become proper test players as an example to understand how the current top quality T20 players find it very hard in tests in overseas ( KLR / Rohit ) 

[zen]

To implement a good rotation policy, it is important to

 

a) understand key performance metrics .... One issue I see in general is a lack of understanding of numbers, which results in unnecessarily chopping and changing .... For e.g. avgs in top order overseas would likely be lower than in middle order 

b) have a solid core esp. if there are test specialists 

c) If test specialists are being rotated, have a plan where they play enough cricket to remain competitive