We cannot afford two slow starters as openers in ODI

[Global.Baba]

26 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

Slow start is fine by me but what's important is capitalising between 11-40 overs. 

Amen. I have seen India chase 300-350 scores in odis too and that too comfortably.

 

When the top 3 we’re doing that we had guys like Dhoni, Jadhav etc slowing down momentum.

 

Now we have better fire power but we are blaming top 3 but none of these middle order guys and that includes Iyer  have yet shown that they can win games on their own even when top 3 doesn’t fire.

 

Lets wait and see for a match where top 3 failed and then the middle order rescue us. Don’t need to pull some obscure matches but matches that matter, like a pressure situation or against a top 5  side (Aus,Eng,Nzl and will add Pak in there for extra pressure situations)

[New guy]

3 hours ago, Global.Baba said:

Amen. I have seen India chase 300-350 scores in odis too and that too comfortably.

 

When the top 3 we’re doing that we had guys like Dhoni, Jadhav etc slowing down momentum.

 

Now we have better fire power but we are blaming top 3 but none of these middle order guys and that includes Iyer  have yet shown that they can win games on their own even when top 3 doesn’t fire.

 

Lets wait and see for a match where top 3 failed and then the middle order rescue us. Don’t need to pull some obscure matches but matches that matter, like a pressure situation or against a top 5  side (Aus,Eng,Nzl and will add Pak in there for extra pressure situations)

Again, there is a difference between a slow start of 5 per over and 3 per over. Your assumption is that openers will need to take risks and we will need rescuing, but 5 an over is still risk free cricket. They were patting down even full tosses

[zen]

On one hand, our brave lower middle order batsmen try to hit even yorkers for 6, on the other hand, these top order batsmen even block perfectly hittable balls. Need to improve their SR for sure or let a youngster do the job if they can’t adjust to fast paced cricket 

[poi]

Personal stats versus what is good for the team as a whole. A batter clearly has incentives to have high average in ODI because average is the first thing being used to judge a player. If you score an ODI century, your place in your team is set for the next 5 innings even with a series of ducks. And who is going to drop a batter who “averages” in the 50s or even in the high 40s? But those stats should always be used with the strike rate.

 

The only time strike rate is used is when trying to be unnecessarily analytical “his strike rate is 200 after 50 balls”, or most sixes in the death.

[Vijy]

1 hour ago, zen said:

On one hand, our brave lower middle order batsmen try to hit even yorkers for 6, on the other hand, these top order batsmen even block perfectly hittable balls. Need to improve their SR for sure or let a youngster do the job if they can’t adjust to fast paced cricket 

they tuk-tuked against moeen ali of all people in ODIs.