Jump to content

End of road for Bhuvi, Ashwin, Axar?


Serpico

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Lord said:

 

yeah Jaddu at 7 in ODIs

 

Maybe someone like Venky Iyer or Tewatia (I know you don't rate him)

 

Could have played a pure bat at 7, if anyone of top 5 except Pandya could bowl 2 overs

 

I have changed my mind onf guys like Tewatia.  Actually he bowled well in SMAT. If a spinner can bring in batting depth that is invaluable. Opposition won't give respect to Ashwins/Axars just because they are specialists. THey are still going to be treated like part timers. Instead why not just play part timers directly.

Link to comment
6 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

 

I have changed my mind onf guys like Tewatia.  Actually he bowled well in SMAT. If a spinner can bring in batting depth that is invaluable. Opposition won't give respect to Ashwins/Axars just because they are specialists. THey are still going to be treated like part timers. Instead why not just play part timers directly.

he bowled well in SMAT because opposition level is very low. he gets found out in IPL, which is below int'l cricket (or roughly on par)

Link to comment
Just now, vvvslaxman said:

 

I do not see any difference between Axar patel and Tewatia at the highes level. Bishnoi, Sundar are okay. But if we are going to pick Ashwin/Axar why not just someone who can change games in a few overs

because neither he nor axar can do it. both below int'l quality

Link to comment

Okay - have you seen performances of Ashwin and Axar on doctored Indian pitches esp tests? They are unplayable. That fact is used to promote them in all facets of the game everywhere.

 

Ashwin has his fans here and in the media - and they are fervent and relentless. The SA tour for example - people were pointing out on this forum that Ashwin had been totally ineffective in SA in past. His fans insisted that he had changed and improved as a bowler. He played and he was just as bad or worse. 

 

Bhuvaneshwar is different. His pace range and runup and action and "swing" are absolutely adored by the Indian cricket establishment. The cricketing establishment is hooked on Bhuvaneshwar type 125-135 kmph range with "swing". For example if Arshdeep was a  145+ bowler my guess is that he would not have made the team. Arshdeep has the right speed and method - swing - to stay in the team for a long time. Maybe it is best to advise all Indian 145+ speed bowlers to reduce speed significantly and concentrate on swing. They will have fewer injuries, a long career and be in good books with the establishment.

 

Ashwin and Bhuvaneshwar are not going anywhere. You and I can stop following cricket but until they retire Ashwin and Bhuvaneshwar will always be in the calculus for Indian teams everywhere they want to play. Axar is a step lower.

Edited by AKane
Link to comment

Regards the post above - compare the action below with Bhuvaneshwar and people claiming before that swing is the way to go in Australia. Now I prefer the action below to Bhuvaneshwar but I am a nobody and the establishment is different.

 

First ball is a loosener and then the sweater comes off, second ball is faster and then the third.... though I admit he does not get swing like Bhuvaneshwar.

 

 

Edited by AKane
Link to comment
18 hours ago, Frustrated said:

As long as Dravid remains our head coach, Kela is not going anywhere. Sorry to say, but the Karnataka connection is evident.  Kela is like Dravid's son.  I hv seen their body language, gesture etc in the dug out during live matches.  Resembles a Father Son duo.   

Hats off to your observation Skills. 

if what you said is CORRECT then it is not the right thing for India as KL is a big MIS FIT for a T20 team, 

 

Rohit, KL and even Kohli are high pedigree batsman who take a little time to settle in , see the line and length the bowler is bowling , How is the ball swinging , they try to understand the mind of the Bowler and then the Settle down and Play.

Rohit is the captain and He knew from start that this settle and Play Style wont work and we need to make for first 6 overs count for 60 runs if we need to Win the Match. only 2 players outside the circle is a very lucrative option and it is worth taking the risk and even if it means loosing one or 2 wickets too..

 

60 for 2 is better than 45-0 because these additional 15 runs are going to make the difference between winners and Loosers. if you notice chasing team comes very close to the team that bats first and either loose the match or win it- difference between teams is very Less. Allmatches that India won were very close except for one .

 

Rohit tried to score big runs in 6 overs and had to throw his wicket bcos He could not push KL to start hitting from the very second Ball. 

Ishan Kishan has 50 % chance of scoring 40+ runs but if he scores , India will win. Surya if he scores 30 balls he will score a 50 and India's chances are big to win , 

 

so we need clear cut T20 type of players in the T20 team. they can think of retaining a KOHLI for T20 but it makes sense that Kohli is also allowed to play in formats that suit him best - ODI and Tests. As far as I am concerned Rohit, KL and KOhli- all 3 should let others take their T20 positions. 

 

lets see Iyer's - venky and Shreyas, Hingarkar and Bawa ( possible pace arrounders) , Washington Sundar , Bishnoi , chahal , kuldeep among Spinners , Shahbaz ( Spin AR)

and Samson, rishabh rajat Patidar, Prithvi Shaw and may be shubman gill compete..

 

among pacers - Siraj , umran , kuldeep , Prasidh can be the fast bowlers supported by Chahar and arshdeep as Swing bowlers. Left arm quicks - Yash dayal, Mukesh chaowdhary, Khaleel and Mohisn Khan should also be tried out.

 

Shammi and Umesh should be considered or picked in Tests only-not even in ODI's

 

T20 and ODI are kind of similar so guyos who excel in t20 should get their chances in ODI too.

 

 

 

Link to comment
13 hours ago, AKane said:

Regards the post above - compare the action below with Bhuvaneshwar and people claiming before that swing is the way to go in Australia. Now I prefer the action below to Bhuvaneshwar but I am a nobody and the establishment is different.

 

First ball is a loosener and then the sweater comes off, second ball is faster and then the third.... though I admit he does not get swing like Bhuvaneshwar.

 

 

umran malik would have been a real handful on mcg and perth, swing or no swing. likewise for kuldeep sen and kartik tyagi

Link to comment
Just now, Vijy said:

umran malik would have been a real handful on mcg and perth, swing or no swing. likewise for kuldeep sen and kartik tyagi

 

But does it matter. We got to semi final. Bhuvi and Arshdeep bowled well in those pitches.  Who would have made difference in the semi final. That is the question. Prithvi shaw type of batsmen would have made a huge difference.

Link to comment
Just now, vvvslaxman said:

 

But does it matter. We got to semi final. Bhuvi and Arshdeep bowled well in those pitches.  Who would have made difference in the semi final. That is the question. Prithvi shaw type of batsmen would have made a huge difference.

don't agree that bhuvi bowled well. he bowled ok. arsh was good though.

 

batting was certainly the bigger letdown in SF. also against bangladesh and other teams

Link to comment
57 minutes ago, Vijy said:

don't agree that bhuvi bowled well. he bowled ok. arsh was good though.

 

batting was certainly the bigger letdown in SF. also against bangladesh and other teams

 

yes despite  Bhuvi not bowling well we still managed to get through with a very very flawed team.  Looking at how average most sides in this contest were India should have been able to go all the way with slight change in strategies. I don't think any team was good in this world T20. A reason why India even topped the group something i never remotely expected when we started the campaign

Link to comment
1 hour ago, vvvslaxman said:

But does it matter.

 

Well it does.... losing is one thing. Losing by 10 wkts in 2 consecutive world cups with 2.1 and 4 overs to spare is disgraceful bowling.

 

Bhuvaneshwar taking 1 wicket in 3 matches vs Pak/SA/Eng while opening the bowling and having the wk standup in one match in the power play is ...... whatever.

 

Arshdeep taking 2 wickets upfront in the Pak/SA matches kept things in control. He did not in the England match and the whole bowling unraveled.

Link to comment
Just now, AKane said:

 

Well it does.... losing is one thing. Losing by 10 wkts in 2 consecutive world cups with 2.1 and 4 overs to spare is disgraceful bowling.

 

Bhuvaneshwar taking 1 wicket in 3 matches vs Pak/SA/Eng while opening the bowling and having the wk standup in one match in the power play is ...... whatever.

 

Arshdeep taking 2 wickets upfront in the Pak/SA matches kept things in control. He did not in the England match and the whole bowling unraveled.

 

Yea. they were playing at MCG not a road like Adelaide oval. India didn't pick wickets against BD as well at the Adelaide oval. Remember? BD was 60/0 in 6 overs. England is 63/0 in 6 overs. BD was chasing 186 and almost hunting down. England was chasing 168. This is simple. Before the world t20 we thought our bowlers would travel in every ground against every opposition. Arshdeep saved the asses of 4 bowlers on his own.  Expecting him to step  up here as well is unfair. First of all who would go with 2 finger spinners in Aussie land where wristies make the most impact

Link to comment

Every selection be it is squad or playing XI can be boiled down to saving the asses of Rohit/Rahul at the top. They do not want a spinner who cannot bat even he is a better option in these conditions. Only reason is they need a back up for top order collapse. Since Jadeja is missing and Axar is not as good as Jadeja, they used two spinners who could bat a bit even though neither of their bowling is unsuitable here.  This is once again to elongate the tail and haven imaginary batting depth.  You got on condition dependent bowler Bhuvi, another one is a rookie, third one is pathetic Shami.  Pandya  is always going to blow hot and cold So our only way of containing opposition in the middle phase was taken away to give cushion to Rohit/Rahul.  India could not balance the side even with pandya in the side.

Link to comment
15 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

Every selection be it is squad or playing XI can be boiled down to saving the asses of Rohit/Rahul at the top. They do not want a spinner who cannot bat even he is a better option in these conditions. Only reason is they need a back up for top order collapse. Since Jadeja is missing and Axar is not as good as Jadeja, they used two spinners who could bat a bit even though neither of their bowling is unsuitable here.  This is once again to elongate the tail and haven imaginary batting depth.  You got on condition dependent bowler Bhuvi, another one is a rookie, third one is pathetic Shami.  Pandya  is always going to blow hot and cold So our only way of containing opposition in the middle phase was taken away to give cushion to Rohit/Rahul.  India could not balance the side even with pandya in the side.

 

Rohit's reflexes seem gone. Previously he looked lazy playing shots. Now he just looks slow. It happens to all batsmen with age - even Sehwag types.

 

I just wonder at Ashwin and Axar - they look like demons bowling in India and look like lambs overseas. Even with the doctored pitches I cannot understand it. Bedi/Pras/Chandra were effective in India and effective abroad too. Shastri was not so good abroad but he was not so good in India too. Something changed with Kumble and continued with Ashwin. Its puzzling - Murali and Kumble have mirror image good and bad stats in home country SL/India vs visiting.

 

 

Edited by AKane
Link to comment
Just now, AKane said:

 

Rohit's reflexes seem gone. Previously he looked lazy playing shots. Now he just looks slow. It happens to all batsmen - even Sehwag types.

 

I just wonder at Ashwin and Axar - they look like demons bowling in India and look like lambs overseas. Even with the doctored pitches I cannot understand it. Bedi/Pras/Chandra were effective in India and effective abroad too. Shastri was not so good abroad but he was not so good in India too. Something changed with Kumble and continued with Ashwin. Its puzzling - Murali and Kumble have mirror image good and bad stats in home country SL/India vs visiting.

 

 

 

 

I don't think even in India off spinners will make bigger difference compared to leg spinners.  Ashwin was just economical there. Nothing more. He didn't exactly run through sides even in India. It was chahal who did the damage for Royals not his partner Ashwin

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...