Proper Batsmen. Proper Bowlers.

[h4te]

Following the tradition of arm-chair experts pouring out their deep intellectual and expert insights into the causes of defeat and providing keen suggestions for improvement, I will try to enlighten. I have played gully cricket for 15+ years, and this makes me an expert on the matters of international cricket. FAIL 1: Playing all stroke-makers. Barring Raina (and perhaps Gambhir), no one can really anchor an innings. We should play another proper batsman who can actually be happy without having the urge to hit every ball to six. When you have Sehwag, Yuvraj, Gambhir, (old) Dhoni, you can afford to have someone else who can bat properly. FAIL 2: What's the point of play Y. Pathan when you''re not even going to use him to bowl? Yuvraj and Sehwag can bowl 100 times better than him, and if all he can do is smash, smahs, smash...he shouldn't be playing. Jadeja looks much better. FAIL 3: No Pathan can't be used as batsman. Play an actual bowler instead....3 geniune fast bowlers (Zak + Ishant + RPS/PK/Sree) + Bhajji with Yuvraj/Jadeja. Too much fascination with 'all-rounders'. None of the three are geniune all-rounders like Flintoff....We could've easily played 2 additional proper batsman + 1 proper bowler. - expert observer

[fineleg]

in b4 h4te replies (to himself)

[h4te]

Following the tradition of arm-chair experts pouring out their deep intellectual and expert insights into the causes of defeat and providing keen suggestions for improvement, I will try to enlighten. I have played gully cricket for 15+ years, and this makes me an expert on the matters of international cricket. FAIL 1: Playing all stroke-makers. Barring Raina (and perhaps Gambhir), no one can really anchor an innings. We should play another proper batsman who can actually be happy without having the urge to hit every ball to six. When you have Sehwag, Yuvraj, Gambhir, (old) Dhoni, you can afford to have someone else who can bat properly. FAIL 2: What's the point of play Y. Pathan when you''re not even going to use him to bowl? Yuvraj and Sehwag can bowl 100 times better than him, and if all he can do is smash, smahs, smash...he shouldn't be playing. Jadeja looks much better. FAIL 3: No Pathan can't be used as batsman. Play an actual bowler instead....3 geniune fast bowlers (Zak + Ishant + RPS/PK/Sree) + Bhajji with Yuvraj/Jadeja. Too much fascination with 'all-rounders'. None of the three are geniune all-rounders like Flintoff....We could've easily played 2 additional proper batsman + 1 proper bowler. - expert observer

BRILLIANT SUGGESTIONS!!!! I was thinking the same too! :hatsoff: edit: oh, wait... ok, back to :joyman: B->

[Sachinism]

Great analysis you is legend

[fineleg]

Great analysis you is legend

You applied to the owl group admission? :cantstop:

[SachDan]

Following the tradition of arm-chair experts pouring out their deep intellectual and expert insights into the causes of defeat and providing keen suggestions for improvement, I will try to enlighten. I have played gully cricket for 15+ years, and this makes me an expert on the matters of international cricket. FAIL 1: Playing all stroke-makers. Barring Raina (and perhaps Gambhir), no one can really anchor an innings. We should play another proper batsman who can actually be happy without having the urge to hit every ball to six. When you have Sehwag, Yuvraj, Gambhir, (old) Dhoni, you can afford to have someone else who can bat properly. FAIL 2: What's the point of play Y. Pathan when you''re not even going to use him to bowl? Yuvraj and Sehwag can bowl 100 times better than him, and if all he can do is smash, smahs, smash...he shouldn't be playing. Jadeja looks much better. FAIL 3: No Pathan can't be used as batsman. Play an actual bowler instead....3 geniune fast bowlers (Zak + Ishant + RPS/PK/Sree) + Bhajji with Yuvraj/Jadeja. Too much fascination with 'all-rounders'. None of the three are geniune all-rounders like Flintoff....We could've easily played 2 additional proper batsman + 1 proper bowler. - expert observer

:omg:

[fineleg]

:omg:

he is doing weights to type longer and cricket related posts :weights:

[Sachinism]

Fail 1: We have Dhoni who can anchor the innings, but if the stroke-makers don't do their job then Dhoni being anchor looks bad and pointless, though he has to do it with wicket falling around him Fail 2: Y Pathan is there to do some serious hitting, when someone is used in this role, it will be a case of hit and miss. Just look at "The Beast"'s career. Yusuf was very expensive last game, maybe Dhoni felt scared to use him or maybe he felt his kind of bowling is not suited to this pitch *dunno* Fail 3: I Pathan is fail. agree here, though he didn't bowl too bad in the end

[h4te]

Fail 1: We have Dhoni who can anchor the innings, but if the stroke-makers don't do their job then Dhoni being anchor looks bad and pointless, though he has to do it with wicket falling around him Fail 2: Y Pathan is there to do some serious hitting, when someone is used in this role, it will be a case of hit and miss. Just look at "The Beast"'s career. Yusuf was very expensive last game, maybe Dhoni felt scared to use him or maybe he felt his kind of bowling is not suited to this pitch *dunno* Fail 3: I Pathan is fail. agree here, though he didn't bowl too bad in the end

Fail 1: Dhoni playing anchor is a waste of his talent. He can do easily what Y Pathan is supposed to do. Hit the ball....hard. Please don't tell me there aren't any batsmen in India who can anchor better than Dhoni. Just because you become a captain, doesn't mean you need to go out of your way to play 'sensibly'. He is a hitter. Plain and simple. (no finey/a_d) Fail 2: Dhoni has never really used him much anyway...and rightfully, he sucks. Sorry to be harsh. He is not international class bowler. He's an amazing hitter, sure. If so, then don't play Jadeja also. You can't have a team full of hitters. The problem is he (and the hitters) can't play anchor (read, sensibly) when the going gets tough. Sehwag and Yuvra are truly truly truly gifted, and they have every right to play the way they play. Yusuf is not even close to being in their class. Fail 3: I think everyone agrees.

[Sachinism]

Dhoni doesn't need to take on the role of the anchor, though he felt he needs to. Him playing sensibly has helped India a lot in the ODIs, its allowed others to play their strokes knowing he's holding up one end. Regarding him being a hitter, I don't think he's that good a hitter as he was, I feel a lot of sides have worked out how to bowl to him, he struggles to hit the ball as often as he used to. I agree Yusuf as a bowler is nothing special, but he's not exactly the worst, he has bowled some good spells for India and he is a decent bat. He needs a bit of guidance and he'll be good, he doesn't need to get carried away with his hitting. I've seen him bat sensibly at times as well, he can knock it about and hit when required. I feel he is a good asset to the side, give him time he will develop his game.

[h4te]

Dhoni can play anchor in ODIs. IMO, Yusuf is better for us strategically in ODIs than 20/20. As little as I care about 20/20s, I'd rather we go in with proper batsmen and proper bowlers in 20s. As weird as it sounds, strategically it will pay off. All our main strokeplayers won't try to go bang, bang, bang in ODIs, in which case Pathan can be very very useufl lower down the order to up the ante. And, he can bowl in the middle overs with plenty of protection. In 20/20s, there is no such cushion. You've gotta play proper, geniune players. Each person should have one and only one job and should be able to do it well. There is really very little room for error here, and we need to get the best players at each respective position in to play. No need for i-bat-50%-i-bowl-50% people in 20/20.

[h4te]

:omg:

i ran out of my viagra pills. will get back to B-> :sex: :joyman: when i go buy another bottle. until then, get used to another whiney! :finger:

[Shane]

:wtf: h4te post > 150 characters Post != Phail

[cowboysfan]

pk should have played in both games.we could have won one at least with him in it.

[Mr. Wicket]

FAIL 1: Playing all stroke-makers. Barring Raina (and perhaps Gambhir)' date=' no one can really anchor an innings. We should play another proper batsman who can actually be happy without having the urge to hit every ball to six. When you have Sehwag, Yuvraj, Gambhir, (old) Dhoni, you can afford to have someone else who can bat properly.[/quote'] Proof of this in Dhoni's unbeaten knock yesterday. The difference between the circus games and the ODI was that we had either Tendulkar or Dhoni anchoring one end at all times, while Yuvraj, Sehwag, Yusuf and Raina went and played their shots freely. As a result, the innings didn't lose momentum totally with a couple of wickets while batsmen kept playing shots with nobody building partnerships.

[Anakin]

you mean h4te != fail? :yay:

[Mr. Wicket]

Nope, only a semi-fail. h4te did say that we need proper batsmen anchoring the innings, which was the difference yesterday with SRT/Dhoni in that role. h4te though did say that Dhoni can't and shouldn't be an anchor, and he is wrong in that, as Dhoni's probably one of our best equipped players for that role - excellent at just working the ball around smartly and taking ones and twos, and among the best in the side at rotating strike quickly and running between the wickets.

[graphic23]

Thank you for the post, Salil (and h4te, indirectly), because apparently some of us feel that 84* at a S/R at 94+ is poor/average batting. This is the guy whom everyone had already dismissed as a FTB at the beginning of last year in Australia - and yes, as predicted, he initially struggled to find gaps and rotate the strike as efficiently as he usually does but by the end of the innings, he was able to do so quite well, and ran like a hare too. He brought in a couple of shots when appropriate. I like Dhoni at #3 but I think next match, Gambhir will be back up there. I wasn't quite sure why he was pushed so far down yesterday.

[Mr. Wicket]

I thought at first Gambhir might have been held back for the middle overs; I reckon he's the best player of spin right now in the side and having him bat in the middle overs might be the best way to combat the threat of Vettori (who might otherwise have tied down the other middle order bats).

[h4te]

Nope, only a semi-fail. h4te did say that we need proper batsmen anchoring the innings, which was the difference yesterday with SRT/Dhoni in that role. h4te though did say that Dhoni can't and shouldn't be an anchor, and he is wrong in that, as Dhoni's probably one of our best equipped players for that role - excellent at just working the ball around smartly and taking ones and twos, and among the best in the side at rotating strike quickly and running between the wickets.

what i meant was Dhoni is a very very explosive player who can essentially handle the role of Y. Pathan in 20/20s. I don't rate Y. Pathan too highly, and less said about his bowling the better. We can have some other proper batsman in place of him, and let Dhoni play his helicopter shots! Same goes for I. Pathan in 20/20s. B->