The saga of the number seven batsman- the ending was good !

[youngindia]

This was one topic where i have been highly critical of the team management for the past year because of the allrounder business. they were trying jadeja who was not ready for the big stage and to no avail. it was never going to work. Irfan pathan was injured and ruled himself out. yusuf came up with a few blistering knocks in SA and sealed the no 7 position. but i was only partly convinced since his technical foudnation was not that of a specialist batsman and he may not murder genuine pace of the stronger sides. i wanted uthappa to be at no 7 and cursing the sleectors.i just wanted to go with 7 batsmen straight. no need for alroudners or five bowlers.i felt the no7 batsman will make or break the game. the twist arrived from a different angle ! Fortunately failures that plagued us in the group stages in form of implosions meant that the technically weaker yusuf was taken out and raina came in as a proper bat. He played the vital knocks without which we would not have passed semis or quarters ! never forget that we owe a significant part of our our 2011 WC win to the NO 7!

[Lord]

yeah n to an immature Kohli who made crucial 35 in the final:--D

[Ranjha]

Yuvis bowling really allowed us to play the 7th batsman.

[ViruRulez]

We are always better with 7 batsmen .. we are strong in batting and we need to use it to its fullest extent ... if some allrounder like Irfan etc. becomes good in the future or if some new pace all rounder emerges then I would even go for 8 batsmen/allrounders .. unless we have McGraths and Marshalls I would go for 7 batsmen at least irrespective of situations .. carrying a less than mediocre pacer as our 5th bowler does not make sense if he cannot bat

[youngindia]

yeah n to an immature Kohli who made crucial 35 in the final:--D

do you work in a circus? :hysterical:....today's match only proves my observations,deluded fellow(i would have been justified using names) who made 97 and who made 91? why is it that gambhir and dhoni decided the match and not kohli? that's what i was trying to hammer into you. dhoni and gambhir had the maturity to play the primary roles. kohli had the maturity to do only supporting role (and he did his job inthe final. i am happy with his contribution) do u see the difference? The match was won by the seniors. AGAIN.JUST AS I SAID. what the hell are you trying to prove with your stupid comment?:hysterical: Anyway don't spoilt this night. Find some one else to torture:--D! i don't enjoy a discussion with you.

[youngindia]

Yuvis bowling really allowed us to play the 7th batsman.

yes that was a pleasant surprise and unforeseen contribution with the ball!

. unless we have McGraths and Marshalls I would go for 7 batsmen at least irrespective of situations .. carrying a less than mediocre pacer as our 5th bowler

even the all time great teams didn't use five bowlers(as a rule). WI had sylvester clark,marshall,wayne daniels and winston davis on the bench when roberts,holding,garner and croft were starting to wreak havoc. australia too had handy bowlers like kasprowicz and bichel,sometimes even brett lee was benched. they didn't use five bowlers and preferred symonds.