Why Munaf ? Why not Sreesanth ?

[CG]

Yes, Munaf is anyday better choice than SreeSanth for WC. Munaf has been doing good very well for last 6 months or so. He was pick of our bowlers in SL Tri Series and did very well in NZ series as well. Followed that good form in Ranji matches and in couple of ODI's he played in SA. His position in team for WC was never in doubt and I think during WC he would be second choice seamer after Zaheer. In fact with the kind of accuracy he has in line and length, he could be really good bowler if he can add another 5 kms in his speed and can get better fitness levels.

Anybody who is saying munaf is a better choice than sree is either drunk or stupid or both, worldcup is played in india on flat pitches have you watched munaf against top team in india last he played against australia in india he did not complete 6 overs you canot just bowl length in india came goes with praveen.

[achilles]

Munaf performed at the most immaculate time & timing was of essence for him

[Texan]

Sree has an economy rate of 6 + after playing so many ODIs. That is unacceptable. Even Nehra shouldn't have been in the team. Instead, someone like Sudeep Tyagi should have been picked. Munaf has been fairly consistent in ODIs and should be included in the starting 11 along with PK and Zaheer as the medium pace trioka

[Mariyam]

I too felt that Sree has been given the rough end of the stick. He should have made it to the 15, if not a starter. He gives it his all, and plays with passion (overdoing it at times). I can't say this is true of Munaf and Nehra who seem distracted/least interested many a times. They don't even chase the ball when they field.

[Late Cut]

I too felt that Sree has been given the rough end of the stick. He should have made it to the 15, if not a starter. He gives it his all, and plays with passion (overdoing it at times). I can't say this is true of Munaf and Nehra who seem distracted/least interested many a times. They don't even chase the ball when they field.

True, though I think Munaf has been playing a lot better in recent times and is probably one of our more consistent bowlers. The thing about Sree is that he can both win you or loose you games. The question is whether it's worth the risk, especially in ODIs.

[Sachin=GOD]

IMO Sree is too much of a risk. His economy rate is extremely high, his line and length is more often than not erratic and to top it all there's his tendency to overdo things (over acting, crying, over-appealing).

[Mariyam]

I agree with everything you (Sachin = God) and Late Cut have said. But this is the WC. The over acting, over appealing etc adds to the entertainment value of the tournament. :P Also, Sreesanth will be able to motivate himself better in these high pressure situations than Nehra and Munaf. Lets just say, Nehra and Munaf are more consistent at an average level of play. Sreesanth is inconsistent, but his game at the peak is better than Nehra' s and Munaf's at their peak.

[Castro]

Munaf has been player better in recent times. Although Sreesanth is a good attacking pace bowlers who gives it his all, I would say Sreesanth is too expensive and may leak many runs. Munaf has controlled line and length and he is far more economical than Sreesanth. Apart from the last 3 one dayers, Nehra has been bowling well ever since his comeback. His whip and experience is a big asset.

[Late Cut]

I agree with everything you (Sachin = God) and Late Cut have said. But this is the WC. The over acting, over appealing etc adds to the entertainment value of the tournament. :P Also, Sreesanth will be able to motivate himself better in these high pressure situations than Nehra and Munaf. Lets just say, Nehra and Munaf are more consistent at an average level of play. Sreesanth is inconsistent, but his game at the peak is better than Nehra' s and Munaf's at their peak.

:haha: I agree with the entertainment value bit; Sree is definitely entertaining, though he might cause you to pull out your hair and smack the TV while "entertaining" you. The issue with Sree is the frequency of his peaks, especially on the subcontinent and under ODI conditions. He is a much better bowler when is bowling to take wickets than when he is bowling to contain. The issue is that when you bowl to take wickets, especially with his natural length, he is bound to get smacked around a LOT. His pace also becomes a liability compared to the slower medium bowlers in these situations.