Folks still think Sree is an ODI bowler? :hysterical:

[CG]

did Sehwag lie?what was so UNEDUCATED about it

i reacted in haste i just saw what was written on cricinfo and made a comment he said that anybody might have a off day afetr that ,so no complains against shewag

[jibranpatel15]

stop blaming SEHWAG guys after all what he said was 100 percent correct. And not all 11 players can have good game everytime that way a team can't loose match with that. and sree was bullish himself. He was just trying too hard to pick up wicket. Look at MUNAF he just runs in & puts ball in right area wkts will come themselves u don't need to try too hard in such big totoal chases. Sree in brainless player in INDIAN team

[Lord]

Since I have some time, :icflove: 1. Because on flat decks, we should try to play 3 pacers. If we have Zak, Munaf and Sree then it's natural that Sree would take the new ball, esp when Ind is bowling under lights, no?

Why 3 seamers r needed so desperately,we should play best combination from our front line choice bowlers,once Nehra was out,2 spinners should've been there.Sree is not our first choice bowler,remember? playing ur best bowlers is more important than a set combination IMO

2. Ind wkts are usually flat. I am discussing this from the PoV of flat decks. If the pitch has turn then the strategy changes. 3. On control w/ new ball is imp: see point #1

why cant spinners bowl on flat decks if they r good enough?If the pitch has swing then it can change for swing bowlers,same logic.

4. A team has to utilize swing, if the ball is swinging. You don't bowl a line and length bowler if the bowlers are getting swing. Just like the first hour in tests is imp, so are the first few overs when the ball is hard in ODIs.

heard about McGrath?dont tell me he wasnt successful with new ball with his line n length stuff.ask him n he'll tell you how acccuracy is as important even if the ball is swinging? n if it is winging,u expect the bowler toi stick to that,not bowl bouncers on a slow wicket.

5. If you play a leggie instead of someone like Sree then chances of 2 spinners bowling in the PP are high, no? Unless your assumption is that only Sree goes for runs and Zak and Munaf won't go for runs and will bowl upto say 12-14 overs

so play Ashwin,he regularly bowls in PPs n does well.n if they r fearful of spinner getting smacked in PPs,its not like Sree is bowling miserly:hysterical:

6. Let's look at your 110/2 after 15 overs comment. If you are assuming that Sree (or his replacement) picked those 2 wkts then either it's him who brought Ind back in to the game or someone else messed it up after he completed his first spell. If you still don't get it: let's say, Sree bowls 5 overs, so he is bowling till the 10th over. Now if he has picked up 2 wkts in 10 overs, then other team would be 70-80 for 2, no? Which means that other bowlers failed to pick wkts up, which is why the other team is at 110-2 after 15 overs, no? And if he is bowling first change, then he took 2 quick wkts in 11th to 15th over to bring Ind into the game :winky:

bring back into the game?going for over 7 wen opposition is chasing 300 is bringing India back into the game?:hysterical::hysterical: lets say Sree got 40-2 in those 5 overs for ur satisfaction?that brought India back into the game?or is it the other bowlers who r keeping India in the game by going under 5 RPO despite Sree's expensive start?despite picking up wickets,Sree would've only made the incoming's batsmen's job easier.

[achilles]

For all the effort we have put in over debating this issue, lets hope Sree picks up some damn wickets.

[zen]

Why 3 seamers r needed so desperately,we should play best combination from our front line choice bowlers,once Nehra was out,2 spinners should've been there.Sree is not our first choice bowler,remember? playing ur best bowlers is more important than a set combination IMO why cant spinners bowl on flat decks if they r good enough?If the pitch has swing then it can change for swing bowlers,same logic. heard about McGrath?dont tell me he wasnt successful with new ball with his line n length stuff.ask him n he'll tell you how acccuracy is as important even if the ball is swinging? n if it is winging,u expect the bowler toi stick to that,not bowl bouncers on a slow wicket. so play Ashwin,he regularly bowls in PPs n does well.n if they r fearful of spinner getting smacked in PPs,its not like Sree is bowling miserly:hysterical:

This is like discussing cricket w/ a girl :giggle: .... Sorry, but it is hard for me to answer to such dumb posts w/ any kind of seriousness but will give it a try. Next time you won't get a decent response for such dumb posts :P 1. Unless the pitch has turn, Ind should play 3 seamers on flat decks. There are a lot of threads discussing this. 2. Wow, now he brings in McGrath to show how effective line and length bowlers are as if we have one bowler of the capability of McGrath. What am I suppose to do, give example of a swing bowler who has been successful too? (this is getting quite comical :giggle: ) 3. It was you who said that you would play a leggie. And I commented on that. Now if you are saying that play Ashwin, then look at point 1 I have to specially quote one of your gems:

bring back into the game?going for over 7 wen opposition is chasing 300 is bringing India back into the game?:hysterical::hysterical: lets say Sree got 40-2 in those 5 overs for ur satisfaction?that brought India back into the game?or is it the other bowlers who r keeping India in the game by going under 5 RPO despite Sree's expensive start?despite picking up wickets,Sree would've only made the incoming's batsmen's job easier.

This is what I had written based on the score that you gave: 6. Let's look at your 110/2 after 15 overs comment. If you are assuming that Sree (or his replacement) picked those 2 wkts then either it's him who brought Ind back in to the game or someone else messed it up after he completed his first spell. If you still don't get it: let's say, Sree bowls 5 overs, so he is bowling till the 10th over. Now if he has picked up 2 wkts in 10 overs, then other team would be 70-80 for 2, no? Which means that other bowlers failed to pick wkts up, which is why the other team is at 110-2 after 15 overs, no? And if he is bowling first change, then he took 2 quick wkts in 11th to 15th over to bring Ind into the game Let's deconstruct it for one more time: You said opposition is 110/2 after 15 overs,implying that how does those two wkts that Sree picked helped India. In the first 15 overs, Sree would either have opened the bowling or bowled first up, right? So if he bowled 5 overs in first 10 ----> 2 wkts for 40. Since the other bowler has given less runs than Sree as per your imagination, opposition is say 70/2 after 10, right? Now if other team is 110/2 after 15, then it's others who have gone at 8 per over in 11-15 overs and that too w/o picking up wkts, no? On the other hand, let's say Sree bowls first change so he is bowling probably say 11,13 and 15th over. Let's say he gives 25 runs in those 3 overs but picks up 2 wkts and the opposition is 110/2 after 15. Hasn't he brought Ind back into the game then? You don't even understand how the numbers that you give work and on top of that you have it in you to pull out some other number :hysterical: As I said, this is my last post that I am trying to respond w/ some kind of seriousness to you. (which is very hard for me considering your post). Please find someone who will equally make assumptions like you, pull numbers out w/o understanding them in all seriousness :giggle:

[Lord]

boy how did I miss this gem

This is like discussing cricket w/ a girl :giggle: .... Sorry, but it is hard for me to answer to such dumb posts w/ any kind of seriousness but will give it a try. Next time you won't get a decent response for such dumb posts :P 1. Unless the pitch has turn, Ind should play 3 seamers on flat decks. There are a lot of threads discussing this.

give me ur reason.dont worry about what others say.why is it so desperate to play 3 seamers that we have to play most expensive bowl in the world?why cant spinners bowl in PPs(two teams have already done that successfully in this WC) If the pitch is flat,it means it doesnt assist spin AND swing.in that case u either play to ur strength(spin in our case) or play ur 4 best bowlers.Sree fits neither criteria(cant believe I've to explain something as basic as this)

2. Wow, now he brings in McGrath to show how effective line and length bowlers are as if we have one bowler of the capability of McGrath. What am I suppose to do, give example of a swing bowler who has been successful too? (this is getting quite comical :giggle:

where did I talk about capabilities?are u dreaming?:haha:I brought McGrath to prove line n length bowlers can be successful with the new ball to your comment"You don't bowl a line and length bowler if the bowlers are getting swing."forgot what you urself typed.ofcourse Munaf is no McGrath,but Sree is no Donald either.its not about capabilities at all.or is too tough for you to grasp(why I'm not surprised:cantstop:)

3. It was you who said that you would play a leggie. And I commented on that. Now if you are saying that play Ashwin, then look at point 1.

I just wouldnt play Sreesanth,thats what I said.if u think Chawla cant bowl with the new ball,if need be,theres Ashwin who has done it earlier.either way we dont need Sreesanth

I have to specially quote one of your gems: This is what I had written based on the score that you gave: 6. Let's look at your 110/2 after 15 overs comment. If you are assuming that Sree (or his replacement) picked those 2 wkts then either it's him who brought Ind back in to the game or someone else messed it up after he completed his first spell. If you still don't get it: let's say, Sree bowls 5 overs, so he is bowling till the 10th over. Now if he has picked up 2 wkts in 10 overs, then other team would be 70-80 for 2, no? Which means that other bowlers failed to pick wkts up, which is why the other team is at 110-2 after 15 overs, no? And if he is bowling first change, then he took 2 quick wkts in 11th to 15th over to bring Ind into the game Let's deconstruct it for one more time: You said opposition is 110/2 after 15 overs,implying that how does those two wkts that Sree picked helped India. In the first 15 overs, Sree would either have opened the bowling or bowled first up, right? So if he bowled 5 overs in first 10 ----> 2 wkts for 40. Since the other bowler has given less runs than Sree as per your imagination, opposition is say 70/2 after 10, right? Now if other team is 110/2 after 15, then it's others who have gone at 8 per over in 11-15 overs and that too w/o picking up wkts, no? On the other hand, let's say Sree bowls first change so he is bowling probably say 11,13 and 15th over. Let's say he gives 25 runs in those 3 overs but picks up 2 wkts and the opposition is 110/2 after 15. Hasn't he brought Ind back into the game then? You don't even understand how the numbers that you give work and on top of that you have it in you to pull out some other number :hysterical: As I said, this is my last post that I am trying to respond w/ some kind of seriousness to you. (which is very hard for me considering your post). Please find someone who will equally make assumptions like you, pull numbers out w/o understanding them in all seriousness :giggle:

wow,u have some serious comprehension problems.completely forgot that I gave other situation(70-1)?:hysterical: let me make it simpler for u,if Sreesanth took 2-40 in 5 ovs or 25-2 in 3 ovs n opposition is 110/2 at 15 ovs marks,we would NOT be in the game as the opposition needs less than 6 an over n can easily form a partnership in middle overs going at 5-5.5.loss of wicket would be negated as opposed to lets say Munaf,gets 20-1 in 5 ovs n opposition is 70-1 at 15 ovs,we r still right in it as the opposition would need 6+ over 35 overs.its to difficult to attack in middle overs as the field is spread out n as the RRR rises,wickets'll come.opposition cant go 5-5.5 in these overs as it'd be too risky its about which situation is better n u didnt get it:hysterical: thank god its ur last post,u r like a kid who thinks big of himself,doesnt understand basics of the game,lives in imaginary world n cant even understand what other is trying to say n keeps harping on just one thing.thanks for wasting my time:hatsoff:

[zen]

boy how did I miss this gem give me ur reason.dont worry about what others say.why is it so desperate to play 3 seamers that we have to play most expensive bowl in the world?why cant spinners bowl in PPs(two teams have already done that successfully in this WC) If the pitch is flat,it means it doesnt assist spin AND swing.in that case u either play to ur strength(spin in our case) or play ur 4 best bowlers.Sree fits neither criteria(cant believe I've to explain something as basic as this) where did I talk about capabilities?are u dreaming?:haha:I brought McGrath to prove line n length bowlers can be successful with the new ball to your comment"You don't bowl a line and length bowler if the bowlers are getting swing."forgot what you urself typed.ofcourse Munaf is no McGrath,but Sree is no Donald either.its not about capabilities at all.or is too tough for you to grasp(why I'm not surprised:cantstop:) I just wouldnt play Sreesanth,thats what I said.if u think Chawla cant bowl with the new ball,if need be,theres Ashwin who has done it earlier.either way we dont need Sreesanth wow,u have some serious comprehension problems.completely forgot that I gave other situation(70-1)?:hysterical: let me make it simpler for u,if Sreesanth took 2-40 in 5 ovs or 25-2 in 3 ovs n opposition is 110/2 at 15 ovs marks,we would NOT be in the game as the opposition needs less than 6 an over n can easily form a partnership in middle overs going at 5-5.5.loss of wicket would be negated as opposed to lets say Munaf,gets 20-1 in 5 ovs n opposition is 70-1 at 15 ovs,we r still right in it as the opposition would need 6+ over 35 overs.its to difficult to attack in middle overs as the field is spread out n as the RRR rises,wickets'll come.opposition cant go 5-5.5 in these overs as it'd be too risky its about which situation is better n u didnt get it:hysterical: thank god its ur last post,u r like a kid who thinks big of himself,doesnt understand basics of the game,lives in imaginary world n cant even understand what other is trying to say n keeps harping on just one thing.thanks for wasting my time:hatsoff:

Another comical post from you so will just highlights the gems:

If the pitch is flat,it means it doesnt assist spin AND swing.in that case u either play to ur strength(spin in our case) or play ur 4 best bowlers.Sree fits neither criteria(cant believe I've to explain something as basic as this)

Flat pitch implies that the bowlers don't get help from the surface. You can still swing (esp under lights) or reverse swing on a flat pitch .... Sums of your girlish understanding of cricket :hysterical: .... and i guess, Sree isn't a swing bowler too per your dumb assessments

where did I talk about capabilities?are u dreaming?:haha:I brought McGrath to prove line n length bowlers can be successful with the new ball to your comment"You don't bowl a line and length bowler if the bowlers are getting swing."forgot what you urself typed.ofcourse Munaf is no McGrath,but Sree is no Donald either.its not about capabilities at all.or is too tough for you to grasp(why I'm not surprised:cantstop:)

haha, the point is that we don't have a bowler of McGrath capabilities so by bringing in McGrath your are showing what type of quality is required to successfully bowl line and length. And if you think that line and length bowlers like McGrath can be successful then I can give examples of swing bowlers too, which is why such points are childish

let me make it simpler for u,if Sreesanth took 2-40 in 5 ovs or 25-2 in 3 ovs n opposition is 110/2 at 15 ovs marks,we would NOT be in the game as the opposition needs less than 6 an over n can easily form a partnership in middle overs going at 5-5.5.loss of wicket would be negated

If Sree bowled 40-2 in 5 or 25-2 in 3 then others gave away 70-0 and 85-0 in 10 and 12 overs respectively, so based on the number that you pulled out to show that more runs don't help Ind, you are infact showing the value of Sree's effort, which is what the key point is :winky:

as opposed to lets say Munaf,gets 20-1 in 5 ovs n opposition is 70-1 at 15 ovs,we r still right in it as the opposition would need 6+ over 35 overs.its to difficult to attack in middle overs as the field is spread out n as the RRR rises,wickets'll come.opposition cant go 5-5.5 in these overs as it'd be too risky

Wow so in your imagination, Munna is bowling at 20-1, w/ others giving us 50-0 in 10 overs on a pitch where Ind scored 300. Keep dreaming :giggle:

[Lord]

Another comical post from you so will just highlights the gems: Flat pitch implies that the bowlers don't get help from the surface. You can still swing (esp under lights) or reverse swing on a flat pitch .... Sums of your girlish understanding of cricket :hysterical: .... and i guess, Sree isn't a swing bowler too per your dumb assessments

yeah we know beforehand,we'll bowl under lights.:giggle:reverrse swing wen ball is changed after 34 ovs???why take such risks wen not needed?what if we r asked to bowl first n ball doesnt scuff up enough till 34 ovs?,u need some backup plans,dont u

haha, the point is that we don't have a bowler of McGrath capabilities so by bringing in McGrath your are showing what type of quality is required to successfully bowl line and length. And if you think that line and length bowlers like McGrath can be successful then I can give examples of swing bowlers too, which is why such points are childish

lol I know swing bowlers can be sucessful,but for that they still need some accuracy n control which Sree lacks.its you who said'line n length bowlers cant be sucessful with new ball,which is why I brought McGrath's examples.not about capabilities.Munaf isnt McGrath but he does bowl line n length day in n day out,it cant be denied

If Sree bowled 40-2 in 5 or 25-2 in 3 then others gave away 70-0 and 85-0 in 10 and 12 overs respectively, so based on the number that you pulled out to show that more runs don't help Ind, you are infact showing the value of Sree's effort, which is what the key point is :winky:

no the key point is his wickets dont help because the opposition is still in a comfortable position,which it wouldnt been if he had economical ,even if he took one wicket less

Wow so in your imagination, Munna is bowling at 20-1, w/ others giving us 50-0 in 10 overs on a pitch where Ind scored 300. Keep dreaming :giggle:

if you can imagine Sree taking two top order wickets wen we made 300 on a flat deck,then Munaf doing it is certainly not unreal.atleast he has done it a couple of times, previously,bowling with the new ball.wen last did Sree dismiss two top order players defending 300:hmmm: http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/361043.html http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/361046.html

[achilles]

The next time someone takes a dig at Sreesanth, it would help if Dhoni watches this video before walking out to humiliate his player in public- AAC6LofdyXo

[zen]

yeah we know beforehand,we'll bowl under lights.:giggle:reverrse swing wen ball is changed after 34 ovs???why take such risks wen not needed?what if we r asked to bowl first n ball doesnt scuff up enough till 34 ovs?,u need some backup plans,dont u lol I know swing bowlers can be sucessful,but for that they still need some accuracy n control which Sree lacks.its you who said'line n length bowlers cant be sucessful with new ball,which is why I brought McGrath's examples.not about capabilities.Munaf isnt McGrath but he does bowl line n length day in n day out,it cant be denied no the key point is his wickets dont help because the opposition is still in a comfortable position,which it wouldnt been if he had economical ,even if he took one wicket less if you can imagine Sree taking two top order wickets wen we made 300 on a flat deck,then Munaf doing it is certainly not unreal.atleast he has done it a couple of times, previously,bowling with the new ball.wen last did Sree dismiss two top order players defending 300:hmmm: http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/361043.html http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/361046.html

The entertainment continues! :giggle: Now the assumption is that playing a swing bowler only works if Ind bowl 2nd, great. And that having a swing bowler as an option equates to Ind not having a back up plan. Do you even realize that the argument you make against Sree getting smashed can be applied to a spinner bowling in PP too or any other bowler for that matter. :giggle: .... If others are going at 6 an over, and if a swing bowler goes at 7 or 8 in order to pick a couple of wkts then that's not a bad risk And I guess McGrath doesn't swing the ball or move it of the surface The point is not Munaf vs Sree but playing Sree as well to take advantage of the swing, if it is available. And since Sree/ or 3rd seamer who can swing is in the line up he bowls first up against someone who can't swing (that much) :winky:

no the key point is his wickets dont help because the opposition is still in a comfortable position,which it wouldnt been if he had economical ,even if he took one wicket less

If the opposition is 110/2 or whatever then almost everyone has gone for runs, no? I broke down the math to you know. Unless your dumb assumption is that if Sree plays, the opposition is 110/2 and if he doesn't then it is 70/1 or whatever :hysterical:

if you can imagine Sree taking two top order wickets wen we made 300 on a flat deck,then Munaf doing it is certainly not unreal.atleast he has done it a couple of times, previously,bowling with the new ball.wen last did Sree dismiss two top order players defending 300:hmmm:

Already answerd through the point above (and in previous posts) but will try again: The point is that if it is a 300 pitch, bowlers are going to go for runs. And since Ind is already bowling 2nd (from your example), it can utilize the swing when bowling under lights. And if dew is a factor then spinners won't be able to get the turn or slow the pace anyways w/ the ball skidding off the surface :winky: Thanks for the entertainment thought. It's no surprise that people who have usernames like you have, along w/ Tendulkar pic in avatar, are likely to come up with comical posts like yours :giggle:

[The Outsider]

Even Sreesanth would be flattered after reading how is 'wicket taking' abilities are rated by some!

[zen]

Even Sreesanth would be flattered after reading how is 'wicket taking' abilities are rated by some!

In the same way, the ER of others is rated so highly by some

[Zero_Unit]

Sree should concentrate on his acting/dancing - he has a far better future there.

Perhaps the ZOO is a solution for this lad :winky:

[achilles]

In the same way' date=' the ER of others is rated so highly by some [/quote'] :rotfl:

[saneindian]

For all the effort we have put in over debating this issue' date=' lets hope Sree picks up some damn wickets.[/quote'] Forget picking wickets. If he can bowl to his field and stop attempting to bowl dream balls (pitching on leg stump for a right hander and swinging/seaming away) which get hit for 4, he will have far better bowling figures. And yes abusing a batsman everytime you beat the bat isn't quite the way to go. For showing that kind of aggression, first settle down into your rhythm and then try sledging. It will work to his advantage as it has in the past like in the 2 ODIs vs Kiwis.

[vpg0002]

Highly unpredictable.

[zen]

Only a miracle can save Ind in this game vs Eng No Sree but the results are similar. With the bowling line up that we have, runs would be scored of us (by good sides) anyways, which is why we need bowlers who can pick up wkts Restrictive bowling resulting into dots which results into wkts probably doesn't work anymore that much as good batsmen are calculate enough to capitalize on slightest of opportunities. We need bowlers who go out for wkts, in that process if we give a few more runs that's a risk worth taking We also need to play 5 bowlers to support our excellent top order, or their good work would go down the drain. And 2+2, as I suspected, doesn't work either unless the pitch is an turner. If you need to play an extra spinner, play 5 bowlers for a miracle for an Ind win

[someone]

This is exactly why Sree should be in the team. He has proved he can go for runs but he is the ONLY one in our team who can change the match. He offers a new dimension in our attack and can really take a wicket at any time. The fact is most of other bowlers gameplan is placed on containing the opponents and waiitng for that player to make a mistake which would result in wicket. Sree has a different game and really should play

[achilles]

[rant]So today's rubbish performance is Sreesanth's fault too, right? What a demon, that guy![/rant] Since we go about calling a spade a spade, lets call for Zaheer's head too.

[bear23]

I dont see any improvement in indian bowling attack without sreesanth. At least sreesanth has the ability to bowl some wicket taking deliveries.