The Drop Sreesanth, Nehra, Ishant from ODIs & T20s thread

[Texan]

Bhaiyya' date=' Parnell and Steyn are not your typical number 9 and 10 batsmen - Parnell played the Under 19 WC as a genuine all rounder and showed his batting skills even in the test at Calcutta. Steyn scored 70 runs in a 180 run partnership against the phaasht bowling of Australia. They are good batsmen.[/quote'] Parnell's highest in List A matches before this match was 26* and Steyn's was 17*. So, they aren't exactly batting dynamites. Besides, my point is - they wouldn't have been able to do what they did today to any other bowling attack.

[achilles]

Buddy, did you watch Aggy bowl in the Ranji Trophy final? He was getting reverse swing, bowling yorkers even on the 5th day towards the end of the match and his pace was still above 135 kph. About Irfan, not sure why he's not playing if you say so, but he was captain of the Baroda Ranji team this season.

But pal, Lord Aggy's a shadow of the guy he used to be once upon a time, I feel. I hope he proves everyone wrong, like he should have when umpteen chances came his way and things unfortunately didn't work out. Irfan is still a bit rusty. C'mon Irfan... We need you. Up the darn pace a bit and find the consistency which was once your hallmark, pal :--D

[Guest Hiten.]

Bhaiyya' date=' Parnell and Steyn are not your typical number 9 and 10 batsmen - Parnell played the Under 19 WC as a genuine all rounder and showed his batting skills even in the test at Calcutta. Steyn scored 70 runs in a 180 run partnership against the phaasht bowling of Australia. They are good batsmen.[/quote'] You're giving too much credit to Steyn but these days you expect the tail to wag and wag big. The problem with a 3 match series is you are forced to use the best of your lot for 2 matches and by the time you win the series its too late to blood a rookie into the side. Prof, don't forget the World Cup is too be played in India and if we don't get use to bowling on these wickets then no matter how much we score it just wouldn't matter. Just put our bowlers in pressure and they'll dish out crap at you. We carry bowlers who are unable to stop the run flow with the new ball and the old ball (the two crucial periods of the game).

[The Outsider]

Parnell's highest in List A matches before this match was 26* and Steyn's was 17*. So' date=' they aren't exactly batting dynamites. Besides, my point is - they wouldn't have been able to do what they did today to any other bowling attack.[/quote'] Steyn, over the last year, has made 70 odd against Australia. In the very next match at Sydney, he survived for more than 20 overs and then cracked a half century against England a few weeks back. He might not have had high scores in limited overs cricket, but that in itself is no indication that he is a bunny with the bat. Ditto with Parnell - a very adequate lower order batsman. Just a few months back Harbhajan and P Kumar smashed the Aussie bowling attack to smithereens - this is not the age of walking wickets in the tail. Every team has strong lower order batsmen who will come through once in a while.

[ludhianvi]

i dont mind tail enders hitting a few runs but none of our fast bowlers know the art of death bowling.we have a new bowling coach but its the same dreading feeling i get after 40 overs have been bowled.

I think the Indian ballers forget what they have to have to in their delivery stride, almost as if their memory is wiped out. The person at mid-off has to constantly remind them to bowl some yorkers. And they probably thought that the match is in their pockets and decided to take it easy.

[The Outsider]

You're giving too much credit to Steyn but these days you expect the tail to wag and wag big. The problem with a 3 match series is you are forced to use the best of your lot for 2 matches and by the time you win the series its too late to blood a rookie into the side. Prof, don't forget the World Cup is too be played in India and if we don't get use to bowling on these wickets then no matter how much we score it just wouldn't matter. Just put our bowlers in pressure and they'll dish out crap at you. We carry bowlers who are unable to stop the run flow with the new ball and the old ball (the two crucial periods of the game).

I don't understand why you guys are not rating Steyn as a batsman - look at my post above for some examples over the last year. I am not denying that we bowl crap at the death in ODIs - my point is that any replacement is going to deliver the same crap on these pattas and so will the opposition phaasht bowlers, unless there is some genuine great like a McGrath. It's all about who smashed bowling better to win ODIs in India. And no matter what spin people put, it's going to be a who batted better on the day which is going to decide the World Cup. My suggestion is to pack up the team with power hitters and cowlashers and let them loose.

[Texan]

Yes. Steyn is a match-winner with the bat. He will score a 100 off 70 balls in next match and have a 200-run partnership with Parnell. India will bat first and score 350 and have SA at 150/8 and Steyn-Parnell will win the next match :winky:

[zen]

It's not just the bowling but captaincy too. We should have been looking to finish the game off but we bowled as if the game had to go till the 50th over and it did .... We should have played either Mishy or Ashwin instead of one of the batters or bits and pieces players Ind needs to learn to develop a culture where it looks to attack both with the bat and the ball. We need to look at going in with 4 specialist bowlers + 1 bowling all-rounder. Of the 4 specialists, not everyone is going to bowl well (just like not every batsman is going to bat well) so we need to have options. While we try to cover for the batting (which is our strength), we still keep exposing our bowling (which is inadequate in the first place)

[topmunda]

Kick out Nehra and Sreenath ASAP.... These guys are discrace. India should just play with 11 batsmen because the 4-5 bowlers are useless.

[Texan]

It's not just the bowling but captaincy too. We should have been looking to finish the game off but we bowled as if the game had to go till the 50th over and it did .... We should have played either Mishy or Ashwin instead of one of the batters or bits and pieces players Ind needs to learn to develop a culture where it looks to attack both with the bat and the ball. We need to look at going in with 4 specialist bowlers + 1 bowling all-rounder. Of the 4 specialists, not everyone is going to bowl well (just like not every batsman is going to bat well) so we need to have options. While we try to cover for the batting (which is our strength), we still keep exposing our bowling (which is inadequate in the first place)

I agree about R Ashwin. In domestic cricket at least, he has shown that he can bowl well restrictively and he's also a handy batsman.

[msb1991]

Sreesanth does not seem to be match fit. He is not the quickest bowler in the world, but rarely has dropped below 130kph in his career, as he has in his recent stint after his swine flu scare. I'd not be surprised if he is below 100% fitness. Whether time in the gym or in domestic cricket is the answer, I'm unsure - but he should not be in the team in his current state. Nehra is a solid bowler, I think that he works hard in Indian conditions and rarely bowls embarassingly - he gets the ball in good areas and tends to suffer from the pitches rather than anything else. People are keen to discount him due to some poor performances, but I think he provides a steadyness that is not present in Sreesanth or Praveen and this is invaluable. This is a value judgement, people can disagree, but I think he offers consistency to Dhoni and this is why he often bowls his 10 overs whereas Dhoni can never trust Sreesanth or Praveen with the old ball. PK seems to be used poorly by Dhoni, imo. Dhoni is keen to stand up to him, negating his swing as batsmen do not get forward to him and taking out the caught behind option, forcing PK to pitch the ball shorter. It is a poor tactic and one which I think needs to be stopped. Praveen is a swing bowler, not a slow medium pace bowler. He is an aggressive bowler, not an attritional bowler - he must be treated as such. It seems obvious to everyone bar the selectors, that we need to play two front line spinners and two pace bowlers. Spin is our strength and pace is our weakness. Whether it is Ashwin, Mishra, Ojha, whoever, does not worry me, as we have numerous competant spin bowlers for ODIs but very few competant ODI bowlers, on their day. Regarding new options, I think we should not hesitate to play some young guns out in ODIs. Tyagi, Mithun, etc - just make sure we do not go back to the tried and tested failures (Sreesanth and Ishant) until they improve.

[The Outsider]

It seems obvious to everyone bar the selectors, that we need to play two front line spinners and two pace bowlers. Spin is our strength and pace is our weakness. Whether it is Ashwin, Mishra, Ojha, whoever, does not worry me, as we have numerous competant spin bowlers for ODIs but very few competant ODI bowlers, on their day. Regarding new options, I think we should not hesitate to play some young guns out in ODIs. Tyagi, Mithun, etc - just make sure we do not go back to the tried and tested failures (Sreesanth and Ishant) until they improve.

Pretty much agree with the first half of your post and as usual your excellent analysis of fast bowling, so am not quoting that. But regarding the above, it's a mindset that Dhoni has developed - rightly or wrongly - that spinners cannot be bowler in Power Play overs as a consistent strategy, so that pretty much rules out the option of going in with 2 specialist spinners in ODIs. Sreesanth and Ishant are not ODI bowlers at the moment anyways, and I agree that we should junk them from ODIs and play some line and length bowlers. They are just not going to get conditions to suit their aggressive bowling in India and will end up losing their skills in the process as has happened with Ishant - Sreesanth has always been an erratic wicket taking bowler anyway suited purely for test matches. Good post!

[ensd2]

Sehwag and Yuvraj are our best bowlers :((

[topmunda]

Indian part-time bowlers are more economical and effective than our pace attack. haha

[zubinpepsi]

Nehra is good.. but way too inconsistent.. sometimes he bows really well in death.. sometimes he gets his yorkers horribly wrong and bowls crap.... Ishant and Sreeshant shud never be selected for the ODIs.. no harm in trying new bowlers.. as we can see how good/bad they are..

[yoda]

Sree was never a good ODI bowler. Nehra is fine. Ishant well, donno what happened to this guy no matter what form of the game. He needs a break to find his mojo back.

[Ram]

No international team goes into an ODI with just two medium pacers and one can understand why. Bringing a spinner on to bowl in the PP overs has proven to be suicidal most times, so much so that even guys like Murali dont come on to bowl until the field spreads out. In such a case, there's a distinct possibility that your best spinner can get hit early and that can leave the entire bowling plan in tatters. In that sense, the lack of a pace bowling all-rounder has haunted us ever since Irfan went out of the team. Dhoni has had to make the trade-off b/w having an extra batsmen at no.7 and playing an extra spinner. But the idea of going into a ODI match with just 2 fast bowlers is not advisable and fraught with extreme risk.

[CG]

So, does that mean we keep persisting with below average bowlers who have time and again leaked runs by the ton? Nehra, Ishant and Sree have all got PLENTY of chances. And for the record, neither is Agarkar a trundler nor is A Mithun. they both bowl 135 + and R Vinay Kumar bowls around 130 - 135 (about the pace at which Ishant operates these days). So, we're not talking about trundlers. I for one would even like to take a chance with Kamran Khan. Good pace and has an excellent yorker. So what if he hasn't played domestic cricket.

Sorry to burst your bubble but the speedgun that neo uses they have been clocked at 120-130.why not drop steyn.parnel.malinga.fernando.kulasekara.mendis.johnson.morkel.anderson. They all have been hammered and they only tour once in a few years on worlds flattest pitches

[msb1991]

Pretty much agree with the first half of your post and as usual your excellent analysis of fast bowling, so am not quoting that. But regarding the above, it's a mindset that Dhoni has developed - rightly or wrongly - that spinners cannot be bowler in Power Play overs as a consistent strategy, so that pretty much rules out the option of going in with 2 specialist spinners in ODIs. Sreesanth and Ishant are not ODI bowlers at the moment anyways, and I agree that we should junk them from ODIs and play some line and length bowlers. They are just not going to get conditions to suit their aggressive bowling in India and will end up losing their skills in the process as has happened with Ishant - Sreesanth has always been an erratic wicket taking bowler anyway suited purely for test matches. Good post!

Actually, putting my view as "obvious" was wrong, because it is a valid school of thought that Dhoni has to not bowl spinners in the powerplay. I just do not think that spinners could do any worse than our pace bowlers do in the powerplay. We've seen the impact of spinners in the early overs of T20s - it requires innovation and style to succeed, but it is possible for our skilful spinners to do that.

No international team goes into an ODI with just two medium pacers and one can understand why. Bringing a spinner on to bowl in the PP overs has proven to be suicidal most times, so much so that even guys like Murali dont come on to bowl until the field spreads out. In such a case, there's a distinct possibility that your best spinner can get hit early and that can leave the entire bowling plan in tatters. In that sense, the lack of a pace bowling all-rounder has haunted us ever since Irfan went out of the team. Dhoni has had to make the trade-off b/w having an extra batsmen at no.7 and playing an extra spinner. But the idea of going into a ODI match with just 2 fast bowlers is not advisable and fraught with extreme risk.

Irfan deserved to be gone from the ODI team, definitely but you are right that it has cost us. Playing two seam bowlers is a risky tactic, but how much worse can our spin bowlers do than our pace bowlers do in the powerplay in the subcontinent - they never fail to be expensive. I also feel that the success of spin bowlers in T20 has shown the impact of spin when batsmen are teeing off, that may have not previously been appreciated. I don't think a Jadeja type steady spinner will be too successful in the powerplay in the long term (he can still play though, of course and bowl in the middle overs like he did so well against SA) or at the death but bowlers like Ojha, Mishra and Bhajji who vary pace, drift and spin and have been successful in T20 can succeed, imo.

[Texan]

No international team goes into an ODI with just two medium pacers and one can understand why. Bringing a spinner on to bowl in the PP overs has proven to be suicidal most times, so much so that even guys like Murali dont come on to bowl until the field spreads out. In such a case, there's a distinct possibility that your best spinner can get hit early and that can leave the entire bowling plan in tatters. In that sense, the lack of a pace bowling all-rounder has haunted us ever since Irfan went out of the team. Dhoni has had to make the trade-off b/w having an extra batsmen at no.7 and playing an extra spinner. But the idea of going into a ODI match with just 2 fast bowlers is not advisable and fraught with extreme risk.

I agree. Especially when all are part-time bowlers are spinners, so there is no backup medium pacer. Going into any match with just 2 pacers will be too risky.