Bowling a spinner for that crucial over

[zen]

Is that like giving the death blow to your own team? Haven't seen the spinners be too successful bowling the crucial final over or the super over. One example I can think of where a spinner did well in the make or break over was in the Hero Cup SF where Tendulkar gave just 3 runs to win it for India. But that pitch at Kol (iirc) probably supported spinners a lot. Usually I see the likes of Mendis, Ashwin and even Murali from what I read not being that successful. And who can forget what Hussy did in the SF of the T20 WC against Pak .... Exclusive report from St Lucia What do you guys think?

[cowboysfan]

dhoni is a freaking idiot.bowling spinners in the death overs in a no-no and bowling them in the super over is a firing offense.its saying that they dont want to win it.

[CSK Fan]

Rett, we have a CL/IPL forum on here and Dhoni's descision is being discussed there

[fineleg]

Very poor decision by MSD

[Ultimate_Game]

Is that like giving the death blow to your own team? Haven't seen the spinners be too successful bowling the crucial final over or the super over. One example I can think of where a spinner did well in the make or break over was in the Hero Cup SF where Tendulkar gave just 3 runs to win it for India. But that pitch at Kol (iirc) probably supported spinners a lot. Usually I see the likes of Mendis, Ashwin and even Murali from what I read not being that successful. And who can forget what Hussy did in the SF of the T20 WC against Pak .... Exclusive report from St Lucia What do you guys think?

Agree cent percent. Spinner bowling a super-over doesn't make much sense as the batsmen have the license to free their arms and go for broke. Even if they middle 2 out of 6 balls, you are left to score 12+ when your turn comes to bat. Super-over should be given to your premier fast bowler who can target the block-hole. With Bollinger in the team I don't know why the over was given to Ashwin. And even Chennai's batting lineup was strange for the super-over - Vijay over Kemp??? Come on!!! Vijay only has one boundary shot in his repertoire - hoick between the arc of wide long on and square leg, and can be easily contained by decent bowlers as witnessed in World T20. Btw... Tendulkar bowled seam-up in that over against SA and should be considered under the Chris Harris or Gavin Larsen trundler category (sort of slow medium pace).

[gaurav92]

If he had to go for a spinner, why not Murali ? Surely is an idiotic decision.

[ZodiaC]

I agree, giving spinner the last over is really a gamble. But giving a rookie spinner who got spanked is PLAIN DUMB.

[Ram]

This is less of a spin vs pace issue and more a 'The bowling options you have Vs The batting option they're likely to put up..' If you have someone like Yusuf Pathan, then it is pretty obvious which brand of bowler he prefers to face, however good that bowler might be. No captain in his right mind could possibly go for a spinner against him, at least from now on. In regards to keeping the runs down in crunch situations, i dont think anyone can say with any sense of surety that one brand of bowling is better than the other. Any evidence we can produce on this is only anecdotal (he got hit this day, he got hit that day etc.) It doesnt swing the argument one way or the other. But here's one factor that could potentially swing the pendulum in favor of the spinners during a super-over situation - The 2 wicket rule. Its a no-brainer that when you have only 6 balls and 2 wickets to lose, the batsmen is going to try to score almost every ball, irrespective of how good or bad the ball is. BUT, its harder to hit a good ball from a pacer (say a toe-crushing yorker) in the air, as opposed to hit a good ball from a spinner, into the air. A mis-hit off a spinner has a higher chance of being wicket-taking chance, when compared to the pacer. So captains might be tempted to think that, if they have a skillful spinner, then he has a better chance of beating the batsmen in the air (or) off the pitch and taking a wicket, even 2, in the same over.

[b555]

exactly marirs and after a 3 hours gruelling period of tensing match no guy would be in the fullest of his strengths, secondly the batsman out there was Hussey who has a reputation for smashing spinners thridly as u said anyone would go for swinging the bat to the fullest extent posisble but the chances that these might go to 6 in a pacer`s ball are very less because of the speed factor hence it nothing but spuditiy to give a spinner the bowl in super over however good he might be

[Sir john]

bowing with spinners at death is always get wrong.

[saneindian]

Ashwin has been CSK's best bowler, especially in powerplays, by a distance. Wonder what's wrong in giving him the Super over? On spinners bowling the crucial overs like the super over, depends on how comfortable a captain is with his pacers. Normally captains go for slower bowlers in such situations because the slower bowlers will have a better control and will be easier to set proper field for a slower bowler vs a pacer. A pacer may bowl a brilliant yorker yet an under edge can result in 4. A spinner on the other hand might go for a few 6s (like Ashwin or Mendis) but there will be days when batsmen will find it impossible to hit him. So both the choices , like all situations , have pros and cons . Ultimately captains go with the option which they are more comfortable with.

[DomainK]

You need smart bowling at death overs. You need someone who can hold his nerve and out think the batsman even under pressure....whether a spinner or a fast bowler. Fast bowlers have their disadvantages. Edges can fly off for fours or even sixes. Mishits would score runs where a spinner forces the batsman to create bat speed, forces him to time well to score any runs, edges and mistimed shots are more likely to produce a wicket than runs.

[veer]

Honestly, before they announce who will be the bowler, I expected Ashwin to bowl.. that's cuz ozzies are better at facing pacers.. and ashwin was the most productive in the game.. raina got tailender wickets so can't bowl him.. unfortunately hussey saw ashwin is bowling so he registered his name as one of those three batters.. so it backfired.. gamble didnt pay off.. that's part of the game.. I am not going to blame Dhoni for this..

[ZodiaC]

Ashwin has been CSK's best bowler, especially in powerplays, by a distance. Wonder what's wrong in giving him the Super over? On spinners bowling the crucial overs like the super over, depends on how comfortable a captain is with his pacers. Normally captains go for slower bowlers in such situations because the slower bowlers will have a better control and will be easier to set proper field for a slower bowler vs a pacer. A pacer may bowl a brilliant yorker yet an under edge can result in 4. A spinner on the other hand might go for a few 6s (like Ashwin or Mendis) but there will be days when batsmen will find it impossible to hit him. So both the choices , like all situations , have pros and cons . Ultimately captains go with the option which they are more comfortable with.

Under edge going for 4 is a possibility, but that's a risk you gotta take. Still the probability of getting sixes are relatively less. Best bowler in the PP? That was clearly not his day and he leaked quite a few runs. Doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

[diegovegaz]

raina missed that run out chance, and gave away another run dhoni followed with not picking doug, and going with ashwin ashwin would hv been a decent choice, but he took a beating from vic batsmen drop in confidence, perhaps nevertheless, good to see dhoni showing faith in ashwin:two_thumbs_up:

[Zelig]

Vettori v WI Mendis v RR Murali v KXIP Ashwin v Vics Go figure :sniffle:

[cowboysfan]

This is less of a spin vs pace issue and more a 'The bowling options you have Vs The batting option they're likely to put up..' If you have someone like Yusuf Pathan, then it is pretty obvious which brand of bowler he prefers to face, however good that bowler might be. No captain in his right mind could possibly go for a spinner against him, at least from now on. In regards to keeping the runs down in crunch situations, i dont think anyone can say with any sense of surety that one brand of bowling is better than the other. Any evidence we can produce on this is only anecdotal (he got hit this day, he got hit that day etc.) It doesnt swing the argument one way or the other. But here's one factor that could potentially swing the pendulum in favor of the spinners during a super-over situation - The 2 wicket rule. Its a no-brainer that when you have only 6 balls and 2 wickets to lose, the batsmen is going to try to score almost every ball, irrespective of how good or bad the ball is. BUT, its harder to hit a good ball from a pacer (say a toe-crushing yorker) in the air, as opposed to hit a good ball from a spinner, into the air. A mis-hit off a spinner has a higher chance of being wicket-taking chance, when compared to the pacer. So captains might be tempted to think that, if they have a skillful spinner, then he has a better chance of beating the batsmen in the air (or) off the pitch and taking a wicket, even 2, in the same over.

this argument is as poor as dhoni's decision.how much more evidence do you ned to see that spinners are not the choice in death overs(let alone the super over)?.do you know how well menids bowled in that match which went to the super over where he got killed in the SP?.do you know how well ajmal bowed in that semi final before he got destroyed in that final over?.spinners are a bad choice in the death overs,period.you need to connect on 3 balls and the match is over!!!.even if you miss hit 2 or lose a wicket it doesnt matter.even murali would have been a bad choice.

[thevortex]

This is less of a spin vs pace issue and more a 'The bowling options you have Vs The batting option they're likely to put up..' If you have someone like Yusuf Pathan, then it is pretty obvious which brand of bowler he prefers to face, however good that bowler might be. No captain in his right mind could possibly go for a spinner against him, at least from now on. In regards to keeping the runs down in crunch situations, i dont think anyone can say with any sense of surety that one brand of bowling is better than the other. Any evidence we can produce on this is only anecdotal (he got hit this day, he got hit that day etc.) It doesnt swing the argument one way or the other. But here's one factor that could potentially swing the pendulum in favor of the spinners during a super-over situation - The 2 wicket rule. Its a no-brainer that when you have only 6 balls and 2 wickets to lose, the batsmen is going to try to score almost every ball, irrespective of how good or bad the ball is. BUT, its harder to hit a good ball from a pacer (say a toe-crushing yorker) in the air, as opposed to hit a good ball from a spinner, into the air. A mis-hit off a spinner has a higher chance of being wicket-taking chance, when compared to the pacer. So captains might be tempted to think that, if they have a skillful spinner, then he has a better chance of beating the batsmen in the air (or) off the pitch and taking a wicket, even 2, in the same over.

This is what Chappell was saying on air. I am not so sure that Dhoni had Ashwin bowling so that he can pick 2 wickets. As he said in the post match stint, he thought of Ashwin as a street smart cricketer. Fair enough. However, if I have to bowl a spinner for one over and I have Murali in my side, nobody is going to have to toss a coin to see who bowls that one over!!! Enough said!

[zen]

But here's one factor that could potentially swing the pendulum in favor of the spinners during a super-over situation - The 2 wicket rule. Its a no-brainer that when you have only 6 balls and 2 wickets to lose, the batsmen is going to try to score almost every ball, irrespective of how good or bad the ball is. BUT, its harder to hit a good ball from a pacer (say a toe-crushing yorker) in the air, as opposed to hit a good ball from a spinner, into the air. A mis-hit off a spinner has a higher chance of being wicket-taking chance, when compared to the pacer. So captains might be tempted to think that, if they have a skillful spinner, then he has a better chance of beating the batsmen in the air (or) off the pitch and taking a wicket, even 2, in the same over.

That's a lame point. Lets look at the two scenarios and see what option a captain would prefer in a super over: - A seamer bowls a good ball (a yorker), the opposition hits the ball along the ground and takes a run - A spinner bowls a good ball and the opposition hits the ball in the air. The ball could either sail for a 6 (or a 4) or get caught Most people who have ever captained a side at any level would pick the opposition getting singles of good balls in super over then actually hope that the batsman goes for big hits and gets out as with the boundary shortened, the pitch good for batting, 3 of the oppositions best hitters playing the super over, the chances of connecting a good ball and putting the ball over the ropes are pretty high than a wkt falling But as someone said, you probably listened to the commentary! :P

[The Outsider]

Bowling a spinner in the death overs and situation like this just does not make any sense. Even as good as spinners as Murali and Saqlain have been hammered on their bad days at the death - who is this Ashwin dude? At the death overs or a situation like this, usually keeping wickets is not a priority and the batsman will have a swing at everything. Even if connects 2 out of 6, you have basically lost the battle. Same thing happened with Raina bowling the last over, the batsmen just had a heave at everything connected 2 out of 6 and got the necessary runs. Put it this way, if a fast bowler has a bad over he would usually go for 15-17 runs, but if a spinner has a bad over he could potentially go for a lot more than that.