I fail to understand exclusion of Ashwin: Sachin Tendulkar

[rkt.india]

Shardul was never going to play as a third seamer in SENA countries. he makes it to the indian team as a seam alrounder, not as a specialist fast bowler.

[vvvslaxman]

19 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

Shardul was never going to play as a third seamer in SENA countries. he makes it to the indian team as a seam alrounder, not as a specialist fast bowler.

In swinging conditions Thakur > umesh. In reverse swing condition Umesh > Thakur. Umesh has been playing since 2011. Can't remember an overseas spell that was as good Thakurs spells.

[zen]

Ashwin’s record in SENA has gone to the dogs. Only way he can salvage something is by having a series where in: 

 

If a 3 test series, he picks up like 20-25 wkts

if a 4 test series, he picks up like 25-30 wickets 

If a 5 test series, he picks up like 30-35 wickets 

 

If the above is less likely to happen, there is no point in resting on the comfort of tailored spinning pitches in India, which is better off giving opportunities to a young spinner (and PS moving away from such garbage pitches at home which has only helped to create pointless spinners)!

 

 

Edited June 12, 2023 by zen

[zen]

PS there was a test in Eng v SL where Murali picked up 16 or so wickets to win a game for SL.
 

No current Indian spinner can even dream of getting 16 wickets in a 3-4 match series. These are the type of overseas performances that a team needs from its spinners if they are being pampered with tailored spinning wickets at home. 

All show (based on come to India) and little substance only work to create castles in air. On the ground, the team gets slaughtered!

Edited June 12, 2023 by zen

[rkt.india]

1 hour ago, vvvslaxman said:

Shardul is a swing bowler. He swung even in Australia. Even as a bowler he should be ahead of washed up Umesh. That is why I wouldn't havr minded  even unadkat ahead of umesh

 

You still don't understand. Are you really this thick pr just pretending to be thic. Shardul would never play as a third seamer. If not Umesh, Unadkat would have played but not Shardula as third seamer. Shardul only played because they wanted a fourth seamer. Even Umesh is a swing bowler and Shardul himself is washed up with that dibbly dobbly stuff he bowled in this test. He now is a better batsman than a bowler. 

[vvvslaxman]

6 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

You still don't understand. Are you really this thick pr just pretending to be thic. Shardul would never play as a third seamer. If not Umesh, Unadkat would have played but not Shardula as third seamer. Shardul only played because they wanted a fourth seamer. Even Umesh is a swing bowler and Shardul himself is washed up with that dibbly dobbly stuff he bowled in this test. He now is a better batsman than a bowler. 

Glad you are not the team selector lol  It is Thakur gave break through. Umesh was hands down the worst bowler not surprisingly.

[vvvslaxman]

Thakur consistently beat the set batsmen in his early spells. He was unlucky not to get more wickets.  Umesh hardly troubled anyone. 

[sensible-indian]

49 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

Thakur consistently beat the set batsmen in his early spells. He was unlucky not to get more wickets.  Umesh hardly troubled anyone. 

Thakur will play ahead of Umesh or Unadkat is basic cricketing sense.

 

But I guess the labels are important.

 

Same reason why they are opposing 2 spinners.

 

Jaddu did as well or better than Green as a bowler but we had no Lyon for us.

 

But since he is a spinner....we should have a pacer to maintain the 4+1 ratio.

 

No wonder this 4 pacer koolaid took off. 

[Vijy]

6 hours ago, sensible-indian said:

He scored most of his runs chasing 78 in 4th innings (3rd test) and the 90 in ammedabad 2nd innings on the dead pitch.

 

Tahts 140 out of his 235 runs in that tour.

 

Other 4 innings, ashwin got him out twice (incl in Ahmedbad patta - first innings)...while Jaddu and shami gor him once each.

 

Even if he didnt get Head out in Oval, he would have slowed down his scoring rate and prevented him from running away with the game.

 

Also another factor is Carrey and Star scored 150 runs in that test.

 

That just aint happening against Ashwin.

 

So no matter how we slice or dice it  ....ashwin in the team would have resulted in a close defeat or a victory.

 

The issue was that the team management drank the 4 pacer koolaid and paid a heavy price.

 

Irony is that the 4 pacer template didnt even work in SA or Eng 2022.

 

It only worked against a weak Eng 2021 side.

 

Most teams will prefer 4 pacers in Oval cos they dont have Ash and Jaddu.

 

But we had them.

 

Thats the tragedy of it.

 

This mistake is up there with Yuvi 2014 t20 world cup.

 

One selection error which cost the nation the cup.

 

All I can is -- wow. suddenly Ashwin has become murali, warne, bill o'reilly, laker, etc rolled into one, who would turn a 200+ run loss into a victory. Even with better bowling, our batting would have failed to score even 200 in 4th innings if that was the reduced target; the fact that they exceeded 200 was mostly down to the relative lack of pressure in chasing nearly 450 (i.e., it was a foregone cause). Top 5 failure, as much as (if not more than) bowling issues, was the reason for the loss.

Edited June 12, 2023 by Vijy

[vvvslaxman]

1 hour ago, sensible-indian said:

Thakur will play ahead of Umesh or Unadkat is basic cricketing sense.

 

But I guess the labels are important.

 

Same reason why they are opposing 2 spinners.

 

Jaddu did as well or better than Green as a bowler but we had no Lyon for us.

 

But since he is a spinner....we should have a pacer to maintain the 4+1 ratio.

 

No wonder this 4 pacer koolaid took off. 

 

Shami/Ishant/Bumrah later Siraj/Thakur gave brief orgasm to our fans. Once Bumrah picked up injury our 4 fast bowler theory was brutally exposed. We act like our fast bowlers are Ambrose/Malcom Marshall  who can dominate on any tracks.

[BlueBlood]

This forum loves to prop up old has-beens.

 

Umesh was a wrong choice but that doesn't mean Ashwin would have done anything substantial.

 

The game was done on Day 1 when spin was ineffective.

 

Ashwin is a a loser past his prime and can never take the pitch out of the equation like Warne, Murali, Rashid Khan or even Kuldeep Yadav can.

 

Lyon took cheap tailender wickets. The game was long over by then.

 

Ashwin would have done the same taking cheap wickets but he would not have troubled Smith or Head on Day 1.

 

I hate the Indian fan mentality.

Why not get Murali Vijay as opener instead of Rohit Sharma at the rate this discussion is going... Or let's replace KS Bharat with Dhoni LOL

 

The team needs a clear strategy and a good balanced team. Ashwin never balanced our team in SENA - he doesn't field well, doesn't run well between the wickets nor can he take pitch out of the equation.

 

All he is good for is giving hope and that's not enough. I would pick Washington Sundar over him 100% of the time but he keeps getting injured.

[Vijy]

6 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

 

Shami/Ishant/Bumrah later Siraj/Thakur gave brief orgasm to our fans. Once Bumrah picked up injury our 4 fast bowler theory was brutally exposed. We act like our fast bowlers are Ambrose/Malcom Marshall  who can dominate on any tracks.

our spinners are also not murali and warne who can dominate on most tracks. have you seen how ash and jaddu do in SENA?

 

fact of the matter is that Ind has both limited pacers and limited spinners for SENA right now. best spin option overseas in SENA is Kuldeep

Edited June 12, 2023 by Vijy

[vvvslaxman]

1 minute ago, Vijy said:

our spinners are also not murali and warne who can dominate on most tracks. have you seen how ash and jaddu do in SENA?

 

fact of the matter is that Ind has both limited pacers and limited spinners for SENA right now. best spin option overseas in SENA is Kuldeep

 

You should still look at tracks, opposition strengths,  kind of ball they use. Ashwin never had a chance to bowl with Duke since WTC final. He did well in that final. Only guy that went missing was our choker Bumrah.  You should still back your best bowlers instead of playing a seamer just for the sake of it.  Any number of analysis would tell you Ashwin is a significant upgrade over Umesh given our pathetic top order batting.  Clubbing all the SENA matches ( 6 matches over 12 years in SA,  1 match in 12 years in NZ, 6 matches in England in 12 years is definitely not an indication he will keep on failing there). That is basically confirmation bias. We have a narrative. We just try to fit that narrative. I can also say Pant wouldn't have made any difference based on his last WTC final Everyone knows that is not true. Bumrah bottled in every important matches for us. I won't say he won't make any difference.  You back your best player that played a big role in getting India to final. This guy saved the ass of these guys against Australia with bat, against Bangaldesh with bat, against Australia with bat away from home. Heck even in a T20 game he didn't choke like DK.  Not like Ashwin is replaced by some legendary fast bowler.

[Vijy]

6 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said:

 

You should still look at tracks, opposition strengths,  kind of ball they use. Ashwin never had a chance to bowl with Duke since WTC final. He did well in that final. Only guy that went missing was our choker Bumrah.  You should still back your best bowlers instead of playing a seamer just for the sake of it.  Any number of analysis would tell you Ashwin is a significant upgrade over Umesh given our pathetic top order batting.  Clubbing all the SENA matches ( 6 matches over 12 years in SA,  1 match in 12 years in NZ, 6 matches in England in 12 years is definitely not an indication he will keep on failing there). That is basically confirmation bias. We have a narrative. We just try to fit that narrative. I can also say Pant wouldn't have made any difference based on his last WTC final Everyone knows that is not true. Bumrah bottled in every important matches for us. I won't say he won't make any difference.  You back your best player that played a big role in getting India to final. This guy saved the ass of these guys against Australia with bat, against Bangaldesh with bat, against Australia with bat away from home. Heck even in a T20 game he didn't choke like DK.  Not like Ashwin is replaced by some legendary fast bowler.

Ashwin picked up some lower order wickets in last WTC final. I have a feeling that if he was selected, it would have been in place of thakur as an AR-for-AR swap. His batting exploits are partly relevant (albeit in Oz, SC), but the main issues were picking 20 wickets cheaply and the top order batting.

 

I don't think he would be a match winning upgrade over Thakur/Umesh. would have taken 4 wkts in the match at an avg of around 30 in all likelihood (as Jaddu did). not really enough to overturn a 200 run deficit

 

kuldeep might have been more potent, if he was at his best

Edited June 12, 2023 by Vijy

[vvvslaxman]

2 minutes ago, Vijy said:

Ashwin picked up some lower order wickets in last WTC final. I have a feeling that if he was selected, it would have been in place of thakur as an AR-for-AR swap. His batting exploits are partly relevant (albeit in Oz, SC), but the main issues were picking 20 wickets cheaply and the top order batting.

 

I don't think he would be a match winning upgrade over Thakur/Umesh. would have taken 4 wkts in the match at an avg of around 30 in all likelihood (as Jaddu did). not really enough to overturn a 200 run deficit

 

kuldeep might have been more potent, if he was at his best

 

All he had to do was take out oone of Head and Smith. There is no way Head/Starc would have survived against Ashwin and piled up that many runs. 200 deficit was a cascading effect. Even out of form Warner thrashed our bowlers before getting out. Almost all left handers enjoyed run fest against us. First of all there woul not have been a 200 deficit at all. Australia was mostly scratch in the bowling department. Neither Cummins nor Starc hit their strides. Only Boland looked threatening. 

[kosingh]

2 players run Indian cricket. And they don't have the best interest of Indian cricket in mind

[vvvslaxman]

Against this set of batsmen  (one that played in the final)  Indian bowlers performances. Let us see

 

Batter: Steven Smith  Travis Head  Marnus Labuschagne  David Warner  Cameron Green  Usman Khawaja  Alex Carey  Mitchell Starc  

 

Ashwin 43 dsimissals 48.4 strike 29.2 avge
Jadeja 28 dismissals 44.3 strike rate 29.4 avge
Siraj  13 dismissals 50.6 strike rate 36.5 avge
Shami  15 dismissals 55.0 strike rate 46.4 avge
Umesh  16 dismissals 70.2 strike rate 51.4 avge
Thakur  3 dismissals 58.5 strike rate 61.7 avge

 

  Ashwin vs

 

Warner 11 dismissals 17 matches

Smith   8 dismissals 16 matches ( 2 ducks)

Head   3 dismissals 6 matches

Labu  3 dismissals 7 matches

 

All the cricketers who made this remarks are not idiots

[zen]

1 hour ago, Vijy said:

All I can is -- wow. suddenly Ashwin has become murali, warne, bill o'reilly, laker, etc rolled into one, who would turn a 200+ run loss into a victory. 

The funny thing is that if Ashwin had played there would have been threads criticizing him (and some people would have been like why Thakur was not played)  

 

 

it is also funny to to see grown up people crying for no big reason! 

[Vijy]

3 hours ago, zen said:

The funny thing is that if Ashwin had played there would have been threads criticizing him (and some people would have been like why Thakur was not played)  

 

 

it is also funny to to see grown up people crying for no big reason! 

need to start a thread criticizing inclusion of Gill in place of jaiswal, or something random like that. we can hear about how jaiswal would have made a 200 and taken ind to victory

[zen]

4 minutes ago, Vijy said:

need to start a thread criticizing inclusion of Gill in place of jaiswal, or something random like that. we can hear about how jaiswal would have made a 200 and taken ind to victory

 

Don't forget Sarfaraz, who would have scored a 100 too ... so basically, Jaiswal would have done a Head and Sarfaraz would have done a Smith. Harshit Rana would have been better than Boland 

 

(Note that Sarfaraz is said to be relatively weak against swing)

 

 

Here is how the process looks: 

 

a) Look at the scorecard (hindsight is 20/20) and work backward to figure out who did well and who did not 

b) Identify players on the bench 

c) Think about your favorite players as well

d) Replace those who failed with the new players 

e) Claim India would have won