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

[Texan]

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

I'm not sure I understand what you are saying about the speed gun. Steyn has been clocked at above 140, which is what his speed is wherever he bowls. You only need to look at the records of Nehra, Sree and Ishant over the last 20 ODIs to see what I mean. They have all conceded runs at over 6 an over and all have averages over 30 which means they are neither economical nor wicket-taking. The much criticized Munaf Patel has a career ODI economy rate of 4.88, much below these 3 clowns! The thread that I have posted is not an impulsive reaction. It is a cumulative reaction looking at the records of these players over a fairly longish period of time.

[Ram]

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.

As I had mentioned earlier, the risk you run by going into a match with just two specialist pacers is that your best bowler(spinner) might get clobbered early (7th or 8th over). So if that happens, who do we turn to for damage control? Our ability to defend targets depend on two things. a) Our pacers picking up early wickets or b) Our spinners putting the brakes on scoring in the middle overs. So, even if 'a' doest not happen, we can always bank of 'b' to bail us out. By going into a match with just 2 pacers, you might entirely lose out on the 'b' option. Also, with the batting powerplay now being employed in the middle/death overs, that is more reason to have an extra seamer since its an acknowledged fact that it is always easier to go after the spinners when the field is up. I doubt if we will EVER go into match with just pacers. It is probably something that is worth trialling, but even half-decent batting attacks will brutally expose the strategy.

[ViruRulez]

I'm not sure I understand what you are saying about the speed gun. Steyn has been clocked at above 140, which is what his speed is wherever he bowls. You only need to look at the records of Nehra, Sree and Ishant over the last 20 ODIs to see what I mean. They have all conceded runs at over 6 an over and all have averages over 30 which means they are neither economical nor wicket-taking. The much criticized Munaf Patel has a career ODI economy rate of 4.88, much below these 3 clowns! The thread that I have posted is not an impulsive reaction. It is a cumulative reaction looking at the records of these players over a fairly longish period of time.

Munaf Patel is one of the biggest trundlers and worthless bowlers.. I would bring in Agarkar instead of Munaf if such a situation would come :giggle:

[msb1991]

I'm not sure I understand what you are saying about the speed gun. Steyn has been clocked at above 140, which is what his speed is wherever he bowls. You only need to look at the records of Nehra, Sree and Ishant over the last 20 ODIs to see what I mean. They have all conceded runs at over 6 an over and all have averages over 30 which means they are neither economical nor wicket-taking. The much criticized Munaf Patel has a career ODI economy rate of 4.88, much below these 3 clowns! The thread that I have posted is not an impulsive reaction. It is a cumulative reaction looking at the records of these players over a fairly longish period of time.

The key with comparing Nehra to the other two and especially when looking at Munaf Patel is to look at when these players have played and when they bowl. Sreesanth has only recently come back into the fray in ODIs, he is not fully fit, as shown by his speeds. When he was fully fit, he was expensive, but he was a potent wicket taker, he is neither at the moment. Ishant, as shown by the stats analysis on cricinfo, takes most of his wickets these days at the death, while still leaking runs. These are cheap wickets, it is clear that his figures flatter him. Nehra has kept his spot throughout this, performing comparitively to other bowlers on offer, rarely bowling noticably worse - this is indicative as to how he is a steady, consistent yet unspectacular bowler, who will continue to keep his place until outperformed by fellow seamers. Looking here, Munaf is in and out of the ODI team due to the occasional shocking performance and fact he bats at 11 and cannot field. Moreover, his most recent ODI exploits in 2008/9 and 2009 season have shown shockingly poor returns - he was dropped justifyably and until he can eradicate the odd game where he bowls like a club seamer, then it is too risky to include him in the ODI team.

[msb1991]

Munaf Patel is one of the biggest trundlers and worthless bowlers.. I would bring in Agarkar instead of Munaf if such a situation would come :giggle:

This is just a flippant post, I understand, but it raises a good issue. The only bowler who is held in similarly poor esteem to Munaf is Agarkar. This is not because of overall statistics, but the fact that both could go seriously missing in crucial situations. This sort of thing can sometimes outweigh the possibility of a good spell or good season - as it puts a team in potential danger of losing a good bowler in an ODI. Agarkar though was an illustrious wicket taker, Munaf is no such thing. It is unviable to have a bowler who will bowl steadily (not spectacularly, or dangerously) at his best and terribly at his worst.

[msb1991]

As I had mentioned earlier' date=' the risk you run by going into a match with just two specialist pacers is that your best bowler(spinner) might get clobbered early (7th or 8th over). So if that happens, who do we turn to for damage control?[/quote'] I simply do not think that our pace bowlers ever (with very few exceptions) successfully damage control a poor start in the subcontinent.

Also' date=' with the batting powerplay now being employed in the middle/death overs, that is more reason to have an extra seamer since its an acknowledged fact that it is always easier to go after the spinners when the field is up.[/quote'] Then why have Mishra, Harbhajan, Ojha and to a lesser extent, Chawla, done so well in T20? Truly skillful spin bowling, if the style is naturally suited, can handle the powerplay. I recall Nehra and Zaheer bowling well in powerplays in the subcontinent, but Ishant? Sreesanth? Irfan? Praveen? - not really!

[ViruRulez]

This is just a flippant post' date=' I understand, but it raises a good issue. The only bowler who is held in similarly poor esteem to Munaf is Agarkar. This is not because of overall statistics, but the fact that both could go seriously missing in crucial situations. This sort of thing can sometimes outweigh the possibility of a good spell or good season - as it puts a team in potential danger of losing a good bowler in an ODI. Agarkar though was an illustrious wicket taker, Munaf is no such thing. It is unviable to have a bowler who will bowl steadily (not spectacularly, or dangerously) at his best and terribly at his worst.[/quote'] Agarkar was hell lot of expensive in most matches throughout his career .. his main ability was not to contain batsmen but to take wickets .. he was mainly dropped due because he was gradually giving away too many runs without taking the amount of wickets he used to take when he initially came to the Indian team .. and we also had many new promising fast bowlers coming in at that time (Zak, Nehra, Irfan, RP etc.) who were faster (at that time) and gave lesser runs while taking more wickets.. so he lost his place.. but right now all those bowlers have become pathetic and are as bad if not worse than Agarkar in death overs .. I dont know but sometimes I feel even Agarkar can bowl better and take more wickets at least in the death overs than the present lot :P .. Agarkar had bouncers as well as a yorker up his sleeve at the time he was part of the Indian team .. not sure if he has those now

[msb1991]

Agarkar was hell lot of expensive in most matches throughout his career .. his main ability was not to contain batsmen but to take wickets .. he was mainly dropped due because he was gradually giving away too many runs without taking the amount of wickets he used to take when he initially came to the Indian team

Yes, that is what I said, or at least, tried to say.

.. and we also had many new promising fast bowlers coming in at that time (Zak' date=' Nehra, Irfan, RP etc.) who were faster (at that time) and gave lesser runs while taking more wickets.. so he lost his place.. but right now all those bowlers have become pathetic and are as bad if not worse than Agarkar in death overs .. I dont know but sometimes I feel even Agarkar can bowl better and take more wickets at least in the death overs than the present lot :P .. Agarkar had bouncers as well as a yorker up his sleeve at the time he was part of the Indian team .. not sure if he has those now[/quote'] Oh yeah, I would not mind Agarkar back either, but he does not make the Challenger Trophy squads these days and I'm not sure he even plays ODs for Mumbai either - so the chances are low. I thought he always had some skiddy speed and posed a threat that the current lot do not.

[Texan]

The key with comparing Nehra to the other two and especially when looking at Munaf Patel is to look at when these players have played and when they bowl. Sreesanth has only recently come back into the fray in ODIs, he is not fully fit, as shown by his speeds. When he was fully fit, he was expensive, but he was a potent wicket taker, he is neither at the moment. Ishant, as shown by the stats analysis on cricinfo, takes most of his wickets these days at the death, while still leaking runs. These are cheap wickets, it is clear that his figures flatter him. Nehra has kept his spot throughout this, performing comparitively to other bowlers on offer, rarely bowling noticably worse - this is indicative as to how he is a steady, consistent yet unspectacular bowler, who will continue to keep his place until outperformed by fellow seamers. Looking here, Munaf is in and out of the ODI team due to the occasional shocking performance and fact he bats at 11 and cannot field. Moreover, his most recent ODI exploits in 2008/9 and 2009 season have shown shockingly poor returns - he was dropped justifyably and until he can eradicate the odd game where he bowls like a club seamer, then it is too risky to include him in the ODI team.

I agree about Munaf having shockingly poor matches and being aweful in the field as well as with the bat. But my argument is plain simple. Nehra is equally bad in the field (maybe slightly better) and an equally bad batsman (one 6 doesn't make him an all-rounder). But Munaf also had days when he bowled economically throughout a spell. On the other hand, when you look at Nehra's stats for the current season - in 19 matches, he's given away runs at 6.15 and an average of 35. This means he has consistently given away runs at a high scoring rate (second only to Ishant this season) and not even been wicket-taking. Surely, this calls for the bowler to be reprimanded by dropping him from the team. And equally surely, there has to be another bowler who can bowl better than that. Either try someone new like R Vinay Kumar or get back ones who could "do the job" like Agarkar or Munaf. People often have a short memory, but Munaf only had 2 bad matches because of which he was dropped. Admittedly, his performance in those 2 matches was shockingly shoddy, but it was just 2 matches. Nehra, Ishant and Sreesanth have had several bad matches. I can't even remember the last time they had a good match. Agarkar too just had one bad series in England after which he was banished for good. BTW, he is still playing for Mumbai in one-dayers and doing pretty well.

[Texan]

Yes, that is what I said, or at least, tried to say. Oh yeah, I would not mind Agarkar back either, but he does not make the Challenger Trophy squads these days and I'm not sure he even plays ODs for Mumbai either - so the chances are low. I thought he always had some skiddy speed and posed a threat that the current lot do not.

Not just the skiddy pace, he also had a reverse-swinging yorker which he bowled with good regularity in the death overs. Ishant, Sree and Nehra are not accurate with their yorkers. Neither do they get much reverse swing with the white ball. They also don't possess a well-disguised slower ball ala PK. Without these weapons, they are all sitting ducks waiting to be hammered every time they bowl in the death overs or in the PowerPlays.

[Lord]

Ishant n Sree shud be kept for tests only.by playing them in ODIs selectos r also screwing thier test bowling.let them concentrate on swing,reverse swing n pace n not worry about slower deliveries n all. n we need specialists in ODIs,Nehra i'll give some chances.but we need bowlers who can bowl in death also contribute with the bat.Agarkar isnt such a bad option

[The Dark Horse]

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.

At last, you realise:giggle:

[The Outsider]

LOL! Everyone is going to get smashed on these pattas. The commentators were talking about how South Africans are having to bowl on such a flat pitch, fast outfield, and short boundaries - well guess what Indian bowlers do it day in and day out. Look what's happening to South African speed demons. Bottom line is that matches on these kind of pitches are always going to be won by batsmen, you bring in any bowler he'll get hammered - the side which smashes the leather off the ball better will win the World Cup.

[msb1991]

I agree about Munaf having shockingly poor matches and being aweful in the field as well as with the bat. But my argument is plain simple. Nehra is equally bad in the field (maybe slightly better) and an equally bad batsman (one 6 doesn't make him an all-rounder). But Munaf also had days when he bowled economically throughout a spell. On the other hand, when you look at Nehra's stats for the current season - in 19 matches, he's given away runs at 6.15 and an average of 35. This means he has consistently given away runs at a high scoring rate (second only to Ishant this season) and not even been wicket-taking.

Comparitively though, Nehra has seldom done much worse (1 or 2 runs per over, more than other bowlers) than his partners. At his best, he has shown consistent wicket taking performances, as in the Champions Trophy.

People often have a short memory' date=' but Munaf only had 2 bad matches because of which he was dropped. Admittedly, his performance in those 2 matches was shockingly shoddy, but it was just 2 matches. Nehra, Ishant and Sreesanth have had several bad matches. I can't even remember the last time they had a good match.[/quote'] Perhaps you are right about Munaf.

Not just the skiddy pace' date=' he also had a reverse-swinging yorker which he bowled with good regularity in the death overs. Ishant, Sree and Nehra are not accurate with their yorkers. Neither do they get much reverse swing with the white ball. They also don't possess a well-disguised slower ball ala PK. Without these weapons, they are all sitting ducks waiting to be hammered every time they bowl in the death overs or in the PowerPlays.[/quote'] Nehra does get some reverse swing, away from the right hander, Ishant has a good yorker and Sree has a good, if not slightly obvious slower one, in their defence.

LOL! Everyone is going to get smashed on these pattas. The commentators were talking about how South Africans are having to bowl on such a flat pitch, fast outfield, and short boundaries - well guess what Indian bowlers do it day in and day out. Look what's happening to South African speed demons. Bottom line is that matches on these kind of pitches are always going to be won by batsmen, you bring in any bowler he'll get hammered - the side which smashes the leather off the ball better will win the World Cup.

Yes. It is tough to bowl on the flat pitches - but surely we should have bowlers who have learned to adapt, rather than those who perform at the same level as those for whom these pitches are totally alien.

[Fontaine]

LOL! Everyone is going to get smashed on these pattas. The commentators were talking about how South Africans are having to bowl on such a flat pitch, fast outfield, and short boundaries - well guess what Indian bowlers do it day in and day out. Look what's happening to South African speed demons. Bottom line is that matches on these kind of pitches are always going to be won by batsmen, you bring in any bowler he'll get hammered - the side which smashes the leather off the ball better will win the World Cup.

Exactly. Where are all the threads about dropping Steyn and Parnell? These guys were giving away runs at 8/9 an over on a pitch where the previous high score was under 300. All of their speeds were slower and they were clearly bowling within themselves and striving for accuracy. There was a a very good thread about this a few weeks ago where people were just criticizing Indian bowlers saying that they were too lazy or couldn't bowl fast. Well it's pretty clear now that either Steyn is too lazy or like we've been saying, on completely flat pitches, in just two games Steyn has completely changed his pace. And he's one of the best in the game. Now compare that to a young Indian fast bowler who's trying to keep his place or get selected for the ODI team. Do they go for all out pace and as a result lose accuracy and get hit for 8/9 an over? Or do what Steyn has tried to do and cut down on pace and focus on accuracy. It was almost hilarious watching Steyn bowl. Every other delivery was being hit for boundaries and Steyn would just shake his head in disgust and disbelief. He's only going to bowl on these pitches a few times a year in his career. Our bowlers have to face that for half of their professional careers.

[Fontaine]

Yes. It is tough to bowl on the flat pitches - but surely we should have bowlers who have learned to adapt, rather than those who perform at the same level as those for whom these pitches are totally alien.

Yes we do have bowlers who have adapted. Zaheer Khan can bowl cutters, use angles over and around the wicket effectively, especially in power plays. Praveen Kumar routinely gets the new ball to shape away, uses slower balls effectively. But not every bowler can adapt and change. Some bowlers can only bowl to their strengths like Jimmy Anderson/Sidebottom who for all of their experience are useless when the ball isn't swinging.

[The Outsider]

Yes. It is tough to bowl on the flat pitches - but surely we should have bowlers who have learned to adapt, rather than those who perform at the same level as those for whom these pitches are totally alien.

As Fontaine pointed out above, some have like Zaheer and P Kumar. It's not like they'll never be hit around, but they will use more variety than others. Bracken was an excellent bowler for such conditions and Australia might miss him next year. Langeveldt is not too bad. But it won't work for everyone. Pathan tried to do it by adding all sorts of cutters and slower balls to his armory and completely lost the plot.

[Karan114]

Sreesanth averaging 52 with an economy rate of 7.28 in ODIs this year

[vvvslaxman]

I think cutting off his penis would do :hysterical:

[ViruRulez]

I think cutting off his penis would do :hysterical:

:hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical: Frankly speaking after all the trial and error it seems PK, Zak and Nehra is still the best trio for our ODI pace attack even now and Bhajji is still the best all rounder .. after going full circle it seems we need to fall back on our original four because nobody seems to be even near them leave apart being world class :giggle: