5 batsmen and 5 bowlers strategy was going to risky all the time

[Trichromatic]

India had no fallback option.

 

You can blame Kohli and KL as much as you want. Yes, they were pathetic in their approach, but one of the reasons was that it was last batting pair for India. 

 

SKY was specialist batsman only on paper. Team had no confidence in him because he was selected just on the basis of potential. He had no ODI performances to show for his inclusion. Most underserving player to play a test for India and then underserving to play in this side. 

 

Of all players who have played 30+ games, he is among lowest averaging batsman. Team was desperate for some x factor and went for unproven one. It's not like his SR is very high. His SR in WC was lower than Jadeja's. 

 

Kishan on the other hand wasn't able to get into side even after performing in different type of situations. Scoring v Pakistan when team was 4 down, scoring double 100. 

 

Team just hoped for returns and since they had no previous examples to think of, they couldn't rely on him at all. It was evident from the promotion of Jadeja when almost 20 overs were left.

 

Those spots are not for pinch hitters. However wrong that maybe, but this was one the reason why team was playing Thakur. Not a right pick, but team batsmen need assurance of remaining batting line up. Without that team was just hoping that everyone in form clicks all the time with no fallback option.

 

When you bat with 5 batsmen, it is going to hurt you at some time. 

 

Same with bowling. Your 5th bowler is going to useless most of the time. Having bowling options ensures that you can give bowl someone for half an hour if someone is having off day. India didn't have that luxury either. It was visible in semi-final, but luckily Shami came up with all time best performance for India.

[CG]

Pandya got injured so they were forced ,Thakur is not pandyas quality.

[Trichromatic]

1 minute ago, CG said:

Pandya got injured so they were forced ,Thakur is not pandyas quality.

 

Still, I don't think SKY had his place in side without anything to show in his resume.

[Lord]

5 hours ago, Trichromatic said:

 

Still, I don't think SKY had his place in side without anything to show in his resume.

Should have been Kishan

[Nikhil_cric]

6 hours ago, Trichromatic said:

India had no fallback option.

 

You can blame Kohli and KL as much as you want. Yes, they were pathetic in their approach, but one of the reasons was that it was last batting pair for India. 

 

SKY was specialist batsman only on paper. Team had no confidence in him because he was selected just on the basis of potential. He had no ODI performances to show for his inclusion. Most underserving player to play a test for India and then underserving to play in this side. 

 

Of all players who have played 30+ games, he is among lowest averaging batsman. Team was desperate for some x factor and went for unproven one. It's not like his SR is very high. His SR in WC was lower than Jadeja's. 

 

Kishan on the other hand wasn't able to get into side even after performing in different type of situations. Scoring v Pakistan when team was 4 down, scoring double 100. 

 

Team just hoped for returns and since they had no previous examples to think of, they couldn't rely on him at all. It was evident from the promotion of Jadeja when almost 20 overs were left.

 

Those spots are not for pinch hitters. However wrong that maybe, but this was one the reason why team was playing Thakur. Not a right pick, but team batsmen need assurance of remaining batting line up. Without that team was just hoping that everyone in form clicks all the time with no fallback option.

 

When you bat with 5 batsmen, it is going to hurt you at some time. 

 

Same with bowling. Your 5th bowler is going to useless most of the time. Having bowling options ensures that you can give bowl someone for half an hour if someone is having off day. India didn't have that luxury either. It was visible in semi-final, but luckily Shami came up with all time best performance for India.

If team has no faith in him, why select him in the first place with his mediocre List A/ODI record.

 

The problem is we worry too much about bowlers not scoring runs when a batter in the Top 6 is not. 

 

 

[Trichromatic]

8 minutes ago, Nikhil_cric said:

If team has no faith in him, why select him in the first place with his mediocre List A/ODI record.

 

The problem is we worry too much about bowlers not scoring runs when a batter in the Top 6 is not. 

 

 

 

It hardly works like that.

 

Any lineup can be 3 down any day. So need that insurance.

 

Same goes bowlers also.

 

Maxwell took most important wicket of Sharma and contributed with ball.

[Trichromatic]

Kishan

Avg 42

SR 102

Clutch performance v Pak when team was 4 down.

Double century in ODIs.

 

SKY

Avg 25

SR 105

 

Whole point of including SKY over proven performer like Kishan was to have mythical hitting abilities which SKY hadn't shown even in T20I tournaments yet.

[Ultimate_Game]

1 minute ago, Trichromatic said:

Kishan

Avg 42

SR 102

Clutch performance v Pak when team was 4 down.

Double century in ODIs.

 

SKY

Avg 25

SR 105

 

Whole point of including SKY over proven performer like Kishan was to have mythical hitting abilities which SKY hadn't shown even in T20I tournaments yet.

 

Plus Kishan can take on spinners, and is a left hander to boot. Could've been our Raina this tourney down the order.

[Trichromatic]

1 minute ago, Ultimate_Game said:

 

Plus Kishan can take on spinners, and is a left hander to boot. Could've been our Raina this tourney down the order.

 

I don't rate Kishan as batsman, but some tailender type hack keeping him out is just mockery of performance based selection.

[AuxiliA]

2 minutes ago, Trichromatic said:

Kishan

Avg 42

SR 102

Clutch performance v Pak when team was 4 down.

Double century in ODIs.

 

SKY

Avg 25

SR 105

 

Whole point of including SKY over proven performer like Kishan was to have mythical hitting abilities which SKY hadn't shown even in T20I tournaments yet.

 

His 360° hitting skills fooled everyone into backing him (including me). Kishan being a lefty would have been a plus too. 

 

Pandya was a huge loss for us. He's twice the ODI batter that SKY is and could bowl some crucial overs too. 

 

Without Pandya, we had no Plan B in bowling. 

 

 

[Ultimate_Game]

6 minutes ago, Trichromatic said:

 

I don't rate Kishan as batsman, but some tailender type hack keeping him out is just mockery of performance based selection.

 

Ideally I would've preferred Rinku over SKY based on List A performance and what I'd seen of Rinku so far - he has a much better temperament and doesn't solely rely on one mode to score runs, and can pace his innings. If not him, I liked Kishan as he has shown he's clutch against Pak in Asia Cup. Plus down the order he wouldn't have faced any swing which he struggled with against Aussies. IMO the team management saw his failure against Aussies but didn't factor the lack of swing if he comes down the order. I trust Kishan much more than SKY but ideally a proper middle order batsman like Rinku should've been in the squad.

[Frustrated]

Both SKY and Kishan are hacks of highest order, with varying degrees of loopholes/inabilities.  Neither of them should be in the team.     Time to groom some other youngster like Rinku Singh.  He has done well in many IPL games along with the T20 game vs Ireland where we were able to see his wide range of strokes all over the ground. 

[Khota]

That was not the problem.

[express bowling]

We lost because Australia showed desperation to win the Final ... while we lacked that desperation. 

 

We can analyze team compositions and change them all we want. But that won't bring us trophies unless we really really develop the will to win the trophies.

Edited November 20, 2023 by express bowling

[SRT100]

3 minutes ago, express bowling said:

We lost because Australia showed a desperation to win the Final ... while we lacked that desperation. 

 

We can analyze team compositions and change them all we want. But that won't bring us trophies unless we really really develop the will to win the trophies.

Our dismissals was a telling factor too.

Not out to brilliant deliveries or unplayable balls. Literally had our top 6 batsmen execute their shots so poorly.

[Texan]

11 hours ago, Trichromatic said:

 

Still, I don't think SKY had his place in side without anything to show in his resume.

He didn't have any ODI resume to be picked in team. He didn't have any FC resume either but miraculously made it to the Test team. IPL performances are now dictating selections in all teams. 

[express bowling]

2 minutes ago, Texan said:

He didn't have any ODI resume to be picked in team. He didn't have any FC resume either but miraculously made it to the Test team. IPL performances are now dictating selections in all teams. 

 

Rahane made a comeback to the test squad and team  ( after getting dropped for below par performances in his last 50 freaking tests )    after he played a couple of good knocks in the IPL and Dhoni certified him as a candidate for tests. This is the state of our selections.

[singhvivek141]

1 minute ago, express bowling said:

 

Rahane made a comeback to the test squad and team  ( after getting dropped for below par performances in his last 50 freaking tests )    after he played a couple of good knocks in the IPL and Dhoni certified him as a candidate for tests. This is the state of our selections.

This shows the amount of influence our seniority culture has in team selections.

Selection committee has no idea who is the right person for what and selects whoever the seniors/superstars recommend to.

[Texan]

6 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

Rahane made a comeback to the test squad and team  ( after getting dropped for below par performances in his last 50 freaking tests )    after he played a couple of good knocks in the IPL and Dhoni certified him as a candidate for tests. This is the state of our selections.

No new guy can make it unfortunately. So many barriers created for new guys. Only folks like Gill get through because they started building their PR machinery early. 

[vvvslaxman]

Most of us recognized this limitation of SKY. But they desperately tried to convert him into a ODI player. Paid the price at the biggest stage.