Sehwag concedes

[Lord]

I am not talking about his cavalier stroke play but rather his attitude towards little adjustment to the conditions. Don't know what I'm talking? Watch Trent Bridge 2002.

but now he doesnt last long even if he tries to be patient so we tend to forget it.like it happened today n at Chennai.

[Crookbond]

but now he doesnt last long even if he tries to be patient so we tend to forget it.like it happened today n at Chennai.

So, two innings are an enough indicator? You obviously need to try even if it fails rather than adopting a failure filled method which isn't working for him in the past 2 years.

[Muloghonto]

Hang on - lets make a fair assessment here. You are talking of the past however, I'm looking at the present. Things change and Sehwag is an example. Sehwag has two core issues - fitness and temperament. Sehwag knows (check his statements before the WC) that if he can see off some time before the start he turn it around in 1 innings. However, he lacks the patience to do so. We're not talking about his past laurels but current situation. His fitness levels leave a lot to be desired which no one can argue. Irrespective of his batting position if these two things are not sorted of I don't see Sehwag making any progress.

1. I don't care about his fitness issues. They've never been great, granted but then again, plenty of batsmen went around who's fitness was not an issue (or atleast, a liability) in test cricket. he is, by quite some distance, amongst the top 3 slip catchers produced by this nation in 25 years ( behind Dravid and Azhar, only) and therefore, he is my 'fat tubby guy who sits at 1st slip all day' guy, a slightly inferior version of Mark Waugh. So for all his fitness issues, it is irrelevant- the role in the field he is clearly the best suited at ( in the whole team) is the role that requires you to stand around and do nothing- 1st slip. 2. Temperament, as i said, is a murky issue. One does not survive so long and so successfully in Test cricket, doing a job they wern't specialized to do, by lacking temperament. What you are, along with many, are mistaking, is confusing the 'KISS principle' ( to those that dont know- Keep It Simple,Stupid) with ineptness. Yes, he's been protracted about his shortcommings. Given that solving his shortcommings = changing a fundamental aspect of his batting, there arnt very many around who's gonna make fundamental changes to their craft due to a few lean years. The issue is clearly that of role- his eyesight & reflexes, along with 90% of batsmen otu there, has lost a step due to his age ( 34). As such, this is the age ( mid 30s onwards) where only specialist openers with solid techniques thrive ( the rare exception of Matty Hayden springs to mind). Asking 'Why Sehwag is failing' is like asking 'why did Laxman fail to open the innings ? Why is it a bad idea to ask tendy to open in Test cricket ? why did Lara & Viv drop themselves down the order from #3 to #4/5 ?'. It is bound to happen to Sehwag, simply because he does not come with the opener's technique and an opener's impeccable perception of the offstump. Its not a knock on Sehwag- outside of career openers and #3s, nobody else does ( Tendy and Lara are rare exceptions). He simply needs to come in at a stage where the ball has lost its shine and the pitch is playing truer to form- ie, 30-40 overs onwards or later. Ie, role of a middle order bat. This is the likeliest solution to the Sehwag problem: we start treating a middle order bat by trade as a middle order bat, instead of the abnormally successful middle order bat who's opened all these years and therefore, must keep on succeeding.

[Lord]

So' date=' two innings are an enough indicator? You obviously need to try even if it fails rather than adopting a failure filled method which isn't working for him in the past 2 years.[/quote'] arrey not two innings,I was saying like in two innings.he tried that even in England series but didnt work besides you cite 2002,but his bigger innings like triples have come when he has attacked early on,so hes confused as to what works

[bharat297]

1. I don't care about his fitness issues. They've never been great, granted but then again, plenty of batsmen went around who's fitness was not an issue (or atleast, a liability) in test cricket. he is, by quite some distance, amongst the top 3 slip catchers produced by this nation in 25 years ( behind Dravid and Azhar, only) and therefore, he is my 'fat tubby guy who sits at 1st slip all day' guy, a slightly inferior version of Mark Waugh. So for all his fitness issues, it is irrelevant- the role in the field he is clearly the best suited at ( in the whole team) is the role that requires you to stand around and do nothing- 1st slip. 2. Temperament, as i said, is a murky issue. One does not survive so long and so successfully in Test cricket, doing a job they wern't specialized to do, by lacking temperament. What you are, along with many, are mistaking, is confusing the 'KISS principle' ( to those that dont know- Keep It Simple,Stupid) with ineptness. Yes, he's been protracted about his shortcommings. Given that solving his shortcommings = changing a fundamental aspect of his batting, there arnt very many around who's gonna make fundamental changes to their craft due to a few lean years. The issue is clearly that of role- his eyesight & reflexes, along with 90% of batsmen otu there, has lost a step due to his age ( 34). As such, this is the age ( mid 30s onwards) where only specialist openers with solid techniques thrive ( the rare exception of Matty Hayden springs to mind). Asking 'Why Sehwag is failing' is like asking 'why did Laxman fail to open the innings ? Why is it a bad idea to ask tendy to open in Test cricket ? why did Lara & Viv drop themselves down the order from #3 to #4/5 ?'. It is bound to happen to Sehwag, simply because he does not come with the opener's technique and an opener's impeccable perception of the offstump. Its not a knock on Sehwag- outside of career openers and #3s, nobody else does ( Tendy and Lara are rare exceptions). He simply needs to come in at a stage where the ball has lost its shine and the pitch is playing truer to form- ie, 30-40 overs onwards or later. Ie, role of a middle order bat. This is the likeliest solution to the Sehwag problem: we start treating a middle order bat by trade as a middle order bat, instead of the abnormally successful middle order bat who's opened all these years and therefore, must keep on succeeding.

He can't face the moving ball! The issue is not of his role anymore. The simple fact is he unfortunately does not tick any of the following: * Footwork * Patience / temperament * Technique * Eyesight * Fitness Now you mention people like Lara, Richards, VVS ... Btw, None of whom had opened the batting for 12-years in international cricket so this whole "natural middle order" argument doesn't make much sense if he's opened for the majority of his career. ... Anyway all those guys had at least one of the above. Can you name me one batsman that had none of these in his mid 30s and went on to prosper in his late 30s? Sehwag has none! So the idea of putting him in the middle-order to shield him from the new ball is a HUGE risk for a guy that has been failing consistently to play the moving ball for 2 years. What happens if we lose a couple of wickets early and he has to face the new ball. We are already hiding him in the field by putting him at first slip, now we want to hide him in the batting line up too. Oh and you may think he's doing an excellent job at 1st slip but 3 drop catches last Test and others in the previous series in England would suggest otherwise.

[India-KXIP fan]

Sehwag should forget about correcting technique or starting cautiously like he recently has. He should go in with arrogant I am the best attitude and smash those bowlers out of the park like he always has :agree:

[Muloghonto]

He can't face the moving ball!

I got news for you: most middle order bats can't face the moving ball opening the innings, which is why 20/2 so quickly evolves to 50/4 overseas. If you think Sehwag can't cope with the moving ball anymore first up, then its guilty as charged but then again, neither can Sachin, Lara, Steve Waugh, etc. when comming in the first 5-10 overs.

The issue is not of his role anymore. The simple fact is he unfortunately does not tick all of the following: * Footwork * Patience / temperament * Technique * Eyesight * Fitness

They arnt a problem when he is scoring runs, they arnt a problem when he's scored 8000+ runs, they arnt a problem now. This argument lost its merit after the first two-three years of his success.

Now you mention people like Lara, Richards, VVS ... Btw, None of whom had opened the batting for 12-years in international cricket so this whole "natural middle order" argument doesn't make much sense if he's opened for the majority of his career. ... Anyway all those guys had at least one of the above.

1. Sehwag didn't start to open till 2002. That is, when he was 24 years old. Sehwag started playing cricket before he was 10, coached from around the same age. That equates to 14+ years of not being an opener, not trained for opening and then thrust into it in middle of his career. 2. if you think Viv had significantly better technique, eyesight or feet movement than Sehwag, then you clearly never seen Viv. he was fitter and came with more patience,yes but otherwise, Viv wasnt much different a player than Sehwag.

Sehwag has none! So the idea of putting him in the middle-order to shield him from the new ball is a HUGE risk for a guy that has been failing consistently to play the moving ball for 2 years.

The idea of putting a guy who is struggling in the middle order, so he doesnt have to face the new ball with a shine on it, is a tried and tested one- even Gavaskar tried it when he was failing, Saffies did the same to Kirstien. It is also a nobrainer, when you are talking about a middle order bat by trade. Middle order bat = comming in when the ball is older = more runs. Pretty much always true unless you happen to face the Pakis in the 80s/90s.

What happens if we lose a couple of wickets early and he has to face the new ball.

Same thing that happens when Tendy walks in at 10/2. Fails 3 out of 4 times, succeeds once or so. That is the norm for middle order bats exposed too early.

We are already hiding him in the field by putting him at first slip, now we want to hide him in the batting line up too. Oh and you may think he's doing an excellent job at 1st slip but 3 drop catches last Test and others in the previous series in England would suggest otherwise.

People who don't have much memory shouldn't criticize. Sehwag has dropped three ? Did you count how many Mark Waugh dropped during the epic series vs WI in 99 ? Or how many did Dravid drop in Australia ? As i noted in an earlier thread, if your standard for 1st slip = never drops a chance, then in the last 30 years, only one guy qualifies: Mark Taylor. As such, the 'hiding him in the field' is a stupid idea- he is clearly the best slip fielder India has at the moment, one of our alltime great slippers and as such, if we are 'hiding him in the field' by asking him to do the job he's best at, then we are also 'hiding Jaddu' in the field by not making him into a fwd short leg/slipper. As for 'hiding him', i consider it, giving him his due- he is a middle order bat, his failures opening the innings in Test cricket should be completely irrelevant to him batting in the middle order. The same applied for Laxman, why can't it apply for Sehwag ?

[Crookbond]

SachinLara - You can't use the end to justify the means. You can't selectively compare Sehwag in departments to other players. Your point of him dropping down the order is well take but it will take a lion hearted man to be so sure of the out come. Sehwag in his current state needs a second wind AND a session with Rudi Webster/Paddy Upton.

[Muloghonto]

SachinLara - You can't use the end to justify the means.

I beg to differ. The very concept of competetive sport, is that the end ( within regulations) justifies the means, period.

You can't selectively compare Sehwag in departments to other players.

I fail to see the 'selective comparison'.

Your point of him dropping down the order is well take but it will take a lion hearted man to be so sure of the out come. Sehwag in his current state needs a second wind AND a session with Rudi Webster/Paddy Upton.

I don't proclaim to be a prophet- simply going by common sense and odds. If a middle order bat fails because we asked him to open, its assinine to drop him, instead of being slotted back in the middle. That the middle order bat had succeeded in the past in opening, (an extraordinary achievement) then normalized with the pack ( ie, middle order bat = opening = fail), shouldn't overtake the consideration that he is a middle order bat in the first place. Of the 25 years he's played cricket, he's been a middle order bat for 15 of those years exclusively and for the rest 10, he's a middle order bat in the few first class appearance opportunities he has. To drop him, before putting him back in the middle order and affording him the opportunities that Tendy,Ganguly,Laxman,Azhar, et. al. were granted by the very nature of their specialization ( middle order bat): to bat when the ball has lost its shine, is as stupid an idea as it gets.

[Crookbond]

I never suggested him to be dropped. I agree with you that he should be dropped down to the middle order and be given a chance. However, past data making future predictions doesn't work in sports as it is not linear. Let me take you up upon Sehwag's fitness point. Fitness just doesn't affect the fielding, it can affect the main aspect of Sehwag's game - batting. Being more fit helps in being more alert and also help hand-eye coordination in trying weather conditions. So, while I agree that Sehwag should drop down the order my confidence on that move being successful is low because Sehwag isn't fit enough which is an important trait for his batting.

[bharat297]

I got news for you: most middle order bats can't face the moving ball opening the innings, which is why 20/2 so quickly evolves to 50/4 overseas. If you think Sehwag can't cope with the moving ball anymore first up, then its guilty as charged but then again, neither can Sachin, Lara, Steve Waugh, etc. when comming in the first 5-10 overs. They arnt a problem when he is scoring runs, they arnt a problem when he's scored 8000+ runs, they arnt a problem now. This argument lost its merit after the first two-three years of his success. 1. Sehwag didn't start to open till 2002. That is, when he was 24 years old. Sehwag started playing cricket before he was 10, coached from around the same age. That equates to 14+ years of not being an opener, not trained for opening and then thrust into it in middle of his career. 2. if you think Viv had significantly better technique, eyesight or feet movement than Sehwag, then you clearly never seen Viv. he was fitter and came with more patience,yes but otherwise, Viv wasnt much different a player than Sehwag. The idea of putting a guy who is struggling in the middle order, so he doesnt have to face the new ball with a shine on it, is a tried and tested one- even Gavaskar tried it when he was failing, Saffies did the same to Kirstien. It is also a nobrainer, when you are talking about a middle order bat by trade. Middle order bat = comming in when the ball is older = more runs. Pretty much always true unless you happen to face the Pakis in the 80s/90s. Same thing that happens when Tendy walks in at 10/2. Fails 3 out of 4 times, succeeds once or so. That is the norm for middle order bats exposed too early. People who don't have much memory shouldn't criticize. Sehwag has dropped three ? Did you count how many Mark Waugh dropped during the epic series vs WI in 99 ? Or how many did Dravid drop in Australia ? As i noted in an earlier thread, if your standard for 1st slip = never drops a chance, then in the last 30 years, only one guy qualifies: Mark Taylor. As such, the 'hiding him in the field' is a stupid idea- he is clearly the best slip fielder India has at the moment, one of our alltime great slippers and as such, if we are 'hiding him in the field' by asking him to do the job he's best at, then we are also 'hiding Jaddu' in the field by not making him into a fwd short leg/slipper. As for 'hiding him', i consider it, giving him his due- he is a middle order bat, his failures opening the innings in Test cricket should be completely irrelevant to him batting in the middle order. The same applied for Laxman, why can't it apply for Sehwag ?

Ok breaking down your argument point by point: * Sehwag's problem is the moving ball. Not specifically the new ball. The lack of footwork combined & technique with diminishing eyesight sets him up as a big candidate for caught behind against the outswinger or bowled/lbw against the inswinger. Just think about it for a second ... Feet planted still ... No technique ... And diminishing eyesight ... How exactly is he going to score runs against Dale Steyn? * The second point about his weaknesses not being a problem when he scored 8000+ runs. My precise point was back then he had superior eyesight and hand-eye coordination which got him through and allowed him to excel. Now that that is gone, unlike Lara or Tendulkar or Ponting or Gavaskar or Richards, he doesn't have anything else to fall back on. * His career when he was 10-20 hardly counts. Needless to say international cricket is a very different game to local club cricket. Mitchell Starc and James Pattinson used to bat No.3 for their club teams. Are you telling me they are natural top order batsmen? * You said Viv had more patience and was fitter ... Exactly! Viv had at least something to fall back on when his eyesight diminished. Again, you pretended to disagree with my point but said the same thing. * Your comment on Middle order = Facing the older ball = more runs is not necessarily true and there are a number of examples to prove that, most recently Shane Watson who performed much better as an opener than in any other position but regardless re: your examples of Gavaskar and Kirsten ... Again they had technique and temperament to fall back on. * Regarding short memories. LOL you bring up Dravid in Australia as an example ... Well that was his last series in Test cricket. Ultimately ... I have to ask you ... What does Sehwag have right now that makes you think he will have a chance at succeeding against the likes of Dale Steyn and Vernon Philander? He plants his feet still and wildly swings at every second ball ... No patience/temperament ... No technique ... No fitness. What does he have right now? Again, I have to ask you ... Name me one player in their mid 30s who had poor footwork AND poor technique AND poor patience/temperament AND poor fitness AND diminishing eyesight and went on to prosper in their late 30s. I agree you can have some of those and still survive but to have all of those and expect him to prosper against Steyn and Philander is silly unless you can explain what he is going to survive off?

[BeautifulGame]

I got news for you: most middle order bats can't face the moving ball opening the innings, which is why 20/2 so quickly evolves to 50/4 overseas. If you think Sehwag can't cope with the moving ball anymore first up, then its guilty as charged but then again, neither can Sachin, Lara, Steve Waugh, etc. when comming in the first 5-10 overs. They arnt a problem when he is scoring runs, they arnt a problem when he's scored 8000+ runs, they arnt a problem now. This argument lost its merit after the first two-three years of his success. 1. Sehwag didn't start to open till 2002. That is, when he was 24 years old. Sehwag started playing cricket before he was 10, coached from around the same age. That equates to 14+ years of not being an opener, not trained for opening and then thrust into it in middle of his career. 2. if you think Viv had significantly better technique, eyesight or feet movement than Sehwag, then you clearly never seen Viv. he was fitter and came with more patience,yes but otherwise, Viv wasnt much different a player than Sehwag. The idea of putting a guy who is struggling in the middle order, so he doesnt have to face the new ball with a shine on it, is a tried and tested one- even Gavaskar tried it when he was failing, Saffies did the same to Kirstien. It is also a nobrainer, when you are talking about a middle order bat by trade. Middle order bat = comming in when the ball is older = more runs. Pretty much always true unless you happen to face the Pakis in the 80s/90s. Same thing that happens when Tendy walks in at 10/2. Fails 3 out of 4 times, succeeds once or so. That is the norm for middle order bats exposed too early. People who don't have much memory shouldn't criticize. Sehwag has dropped three ? Did you count how many Mark Waugh dropped during the epic series vs WI in 99 ? Or how many did Dravid drop in Australia ? As i noted in an earlier thread, if your standard for 1st slip = never drops a chance, then in the last 30 years, only one guy qualifies: Mark Taylor. As such, the 'hiding him in the field' is a stupid idea- he is clearly the best slip fielder India has at the moment, one of our alltime great slippers and as such, if we are 'hiding him in the field' by asking him to do the job he's best at, then we are also 'hiding Jaddu' in the field by not making him into a fwd short leg/slipper. As for 'hiding him', i consider it, giving him his due- he is a middle order bat, his failures opening the innings in Test cricket should be completely irrelevant to him batting in the middle order. The same applied for Laxman, why can't it apply for Sehwag ?

Did u miss the 2006. Series in SAwhen Sehwag batted in middle order and was a walking wicket?

[bharat297]

Did u miss the 2006. Series in SAwhen Sehwag batted in middle order and was a walking wicket?

Lol yeah ... In fact, in that series Chappell was criticised for moving Sehwag away from his "natural" position of opener.

[Crookbond]

Did u miss the 2006. Series in SAwhen Sehwag batted in middle order and was a walking wicket?

Lol yeah ... In fact' date=' in that series Chappell was criticised for moving Sehwag away from his "natural" position of opener.[/quote'] Since, we are talking about Test matches here there was just one innings where Sehwag played in the middle order - 1st innings 3rd Test Match, Cape Town. Apart from that he was asked to play in the middle order in the 2nd innings of the 2nd Test match in NZ 2002. He took 14 runs from an over from Shane Bond and wanting for more was out in the same over. Since, Sehwag's attitude is taken up here I finally dug out the article where Sehwag was stripped of vice captaincy due to disciplinary and fitness issues. The case against Sehwag is of indiscipline, his defence is a deep-rooted sense of hurt and a bruised ego. Falling between the two are missed runs for the player and missed opportunities for his team. http://www.espncricinfo.com/srilanka/content/current/story/623329.html

[bharat297]

Since, we are talking about Test matches here there was just one innings where Sehwag played in the middle order - 1st innings 3rd Test Match, Cape Town. Apart from that he was asked to play in the middle order in the 2nd innings of the 2nd Test match in NZ 2002. He took 14 runs from an over from Shane Bond and wanting for more was out in the same over. Since, Sehwag's attitude is taken up here I finally dug out the article where Sehwag was stripped of vice captaincy due to disciplinary and fitness issues. The case against Sehwag is of indiscipline, his defence is a deep-rooted sense of hurt and a bruised ego. Falling between the two are missed runs for the player and missed opportunities for his team. http://www.espncricinfo.com/srilanka/content/current/story/623329.html

Yep true it was only one match in that tour but there was criticism there of Chappell who played Karthik as opener in the 1st innings of the 3rd test and Sehwag in the middle order. Then the second innings Sehwag was moved up to opener. I am by no means an anti-Sehwag person. In fact I think Sehwag is a fantastic cricketer with a God-given ability of hand-eye coordination and timing. However I think we have to look at the mode of dismissals, not just for 1 or 2 series but consistently for the past 2 years now ... His eyesight is diminishing and he doesn't have anything else to fall back on and if this article is to be believed (and I don't always believe what comes out of these articles), he doesn't even have the attitude to turn it around either. This is not a Dravid or Tendulkar we're talking about. Dravid and Tendulkar even in their mid-to-late 30s were shining examples of professionalism and work-ethic, which enabled them to fight through form slumps and slowing reaction time. I sincerely hope I am wrong about Sehwag but I have seen nothing in the past 2 years to suggest that I might be.

[Junyfan]

sehwag is a great player

[Crookbond]

Yep true it was only one match in that tour but there was criticism there of Chappell who played Karthik as opener in the 1st innings of the 3rd test and Sehwag in the middle order. Then the second innings Sehwag was moved up to opener. I am by no means an anti-Sehwag person. In fact I think Sehwag is a fantastic cricketer with a God-given ability of hand-eye coordination and timing. However I think we have to look at the mode of dismissals, not just for 1 or 2 series but consistently for the past 2 years now ... His eyesight is diminishing and he doesn't have anything else to fall back on and if this article is to be believed (and I don't always believe what comes out of these articles), he doesn't even have the attitude to turn it around either. This is not a Dravid or Tendulkar we're talking about. Dravid and Tendulkar even in their mid-to-late 30s were shining examples of professionalism and work-ethic, which enabled them to fight through form slumps and slowing reaction time. I sincerely hope I am wrong about Sehwag but I have seen nothing in the past 2 years to suggest that I might be.

Same here - to prove the point that it is just not about the moving ball which is making struggle Sehwag, how many dismissals in the SC in the last 2 years were due to the moving ball?

[Crookbond]

Has Sehwag run out of time?

The Sehwag riddle arises from his form, or the lack of it. Starting from the tour of Australia, Sehwag has scored one century and two fifties in his last 21 innings. After the century against England in Ahmedabad, his scores read: 25, 30, 9, 23, 49, 0, 19, 2, 6. In the last five years, his best innings outside the sub-continent has been 67 in Melbourne in December 2011. Outside conditions of comfort, he averages 22.73.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/india-v-australia-2013/content/current/story/623495.html

[vamos_rafa]

The posts here are way too long for me to be reading. But, one thing is for sure. time has run our for him to be opening the innings. He just can't cope with the moving ball anymore(infact has not been able to for a long time now). It would be a good enough idea to play him in the middle order. But,India now opting for 4 bowlers + 1 AR, which is a good strategy IMO, where does it leave a space for him?

[vijay50]

Sehwag deserves a chance in the middle order.But moving to middle order may not solve the problem for Sehwag, since he is getting out to all kind of spinners off late, than pacers.There was a detailed analysis about Sehwag in cricinfo few months back about his lack of form and mode of dismissal. Best solution would be to play Sehwag in middle order in next two tests in India and first two tests in SA. If Sehwag still fails, then probably dropping Sehwag is the way forward.