Composition of our bowling attack for WC - Seamers Vs Spinners

[Ram]

oh boy, so you want folks to assume that guys like Zak wouldn't play/miss the WC? That opening line of yours is as dumb as it gets. (Feels like I am discussing this with some school kid, which i guess, what you are) Yes, I have picked four seamers in my WC squad as I can't pick everyone: Zak, Nehra, PK and Ishant. In my 11, I have 3 of them playing. I don't need to know the SR of each and every pace bowler that played for India as that's irrelavant (something you still haven't been able to comprehend and based your arguments on that). What's important is the SR of these 4. And since I can pick 3 of those 4, I picked Zak, Nehra and Ishant :winky:

Lol, poor dude.. First you picked 4 seamers based on strike rates (which itself is entirely inadequate criterion for ODIs, run rates as important) , only to figure that they actually had a combined SR of 43, which is EXTREMELY MEDICORE. Then you realized one (Praveen Kumar) of the 4 had a SR of 55, so you trimmed the list to 3, only to find out one (Ishant) of three was actually dropped from the team last year because he bowled so poorly in ODIs at home and the other (Zaheer) missed 2/3 of the ODIs due to injury… ? Where to now, hero? I am sure there exists in your ideal world some mythical Indian strike seamer who can take wickets at home at ease.. ::haha: Essentially, your discussion has centered entirely around some wishful arguments as to who would play in your team an in ideal world, rather than the ground realities of who actually played/ did not play and how they actually fared.. This is what happens if you play too many video games.

Another example of your poor comprehension skills. How many times have I explained the seamers bowl during RR and at death, while spinners bowl during middle overs. Unless you can show us that spinners would do a better job, this point is moot

Yea, so? I never asked you explanation for their pathetic economy rates, I ALREADY know it.. But hey, who CARES as long you can just call them STRIKE SEAMERS right? Never mind their SR is 43 and economy is 6.4.

According to your truth (drawing parallels), if a team is 120 after 15, it's score is 400. Yes, we are suppose to look in to 'such' truth. Go play with other kids, kid. May be they would entertain your thoughts :--D

At least its not as disingenuous as handpicking seamers you want included in the discussion, completely oblivious of the ground realities, only to realize even the hand picked seamers actually fared pathetically.. Anyways, I have wasted enough of my time arguing with you on your fantasy world of fabricated strike seamers. Keep embarrassing yourself, good luck.

[Ram]

Btw, an open question to everyone; Who here thinks here strike rate of 43 and an economy rate of 6.4 has all the makings of a STRIKE SEAAAAAMING attack? :hysterical:

[The Outsider]

I was pretty open to the idea of playing 2 fast bowlers and 3 spinners till I saw the pathetic showing of our spinners in the PP overs in the T20 WC. Jadeja was absolutely creamed. On current evidence Harbhjan looks to be the only spinner who can do a decent job in PP overs. But then you are running the risk of having no strike power in the middle overs. Not that I consider Harbhajan a great strike bowler, but he definitely is a better wicket taking option than Ojha and Jadeja trundling away with left arm monotony in the middle overs.

[zen]

Lol, poor dude.. First you picked 4 seamers based on strike rates (which itself is entirely inadequate criterion for ODIs, run rates as important) , only to figure that they actually had a combined SR of 43, which is EXTREMELY MEDICORE. Then you realized one (Praveen Kumar) of the 4 had a SR of 55, so you trimmed the list to 3, only to find out one (Ishant) of three was actually dropped from the team last year because he bowled so poorly in ODIs at home and the other (Zaheer) missed 2/3 of the ODIs due to injury… ? Where to now, hero? I am sure there exists in your ideal world some mythical Indian strike seamer who can take wickets at home at ease.. ::haha: Essentially, your discussion has centered entirely around some wishful arguments as to who would play in your team an in ideal world, rather than the ground realities of who actually played/ did not play and how they actually fared.. This is what happens if you play too many video games.

This gives a good insight on your ability to grasp .... Appears as if you thought I was playing 4 seamers in the playing 11! If not then I have the right to pick 3 out of 4 in the squad for my argument. so you want people to look at the SR of every pace bowler as if everyone of them would be bowling in the world cup for India, consider their economy rate as if they were bowling like spinners in the middle overs and then come up with a game plan :hysterical:

Yea, so? I never asked you explanation for their pathetic economy rates, I ALREADY know it.. But hey, who CARES as long you can just call them STRIKE SEAMERS right? Never mind their SR is 43 and economy is 6.4.

ah ha, you are still chewing the same stuff. No new ideas I guess :hehe:

At least its not as disingenuous as handpicking seamers you want included in the discussion, completely oblivious of the ground realities, only to realize even the hand picked seamers actually fared pathetically..

Addresed this already but still ....

Anyways, I have wasted enough of my time arguing with you on your fantasy world of fabricated strike seamers. Keep embarrassing yourself, good luck

yes, it's time for you to play with other kids :winky:

[sudheer kumar]

Btw, an open question to everyone; Who here thinks here strike rate of 43 and an economy rate of 6.4 has all the makings of a STRIKE SEAAAAAMING attack? :hysterical:

What do you mean actually?

[Ram]

This gives a good insight on your ability to grasp .... Appears as if you thought I was playing 4 seamers in the playing 11! If not then I have the right to pick 3 out of 4 in the squad for my argument.

Yes, apart from that inconvenient FACT that one of the two seamers you’re advocating so strongly for got DROPPED from the team and the other missed 2/3 of the matches due to injury. :hysterical: I told you dude, this is what happens when you base your ENTIRE argument on stats you can mine from an online database, rather than watching matches live. You’ll end up looking a complete fool, like you’re now.

So you want people to look at the SR of every pace bowler as if everyone of them would be bowling in the world cup for India, consider their economy rate as if they were bowling like spinners in the middle overs and then come up with a game plan :hysterical:

No, but you need to look at the strike rates/economy of everyone who is likely to get selected, especially when one of the 3 that you cherry picked has a long history of injuries and the other was actually dropped due to bad form. And that is exactly what I did (which you so disingenuously didn’t, and essentially handpicked seamers you WANT selected for the team, once again, completely ignoring ground realities.. :hysterical:) And if you do that, you’ll realize that the much vaunted strike force has a combined SR of 47 and an economy of 6.3 If you trim down the fat and looked just the group that you chose, then the numbers don’t get any better as well (SR – 43, economy – 6.4). Some Strike force it is..

ah ha' date=' you are still chewing the same stuff. No new ideas I guess :hehe:[/quote'] Talk about chewing, you obviously bit a lot more than you could chew, first by posting stats that entirely contradicted your original argument and calling a group of bowlers with a SR of 43 and an economy of 6.4 as STRIKE SEAMEEEEEEEERS..

Addresed this already but still ....

Yes, I see that you’ve completely addressed the fact that two of the three players whom you want selected were either dropped or missed a majority of games due to inury..

[Ram]

If the conditions for the world cup are going to be anywhere even remotely close to the kinds of conditions we encountered for our last two home series (and there’s absolutely no reason to believe otherwise. It’s a marquee tournament, they’d be frothing at their mouths to prepare flatbeds that would be so full of runs), how many here actually think our pacers are going to win the cup for us? If we go the old route of ‘lets pick 3 seamers no matter what’, we’re almost guaranteed to conceded gargantuan scores every game and much like the Sri Lanka/South Africa series, it will be upto our batting to bail us out. And that’s precisely the reason why we need to break out our imagination and consider some alternate strategies, coz the one they’re so intent on pursuing now, is obviously not working.

[Lord]

If the conditions for the world cup are going to be anywhere even remotely close to the kinds of conditions we encountered for our last two home series (and there’s absolutely no reason to believe otherwise. It’s a marquee tournament, they’d be frothing at their mouths to prepare flatbeds that would be so full of runs), how many here actually think our pacers are going to win the cup for us? If we go the old route of ‘lets pick 3 seamers no matter what’, we’re almost guaranteed to conceded gargantuan scores every game and much like the Sri Lanka/South Africa series, it will be upto our batting to bail us out. And that’s precisely the reason why we need to break out our imagination and consider some alternate strategies, coz the one they’re so intent on pursuing now, is obviously not working.

thats why I want to try Irfan as he can also contribute with the bat which other 3 pacers cant,our pacers r gonna get smacked anyway,so why not pick a bowler who can bat?It seems pretty obvious for me

[Ram]

thats why I want to try Irfan as he can also contribute with the bat which other 3 pacers cant' date='our pacers r gonna get smacked anyway,so why not pick a bowler who can bat?It seems pretty obvious for me[/quote'] Fine, but whats wrong with trying an alternate approach to go with 2 seamers + 2 spinners + 2 part-timers and see how it works, rather than try out just a adaption of a tried-tested and failed technique? Its obvious that our seamers don’t inspire too much confidence any longer for ODIs at home. At least that is impression you get from guys like Kirsten, Dhoni and even Ganguly. In that case, why persist with them?

[zen]

Yes, apart from that inconvenient FACT that one of the two seamers you’re advocating so strongly for got DROPPED from the team and the other missed 2/3 of the matches due to injury. :hysterical: I told you dude, this is what happens when you base your ENTIRE argument on stats you can mine from an online database, rather than watching matches live. You’ll end up looking a complete fool, like you’re now. No, but you need to look at the strike rates/economy of everyone who is likely to get selected, especially when one of the 3 that you cherry picked has a long history of injuries and the other was actually dropped due to bad form. And that is exactly what I did (which you so disingenuously didn’t, and essentially handpicked seamers you WANT selected for the team, once again, completely ignoring ground realities.. :hysterical:) And if you do that, you’ll realize that the much vaunted strike force has a combined SR of 47 and an economy of 6.3 If you trim down the fat and looked just the group that you chose, then the numbers don’t get any better as well (SR – 43, economy – 6.4). Some Strike force it is.. Talk about chewing, you obviously bit a lot more than you could chew, first by posting stats that entirely contradicted your original argument and calling a group of bowlers with a SR of 43 and an economy of 6.4 as STRIKE SEAMEEEEEEEERS.. Yes, I see that you’ve completely addressed the fact that two of the three players whom you want selected were either dropped or missed a majority of games due to inury..

As I said you need to improve your comprehension skills. why would you assume I went by stats? I use stats to support what I want to say and not other way around. Stats are not the main point of contention My opinion was 'also' (in addition to what I have said) formed on our bowlers recent performance in SL (and Ishant is back just in case you didn't know) from Jan 1, 2010 till today:

Bowler	M	I	Wkts	SR 	Eco
Seamers					
PK	6	6	11	27.8	4.17
Nehra	5	5	11	22.2	5.19
Zak	4	4	6	29.5	5.01
Ishant	1	1	2	27	3.55
Spinners					
Jadeja	6	6	6	50.1	4.48
Ojha	3	3	4	43.7	4.9
Bhajji	3	3	3	48	4.54

Relatively, if you see our seamers are much better equipped to be strike bowlers than our spinners. The economy of some seamers may be high but that's acceptable since they bowl during PP and at death. If the spinners bowled as much as the seamers bowl during these stages, I expect them to fare much worse Now you can keep on harping how bad seamers are (as if Ind would replace them with spinners), how bad their economy is (w/o putting things in to perspective), how they can be injured (as if they wouldn't be fit and available for the WC), it means little to me (or anyone who is sensible enough). In fact, the only person you have managed to convince is probably yourself :--D There is no place for your dumb arguments here and it's not surprising that you think by repeating the same things that have been addressed and acting as if they haven't been and you have made some kind of a point (when you haven't), you are only showing what a tool you are, your inability to comprehend things, stupid thinking process and childish behavior. This is not a school!

[The Outsider]

Fine, but whats wrong with trying an alternate approach to go with 2 seamers + 2 spinners + 2 part-timers and see how it works, rather than try out just a adaption of a tried-tested and failed technique? Its obvious that our seamers don’t inspire too much confidence any longer for ODIs at home. At least that is impression you get from guys like Kirsten, Dhoni and even Ganguly. In that case, why persist with them?

What's wrong is that as bad as our fast men are, and they are pretty bad, the spinners haven't done much to inspire any confidence whatsoever. Jadeja was tried in the T20 WC in the PP and was hammered. Yusuf Pathan was dismantled by South Africa in the T20 WC as well. It was a tournament where we tried going in with 2 fast bowlers, so it's not that this strategy has not been tried out, albeit in T20, but the concept of PP still carries over. Going in with 2 seamers, Harbhajan is the only spinner capable of bowling in the PP and then you are left with no striking option in the middle overs.

[Lord]

Fine, but whats wrong with trying an alternate approach to go with 2 seamers + 2 spinners + 2 part-timers and see how it works, rather than try out just a adaption of a tried-tested and failed technique? Its obvious that our seamers don’t inspire too much confidence any longer for ODIs at home. At least that is impression you get from guys like Kirsten, Dhoni and even Ganguly. In that case, why persist with them?

what u r suggesting is to give 10 overs regularly to part timers.plus the overs they r bound to fill in for wen someone get thrashed.Sorry thats too much to ask of them.they r batsmen n should concentrate mainly on that.last thing we can afford is thier batting to get affected with this increased workload. as for going in with 2 seamers,I dont see anyone doing that.with 20 overs of PP plus death overs.spinners may be our strength but they cant be expected to bowl in PPs.they'll be even worse than seamers.

[Ram]

As I said you need to improve your comprehension skills. why would you assume I went by stats? I use stats to support what I want to say and not other way around. Stats are not the main point of contention

What the heck does as ‘not the other way around’ even mean I thought there’s only one way one can possibly go about it – You make a case and you use stats, for/against the case. It didn’t occur to me that you have an option whereby you can use real-life scenarios to support stats. You do realize that what you say makes ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE right? :hysterical: And stats are NOT your main point of contention? You formulated an entire stream of argument based on a table of numbers (never mind that those very same numbers ended up embarrassing you..) and then say ‘Oh, I was just kidding, I wasn’t really serious when I posted that table’? lol…

My opinion was 'also' (in addition to what I have said) formed on our bowlers recent performance in SL (and Ishant is back just in case you didn't know) from Jan 1, 2010 till today:

Bowler	M	I	Wkts	SR 	Eco
Seamers					
PK	6	6	11	27.8	4.17
Nehra	5	5	11	22.2	5.19
Zak	4	4	6	29.5	5.01
Ishant	1	1	2	27	3.55
Spinners					
Jadeja	6	6	6	50.1	4.48
Ojha	3	3	4	43.7	4.9
Bhajji	3	3	3	48	4.54

Hahahaha.. this is getting hilarious-er and hilarious-er.. So you essentially alternate b/w posting stats that completely contradict your main point of contention to posting stats that are completely irrelevant to the discussion. While you’re at it, why don’t you post stats for Zak and Nehra from the 2003 WC in South Africa. I bet they read a lot better than that.. So you wanted some wriggle room and posted a new table, a table of stat set SO NARROW that it actually lists players who have played one matches.. :haha:… Boy, are you clutching at some straws or what.. Irrespective, I can see that you’ve FINALLY realized that original stat table you posted was in complete contradiction to your argument and hence the need for a new table altogether Excellent, we’re progressing here….

Relatively, if you see our seamers are much better equipped to be strike bowlers than our spinners. The economy of some seamers may be high but that's acceptable since they bowl during PP and at death. If the spinners bowled as much as the seamers bowl during these stages, I expect them to fare much worse

So it is your ‘theory’ that the spinner will fare much poorer, so the solution is to persist with the status quo of an economy rate of 6.4 and a strike of 43? Sound strategy indeed! :haha:

Now you can keep on harping how bad seamers are (as if Ind would replace them with spinners), how bad their economy is (w/o putting things in to perspective), how they can be injured (as if they wouldn't be fit and available for the WC), it means little to me (or anyone who is sensible enough). In fact, the only person you have managed to convince is probably yourself :--D

And you sir, can keep living the world where the you keep making arguments that either completely contradictory or irrelevant to your overall point and make a case supporting two bowlers who were dropped from the team or missed a big portion of home odis due to injury. I know you it’s a wonderful fantasy world that you live in, why bother trying to inject it with a dose of reality? :haha:

There is no place for your dumb arguments here and it's not surprising that you think by repeating the same things that have been addressed and acting as if they haven't been and you have made some kind of a point (when you haven't)' date=' you are only showing what a tool you are, your inability to comprehend things, stupid thinking process and childish behavior. This is not a school![/quote'] Very good, now post stats for our bowlers from the CB series in Australia in 2008.

[Ram]

What's wrong is that as bad as our fast men are, and they are pretty bad, the spinners haven't done much to inspire any confidence whatsoever. Jadeja was tried in the T20 WC in the PP and was hammered. Yusuf Pathan was dismantled by South Africa in the T20 WC as well. It was a tournament where we tried going in with 2 fast bowlers, so it's not that this strategy has not been tried out, albeit in T20, but the concept of PP still carries over. Going in with 2 seamers, Harbhajan is the only spinner capable of bowling in the PP and then you are left with no striking option in the middle overs.

Please don’t even bring up names like Yusuf Pathan into the argument. In my opinion, he’s not even a spinner. He never was, never will be. But if you want to talk about names like Jadeja, Ojha and even Ashwin, may we’ll get somewhere. Apart from the odd match (Yes, Watson ripped him to shreds in T20 match in the Windies), Jadeja has rarely been carted around with disdain, so I think he deserves more chances to prove his case. Ojha is also someone with excellent control, so there’s a reasonable chance that he could potentially succeed when it comes to bowling during the PP overs. And with reg. to Ashwin, we ALREADY know that he does have the ability to bowl some serious containment bowling in the initial PP overs (IPL 3), so he’s a potential hedge. Its important that we consider that because IPL 3 was held in India and so is the World cup. I don’t even need to make a case for Bhajji. So I think there’s enough there for us to at least experiment around with, when it comes to bowling with our spinners in the PP overs. I am not saying I KNOW for a fact that the spinners would prove more successful, but you really don’t how effective strategy will be, unless you tried it out right? The problem right now with the Indian team is that they’re so fixated with the option of having a 3rd seamer in case one of our opening bowlers get hit (which they invariably have) and also making sure we have 7-8 overs at the death from our pacers. Because of that, these are issues that has afflicting us; -- Our bowling strategy has become incredibly predictable that teams already know what we’re upto, no matter what the start is. So its essentially seam bowling throughout the first 15, followed by spin, followed by seam bowling in the last 7-8. We cannot try anything else, even if we want, because by virtue of playing 3 seamers, we have to get somewhere around 25-30 overs from them, no matter how badly they get hit. -- This fixation with the 3 seamer option has completely under-cut our batting order (which is our biggest strength), since we have no option but to play Jadeja as the back-up spinner and the lowest he can bat is no.7. And I cannot stress this point enough, we simply CANNOT hope to win the world cup without sorting the no.7 position. Its importance couldn’t be under-stated. We need a genuine batsmen at no.7 , not a faltering rookie.

[The Outsider]

Please don’t even bring up names like Yusuf Pathan into the argument. In my opinion, he’s not even a spinner. He never was, never will be. But if you want to talk about names like Jadeja, Ojha and even Ashwin, may we’ll get somewhere. Apart from the odd match (Yes, Watson ripped him to shreds in T20 match in the Windies), Jadeja has rarely been carted around with disdain, so I think he deserves more chances to prove his case. Ojha is also someone with excellent control, so there’s a reasonable chance that he could potentially succeed when it comes to bowling during the PP overs. And with reg. to Ashwin, we ALREADY know that he does have the ability to bowl some serious containment bowling in the initial PP overs (IPL 3), so he’s a potential hedge. Its important that we consider that because IPL 3 was held in India and so is the World cup. I don’t even need to make a case for Bhajji.

Firstly, I don't want Harbhajan to be bowling in the PP overs, not because he is not capable of doing so, but because it leaves the middle overs completely devoid of striking ability. We played the entire T20 WC with two seamers and did not look like stopping the run flow at any point during the tournament. Jadeja was absolutely killed during the entire tournament. I haven't followed a lot of ODIs and T20s over the last year, but can you give me some instances where he has done a good job in PP. So, you are making a case for Ashwin based on the same crapolla called IPL, whose credentials have been laid bare every time some tiger from there like Vijay and Yusuf Pathan has been played at international level? As you follow IPL much more than I do, you would also be aware that the same Pathan you don't call a spinner has done a good enough job in PP overs in IPL.

So I think there’s enough there for us to at least experiment around with, when it comes to bowling with our spinners in the PP overs. I am not saying I KNOW for a fact that the spinners would prove more successful, but you really don’t how effective strategy will be, unless you tried it out right? The problem right now with the Indian team is that they’re so fixated with the option of having a 3rd seamer in case one of our opening bowlers get hit (which they invariably have) and also making sure we have 7-8 overs at the death from our pacers. Because of that, these are issues that has afflicting us;

Thing is we have tried it out. Not only do these spinners get carted in the PP overs, but seriously can you say that you see any death bowling abilities in Jadeja or Ojha? I haven't seen enough of Ashwin to comment. But in international cricket bowling spinners at the death is a huge risk. Even spinners of the ability of Saqlain, Ajmal, and Murali have got absolutely massacred on occasions going for some huge overs. How can you have confidence in novices like Jadeja and Ojha to bowl at the death is beyond me! It's not like they are bowlers of extraordinary abilities or will become skillful death bowlers in a few months. When seamers get carted in the death overs they will bleed 10-12 runs per over, when spinners get hammered there is no limit. I have nothing against experimenting and quite wanted to see the 2 seamer experiment myself. But I am convinced that I have seen enough of it to be pretty sure, it's not going to work. Can you imagine what would happen if one of our fast men has a poor day? It'll be carnage.

-- Our bowling strategy has become incredibly predictable that teams already know what we’re upto, no matter what the start is. So its essentially seam bowling throughout the first 15, followed by spin, followed by seam bowling in the last 7-8. We cannot try anything else, even if we want, because by virtue of playing 3 seamers, we have to get somewhere around 25-30 overs from them, no matter how badly they get hit.

That's quite lame, because practically every team follows the same strategy. 20 overs of PP plus slog overs doesn't leave captains with too many choices. And FWIW, having 3 spinners we will become even more predictable. Teams would know that we would be forced to use Harbhajan either at the start or keep him for the death. Even if he looks threatening in the middle overs, we would not be able to bowl him out. Even if one of the seamers is looking threatening at the start, we would not have the option of continuing with him for another couple of overs. Think through it, how predictable an attack with just 2 fast bowling option looks like.

-- This fixation with the 3 seamer option has completely under-cut our batting order (which is our biggest strength), since we have no option but to play Jadeja as the back-up spinner and the lowest he can bat is no.7. And I cannot stress this point enough, we simply CANNOT hope to win the world cup without sorting the no.7 position. Its importance couldn’t be under-stated. We need a genuine batsmen at no.7 , not a faltering rookie.

That's a separate discussion. You can still play a number 7 batsman and entrust 10 overs to part time spinners.

[zen]

Yes, the alternative is to go with FAMED strike seaming group that has a SR of 43 and economy of 6.4.. :hahaha:.. Oh no hang on, that table is now irrelevant.. We have a new table consisting of bowlers who have played one match, 3 matches etc..Ooopsy – doopsy, that’s now old too.. There’s an even more updated table from the WC ’03.. Soon, it will be followed by another table from WC ’83.. :hysterical: What I’ve found is, with time, your ‘arguments’ have gotten progressively irrelevant and quirky. But hey, I am still waiting to see how you could possibly use the ‘other way around’ strategy. :haha:

The above posts shows it's time for you to go to bed. What's interesting is that now atleast you could dream about Jadeja, Ojha and company doing some serious damage to the opposition. Kid's dream: One of the two seamers gets injured so Jadeja is called in to bowl in the PP. It's over #4. Jadeja has the hard shiny bowl in his hand. Shane Watson is on strike. Ball #1, well flighted, Watson steps out and smashes it for a 6 Ball #2, well flighted, Watson steps out again, but is deceived in the flight. The hard ball takes a sharp turn and Dhoni dislodges the bails! Big wicket for India Ball #3, Ponting is ready to face the ball. Dhoni brings in the 2nd slip. Jadeja bowls and Ponting edges the ball to the 2nd slip! What a move by Dhoni to bring in the 2nd slip. Jadeja is on hattrick!!!! Ball #4, Clarke takes strike. Dhoni has men crawling around the bat waiting to hold on to the slightest of chance. Jadeja slips in a quicker one. Clarke plays for the turn but the ball keeps its line and hits him on his pads! There is a huge appeal, the umpire is taking his time and finally the finger goes up! Jadeja gets 3 in 3!!!!!!! Mariris is clapping and has tears of joy in his eyes! He knew deep down that his suggestion was the best. Ind couldn't go wrong by playing just 2 seamers. Today, he had been vindicated. Suddenly, he feels wetness all around him and then Mom shouts "Mariris, you weted the bed again". Mariris dream turns in to a nightmare. The tears of joy that he felt were in fact the wetness of the bed and he was full of his on pee!

[Ram]

what u r suggesting is to give 10 overs regularly to part timers.plus the overs they r bound to fill in for wen someone get thrashed.Sorry thats too much to ask of them.they r batsmen n should concentrate mainly on that.last thing we can afford is thier batting to get affected with this increased workload. Huh, are you suggesting that making Sehwag/Raina/Yuvraj bowl 3-4 overs each game is actually going to affect their batting? :dontknow: as for going in with 2 seamers,I dont see anyone doing that.with 20 overs of PP plus death overs.spinners may be our strength but they cant be expected to bowl in PPs.they'll be even worse than seamers.

So the alternative is to stick with the status quo of 3 seamers and keep getting thrashed? Here’s the deal – No one quite knows how things will work out if spinners are forced to bowl in the PP overs, but here’s what we we know when our seamers are at the forefront of it – CARNAGE. You point to me two other cumulative series in the HISTORY of ODI cricket where the seamers, put together, had a SR of 47 and an economy of 6.4. That is exactly what happened, in our last two ODI series at home versus Sri Lanka and South Africa. And somehow that is acceptable? Inevitably, it is our batting that has kept bailing us out of these incredibly unfavorable situations. They cannot possibly do it EVERY single game. If that wasn’t enough, even B’desh thrashed our pacers around to post a near 300 total when we played against them.

[Ram]

come up with valid points and issues that haven't been addressed already and we have the game on :icflove:

No thanks, grown-up.. errr.. ex-grown-up.. oops.. ex-grownup-now-pretending-to-be-a-kid.. See dude, I don’t even know what to call you now.. :hahaha: As far as the cricket goes, I wouldn’t waste my energy debating it with someone who thinks a SR of 43 and an economy of 6.4 has all the ingredients of a STRIKEREEEEE SEAMING ATTACK! :icflove:

[zen]

No thanks, grown-up.. errr.. ex-grown-up.. oops.. ex-grownup-now-pretending-to-be-a-kid.. See dude, I don’t even know what to call you now.. :hahaha: As far as the cricket goes, I wouldn’t waste my energy debating it with someone who thinks a SR of 43 and an economy of 6.4 has all the ingredients of a STRIKEREEEEE SEAMING ATTACK! :icflove:

It's your call. I am neutral .... but seeing that you still haven't been able to put that (SR, Eco) in to perspective, it's not a bad idea for you conserve your energy for something else :winky:

[The Outsider]

So the alternative is to stick with the status quo of 3 seamers and keep getting thrashed?

Hmmmm...keep getting thrashed? Surely, that's a bit harsh on a team which lost only one live match in the two series under discussion against Sri Lanka and South Africa. Even in the series prior to that against Australia, we lost 3 out of 4 matches due to poor batting.

Here’s the deal – No one quite knows how things will work out if spinners are forced to bowl in the PP overs, but here’s what we we know when our seamers are at the forefront of it – CARNAGE.

What you fail to see is that we have already tried this strategy in the T20 WC and it bombed completely. At no point, PP or slog overs, did we look like containing the opposition. All our spinners barring Harbhajan were taken to the cleaners. These matches are played on pattas and everyone will get his fair share of thrashing, even Steyn. I asked you earlier as well as to what qualities do you see in bowlers like Jadeja and Ojha that they would not be hammered in the PP and at the death. They don't have the control, variation, or sharp turn of a Saqlain and Murali to be able to be a success in that role. If you want to try it and see them get hammered with your own eyes, go ahead, but I don't see any cricketing quality in Jadeja and Ojha which would make them effective death bowlers in a few months time.