The 8+3 theory : Sunil gavaskar

[coffee_rules]

Why stop there 9+2 would work better than 8+3?

[zen]

May be Sunny got carried away by Pakistan's composition of 3 specialists bowlers (Aktar, Gull and Rehman) + 2 all-rounder (Afridi and Razzaq) + 1 part timer ( Hafeez) .... He forgot that we don't have bowling all-rounders but batting part-timers :hehe: Anyways, if he is inspired by Pak then I don't know what to say as Pakistan probably is a disaster waiting to happen sooner or later :P .... Even Imran and Akram have urged Pak to use altleast 4 specialist bowlers against top sides

[Raghav_12]

8+3.. lolz. Gavaskar at times loses his mind. Why doesn't he go and persuade ICC to increase max. number of overs per bowler from 10 to 13. That way we'll get to play even more batsmen :-). In current situation, I would rather like it to be 6+5.

[ganeshran]

Lets go for 12-1.. Even the 12th man should be a batsman. :phehehe:

[ViruRulez]

Our bowling is weak and you want to drop another bowler ? Why dont we do away with bowlers completely and just play with 11 batsmen ?

[gaurav92]

Sunny (and you) have got it horribly wrong in my view. At a time where people are goading Dhoni to play more spinners' date=' Gavaskar is doing just the opposite. [b']Our pitches are more spinner friendly than seamer friendly, but that doesn't mean we should relegate all spinning duties to the part timers. To top it all, Bhajji has been a tad lacklustre, Chawla is even worse, and Ashwin hasn't even got a chance yet, and won't if the 8+3 combo is followed because we all know how much Dhoni favours having one leggie in our team.

SO can you tell me how many runs did the leggie leak in the last couple of games :--D ? About Harbhajan, yes he has underperformed, so what ? He has been underperforming in the last 12 months, Ashwin instead of Bhajji would not be a bad idea, especially against the minnows like Holland. Yuvi has done remarkably well, and it would be a crime to say he is a part timer given his last couple of years as a bowler.

Matches aren't merely won by batting.. bowling matters a huge deal too. Did Gavaskar not see how England was plowing even our specialist spinners' date= leave alone our part timers in spite of such a huge score on a flat pitch? Teams should be well balanced, not one sided. We all saw how we had to pay for having just a batting oriented team in our close match with England.

That was a flat deck, and on such decks, our part timers = our specialist spinners. And if we prepare that kind of surface, I am sure none of our bowlers will be effective. But imagine, if we play an extra batsman, we will be able to score 20-30 runs more than what we would have, had we played 4 bowlers. In fact it would be fair to say that we are going with 4 bowlers as I consider Yuvi as a bowler and not just a batsman.

Also, having a 8+3 combo will make India even more predictable because we will have far fewer options which the opposing teams will easily pick up on.

So you mean, we are not predictable now with the current strategy :P Look what Chawla offered on that slow turner against a mediocre side of spin like Ireland ?

Our bowling is weak and you want to drop another bowler ? Why dont we do away with bowlers completely and just play with 11 batsmen ?

Our bowling, even if we play 5 bowlers will look mediocre, coz the tracks are not spinner friendly complete;ly like what we get in Sri Lanka. Its flaccid, which turns slowly. What I think is, even if we give 10-15 runs more, I don't think we should panic, coz now we have an extra batsman in the side, and that too an aggressive game changer like Raina. So we would be able to cover up those 10-15 runs with our stronger batting line up, No ?

the side looks very abnormal. we dont need 8 batsmen. 5-6 are more than enuf for a side with batsmen with exaggerated batting statistics. this is our best shot. dhoni is doing it right. sachin sewag gambhir kohli yuvraj dhoni yusuf harbhajan zaheer (ashwin/sree/ nehra) munaf

What I am saying is, if the tracks are going to be flat out, opposition will pile runs on the board irrespective of us playing in with 4-5 bowlers. See what happened against england, they almost chased 338 down with our specialist playing in the game. I am sure, had we played the team which I am pointing at, we would have crossed 360 mark, and it wouldn't have made much difference in the latter half, as it is they were literally toying with our bowling.

[gaurav92]

Also' date=' Raina's ODI bowling ER isn't great.. it's over 5, while Ashwin has a better ER in ODIs in the few matches he's played.[/quote'] He just has to roll his arm over for 4-5 overs, in that if he gifts 30 odd runs, fair enough he has done his job. But remember Raina also has a pausy arm action, and he would not be a bad choice in the middle overs when the batsman are not in a mood to take risks, he would do his job by finishing 5 overs quickly.

8+3 = :fail:

I knew you would come up with something similar :winky: can you please elaborate ?

4 bowlers are consistanly going for lots and lots of runs and are unable to pick wickets and now we've got people saying drop another bowler :adore: what next - all 11 batsmen :hmmm:

And hence this strategy, at least we will have 8 batsman who can score the runs for the team which the bowlers have gifted to the opposition by dishing freebies :D

Gavaskar is confusing the team here. Many folks try to pick team based on percentage cricket, which may work in bi-lateral series or round-robin group stages as you can expect the batting to fire more often than not to give you a win say 3 wins out of 5 in an ODI series or a QF qualification based on finishing in the top 4 in the world cup. But KO are a different ball game. Percentage cricket doesn't work that much in KO stage as you don't get a 2nd chance like in a bi-lateral ODI series or group stages (or like in tests through 2nd innings). You lose a game and that's the end of the story. You pack your bags. To be successful in KO stages, you have to account of batting failures too because you are likely to play better oppositions, who would be fired up too. You got to have options to attack both w/ the bat and the ball. Which is why teams w/ the ability to attack both w/ the bat and the ball usually do well in KO.

You did not get my point rett. I am saying, lets try this in the round robin games. Like in the game against Holland, and if we win, try it against the SAF to just check whether it is feasible to play it against the big teams ? I am of the opinion, we will be a much more balanced side with this approach, as our bowling which has been a weakness, will be strengthened by an even stronger batting line up to back. Not to forget Raina on a sub continental track can smell danger for the opposition. Just look at this batting line up : Sachin Sehwag Gambhir Kohli Yuvraj Dhoni Raina Yusuf Harbhajan This is the best batting line up in the World. And yes, we would be able to pile on 350+ every game with this line for sure, on a flat track.

[pinkfreud]

SO can you tell me how many runs did the leggie leak in the last couple of games :--D ? About Harbhajan, yes he has underperformed, so what ? He has been underperforming in the last 12 months, Ashwin instead of Bhajji would not be a bad idea, especially against the minnows like Holland. Yuvi has done remarkably well, and it would be a crime to say he is a part timer given his last couple of years as a bowler. That was a flat deck, and on such decks, our part timers = our specialist spinners. And if we prepare that kind of surface, I am sure none of our bowlers will be effective. But imagine, if we play an extra batsman, we will be able to score 20-30 runs more than what we would have, had we played 4 bowlers.

I didn't count the exact number of runs Chawla leaked in the past few games, but suffice to say he was by far the worst bowler in our squad. Bhajji has been below par but at least he's been restricting the flow of runs to a certain extent. I don't think dropping him would do us any good, leave alone the fact that it will ever happen in any case! This is mere wishful thinking. I have always favoured Ashwin from the very beginning, but in a 8+3 squad you will never see the bowling odds being stacked in favour of spinners, and playing just one specialist spinner is a huge no-no on Indian pitches. Also, undermining minnows like Holland would not be wise in my view. Just because they have been on a losing streak doesn't mean they can't be easily contained with just 3 specialists. If Ireland could put up such a huge fight with out 7+4 combo, do you really believe the 8+3 would work wonders against anyone, leave alone the smaller, but better associate nations like Netherlands? Players like ten Doeschate have the potential to maul bowlers with very limited options, and limited is what our squad would be with just 3 specialists. Also, I disagree with your 'flat deck' argument. Firstly, our part timers are not specialists on such tracks. How could that be said when they too were leaking runs heavily against England? You want to replace Bhajji, but at the same time, he was the more economical bowler of the lot on that particular day. Just adding 20-30 runs to the score on a flat track does not guarantee that our part timers will turn the tide in their favour. Raina's ER in ODIs is also nothing to rave about, and I would have understood your point had his bowling figures been better, but sadly- they are not. You need to look at the facts here rather than pin this theory on optimism and putting all your eggs in one basket. On a flat track, no score can be too huge if you do not have a deadly bowling side. Raina is no deadly bowler, and everyone knows that. Now if we had an all-rounder like Kapil Dev, on the other hand....

[pinkfreud]

He just has to roll his arm over for 4-5 overs' date= in that if he gifts 30 odd runs, fair enough he has done his job. But remember Raina also has a pausy arm action, and he would not be a bad choice in the middle overs when the batsman are not in a mood to take risks, he would do his job by finishing 5 overs quickly.

Do you seriously believe 4-5 overs for 30 is good for any spinner? C'mon now, you've got to be joking...

[gaurav92]

sunil gavaskar is losing his brain.What a stupid theory.:finger: we should go with five bowlers if we want to win world cup.

this is far better than your silly threads :D

Why go with only 8+3? How about 9+2? Even 11+0? Heck' date=' why not clone 10 Sachins make it all Sachin eleven? [/quote'] :cantstop:

If and indeed Sunny did say that we should play only 3 specialist bowlers' date=' I think its probably a good idea if he just sticks to tracking the statistical milestones of batsmen. The man, as usual, is completely clueless.[/quote'] See, I think Yuvi can be considered more than a part timer now. He has got crucial wickets, he has been economical, and has improved his bowling great deal. It would be wrong to say that we are going with 3 bowlers. We are definitely going with 4 bowlers here. We can ask Zaheer and Harbhajan/Ashwin (whoever plays) to bowl their quota over 20 overs. Then we have Munaf, who will bowl at least 6-7 overs. And with bowlers like Yuvi, Raina, Yusuf and even Kohli and Sachin (if need be) can roll their arms for a few overs. So it wont be difficult for us to get our quota of 50 overs fulfilled. And who knows, if the track is good for spinners, we can even bowled them out in under 50 overs ;) On the flip side, look how strong our batting will be. So say, if one of the bowlers has an off day (which happens more often than not :P). We would end up giving 20 runs extra, so what ? We have another batsman in the side now, who can score those runs effectively.

For fun... it is fine. But 8+3 combinations usually you find in associate teams.

Our bowling is as weak as any other associate side :--D

8+3.. lolz. Gavaskar at times loses his mind. Why doesn't he go and persuade ICC to increase max. number of overs per bowler from 10 to 13. That way we'll get to play even more batsmen :-). In current situation, I would rather like it to be 6+5.

:hysterical: Sorry mate. But seriously, would you risk it with 6+5 ? If that is the case, I think it would be a better idea to risk it with a 8+3 combination. Reasons : 1) You would be throwing Yusuf Pathan out, who could have given you some handy quick runs down the order and could have also been sent in as the pinch hitter if need be. Now you have no one to do that job (since Raina is not playing). 2) You will probably be playing 3 spinners, right ? Or 3 seamers ? In whichever case, I think, our bowling will take some pounding, since Chawla has been ineffective. And if you try a half fit Nehra, you would be risking with your bowling combinations. And if you are thinking about Sree , I would definitely like to remind you about his performance in the opening game against Bangladesh. So 6+5 is :fail: unless you consider Yuvi as the fifth bowler :) 3) If we are able to restrict an opposition on a flat track for under 300. We will have less options in the batting. And if we lose a couple of early wickets, the middle order will look a lot more shaky.

[gaurav92]

I didn't count the exact number of runs Chawla leaked in the past few games, but suffice to say he was by far the worst bowler in our squad. Bhajji has been below par but at least he's been restricting the flow of runs to a certain extent. I don't think dropping him would do us any good, leave alone the fact that it will ever happen in any case! This is mere wishful thinking. I have always favoured Ashwin from the very beginning, but in a 8+3 squad you will never see the bowling odds being stacked in favour of spinners, and playing just one specialist spinner is a huge no-no on Indian pitches. Also, undermining minnows like Holland would not be wise in my view. Just because they have been on a losing streak doesn't mean they can't be easily contained with just 3 specialists. If Ireland could put up such a huge fight with out 7+4 combo, do you really believe the 8+3 would work wonders against anyone, leave alone the smaller, but better associate nations like Netherlands? Players like ten Doeschate have the potential to maul bowlers with very limited options, and limited is what our squad would be with just 3 specialists. Also, I disagree with your 'flat deck' argument. Firstly, our part timers are not specialists on such tracks. How could that be said when they too were leaking runs heavily against England? You want to replace Bhajji, but at the same time, he was the more economical bowler of the lot on that particular day. Just adding 20-30 runs to the score on a flat track does not guarantee that our part timers will turn the tide in their favour. Raina's ER in ODIs is also nothing to rave about, and I would have understood your point had his bowling figures been better, but sadly- they are not. You need to look at the facts here rather than pin this theory on optimism and putting all your eggs in one basket. On a flat track, no score can be too huge if you do not have a deadly bowling side. Raina is no deadly bowler, and everyone knows that. Now if we had an all-rounder like Kapil Dev, on the other hand....

Well English did not have many part time spinners in their side, and hence Irish were able to smash them. Also the fact that the Dutch looked clueless against slow bowlers proves my point of the inability of the associates to play spin. Yes, I know Raina is not a deadly bowler, but he is a good enough bowler to bowl 4-5 overs in the middle overs. You don't need a computing mind to bowl a part timer for 4-5 overs. And Yusuf and Raina are decent enough part timers to share 10-12 overs amongst them. Agree with you that we don't have an all rounder like kapil Paaji, but we definitely have Yuvraj, who is a handy all rounder.

Do you seriously believe 4-5 overs for 30 is good for any spinner? C'mon now' date=' you've got to be joking...[/quote'] I would definitely take a 30 in 5 overs from a part timer anyday on a flat deck ahead of a 56 from 7 overs by a specialist against a side, not know for their game against spin ;-)

[pinkfreud]

I would definitely take a 30 in 5 overs from a part timer anyday on a flat deck ahead of a 56 from 7 overs by a specialist against a side' date=' not know for their game against spin ;-)[/quote'] Gaurav, just look at the India-England scorecard. An all rounder like Yuvraj went for well over 6 an over on the flat track. Yusuf's ER on the pitch was 7, and to top it all, Pathan is more economical than Raina in ODIs. To expect an average ER of 6 on this kind of track from a part timer like Raina is a bit too much and unrealistic. Netherlands may not be good against spin, and England may not have the luxury of part timers, but that match came really close anyway- and yes, England did manage to thrash SA with specialists. You really can't leave a game of cricket to mere chance, and you can't take things for granted. This is why we need specialists (barring Piyush Chawla, of course :cantstop:). Part timers are a very handy asset to have in your team, no doubt, but on Indian pitches, you just can't compromise on your strength (spin) by relegating it to someone like Raina. In the 8+3 combo (if it ever were to become a reality, which it will never be), Dhoni would have opted for Bhajji as the main tweaker and two seamers. Bhajji seems to be more interested on curbing runs than taking wickets, and if he would have been backed up by part time spin (barring Yuvraj), I shudder to think to what extent our wicket taking abilities would have been compromised. Our main goal is to take wickets, not to just slow the opposition's run rate.

[gaurav92]

Our main goal is to take wickets' date=' not to just slow the opposition's run rate.[/quote'] But since our specialists are doing this, I don't see a problem with our part timers doing the same.I know the main focus should be picking up wickets, and that in itself will hold back the run rate. But the fact is, our part timers have been far more instrumental in breaking partnerships than our specialist spinners.

Gaurav' date=' just look at the India-England scorecard. An all rounder like Yuvraj went for well over 6 an over on the flat track. Yusuf's ER on the pitch was 7, and to top it all, Pathan is more economical than Raina in ODIs. To expect an average ER of 6 on this kind of track from a part timer like Raina is a bit too much and unrealistic. Netherlands may not be good against spin, and England may not have the luxury of part timers, but that match came really close anyway- and yes, England did manage to thrash SA with specialists. You really can't leave a game of cricket to mere chance, and you can't take things for granted. [/quote'] In that scorecard, even Bhajji went for 58 which makes up for almost 6 an over. Yusuf and Yuvi didn't bowl well, but the specialists weren't effective as well. SO that really tells my point that, if Chawla were to be replaced by Raina, and along with him, Yusuf and Yuvi were to bowl more overs, they would have gone for 7 an over, which is what Chawla went for. So you can't pinpoint at that scorecard and say that part timers didn't perform well, coz even the specialists were ordinary. But just think, what would have been our score in the end, had we played an extra batsman, Raina would have definitely squeezed more than 30 runs in the final 3 overs, and we would have reached close to 360. Which could have been a match winning total, if you take out Chawla's equation and add Raina's and Yusuf's to the tally. All in all, I do think, there is a huge risk involved, and that is why I am just saying that we can try this in the group test, to get the pros and cons, and whether its suitable for our team or not.If yes, then why not, and if it doesn't work, we might go for the earlier strategy. But at least we tried something different to alter the balance of the side.

[Sachin=GOD]

And hence this strategy, at least we will have 8 batsman who can score the runs for the team which the bowlers have gifted to the opposition by dishing freebies :D

We saw against the mighty Bangbros our 7 batsmen scored 370 and 4 specialist bowlers gave away 280 odd. Against England our 7 batsmen again able to score 330 odd but the 4 specialist bowlers let England chase that score with ease. Just imagine how many runs the opposition will score if we drop another bowler.

[zen]

May be Sunny got carried away by Pakistan's composition of 3 specialists bowlers (Aktar, Gull and Rehman) + 2 all-rounder (Afridi and Razzaq) + 1 part timer ( Hafeez) .... He forgot that we don't have bowling all-rounders but batting part-timers :hehe: Anyways, if he is inspired by Pak then I don't know what to say as Pakistan probably is a disaster waiting to happen sooner or later :P .... Even Imran and Akram have urged Pak to use altleast 4 specialist bowlers against top sides

Disaster finally (the very first time they bowl first)! :orderorder: