Where have all the all-rounders gone?

[Number]

^ then play 4 pacers and operate with Yuvi as 5th bowler. Though a lot depends on his fitness.

[jj_28]

Ashwin Irfan Yuvraj Yusuf theirs no shortage of genuine all rounders but they need to be managed better

[Cricket Tragic]

Ashwin Irfan Yuvraj Yusuf theirs no shortage of genuine all rounders but they need to be managed better

:giggle:

[Ultimate_Game]

^ then play 4 pacers and operate with Yuvi as 5th bowler. Though a lot depends on his fitness.

I would play 4 pacers but I want one of them to be Irfan to lend solidity to the batting order as you don't want nos. 7-10 to be dismissed for a duck, and that's why Irfan adds so much to the team especially in a place like Aus.

[Cricket Tragic]

Number 7 is too high for Pathan anyway.

[Ultimate_Game]

Number 7 is too high for Pathan anyway.

If we don't have pathan, it would be one of the Koomars at no. 7 :(( You decide which one is a better option.

[vvvslaxman]

Irfan comes the closest to fit the description of an all rounder. He has opened the bowling for India. He has played more than useful hand with his bat. He is not a horrible fielder too if not in the same class as Kapil dev. A batsman who can bowl occasionally and vice versa are not all rounders.

[Cricket Tragic]

If we don't have pathan' date=' it would be one of the Koomars at no. 7 :(( You decide which one is a better option.[/quote'] Why not go back to our 7 batsmen strategy? Having an extra bowler for the sake of it is useless.

[vvvslaxman]

Why not go back to our 7 batsmen strategy? Having an extra bowler for the sake of it is useless.

7 batsmen strategy worked when the batsmen were playing like batsmen. Nowadays our batsmen are equally unreliable especially abroad.

[Ultimate_Game]

Why not go back to our 7 batsmen strategy? Having an extra bowler for the sake of it is useless.

7 batsmen approach works on flat/turning tracks where our part-time spinners like Raina/Sehwag/Rohit/Yuvraj etc. can bowl 10 overs. In Aus where the average scores should be lower (maybe around 240-270 range) and the pitches generally help pacers, 10 overs from our spin part-timers will be disastrous. They can lose us the game in those 10 overs and that's why we need someone like Irfan. Unfortunately he's the best we have for Aus pitches and is a handy bat at no. 7 - at least much better than Jadeja and maybe Yusuf as well.

[Cricket Tragic]

7 batsmen approach works on flat/turning tracks where our part-time spinners like Raina/Sehwag/Rohit/Yuvraj etc. can bowl 10 overs. In Aus where the average scores should be lower (maybe around 240-270 range) and the pitches generally help pacers' date=' 10 overs from our spin part-timers will be disastrous. They can lose us the game in those 10 overs and that's why we need someone like Irfan. Unfortunately he's the best we have for Aus pitches and is a handy bat at no. 7 - at least much better than Jadeja and maybe Yusuf as well.[/quote'] How many more runs will our part-timer go for compared to our weakest seamer? In fact, in conditions where batting is tougher, you need more batsmen. In flat conditions, you need more bowlers because the number 7 batsman will rarely get a hit.

[Ultimate_Game]

How many more runs will our part-timer go for compared to our weakest seamer? In fact, in conditions where batting is tougher, you need more batsmen. In flat conditions, you need more bowlers because the number 7 batsman will rarely get a hit.

In tough conditions which help pacers Irfan would be more than handy with the ball and on such tracks I would expect him to have figures like 2/40 or thereabouts whereas spin part-timers would go for 0/65 (or 1/65) or thereabouts. Plus batting-wise Pathan wouldn't be that bad compared to the no. 7 batsman as he has shown over the years.

[MCcricket]

In tough conditions which help pacers Irfan would be more than handy with the ball and on such tracks I would expect him to have figures like 2/40 or thereabouts whereas spin part-timers would go for 0/65 (or 1/65) or thereabouts. Plus batting-wise Pathan wouldn't be that bad compared to the no. 7 batsman as he has shown over the years.

It is preposterous and defies cricketing logic that Irfan is not a permanent fixture in all three formats, a team man, fighter and disciplined cricketer, he can average 30 plus in batting and also win matches with the ball, his rhythm and pace is back, Dhoni is one main cause of his being out of the team, Mathews, Kulesekara, MCkay are not half as good or versatile as him and they are the stars for SL, AUSTRALIA.I am just waiting for Cheeka to be gone and Dhoni to be fired from captain ship:((.

[Manny_Pacquiao]

In tough conditions which help pacers Irfan would be more than handy with the ball and on such tracks I would expect him to have figures like 2/40 or thereabouts whereas spin part-timers would go for 0/65 (or 1/65) or thereabouts. Plus batting-wise Pathan wouldn't be that bad compared to the no. 7 batsman as he has shown over the years.

this wasnt the case recently in australia, where his bowling was harmless. your argument would make sense if his bowling was going alright, but it isnt, he still doesn't swing it enough to be effective. his batting is excellent though, he played some great cameos in australia and looked very confident. but there is no way you could pick him as a 3rd seamer, his bowling wasn't a whole lot better than what they got from jadeja or the other scrubs. that said, dropping him was still a stupid decision considering that he had a good domestic season, recently took a 4wicket haul against SL: the team we will play next whom he usually does well against. but what else can you expect with the rat-faced tamil being chief of selectors...he probably picks teams on astrological signs or something. the most successful indian ODI sides always played 7 batsmen. its all about maximizing your strength. looking for bits and pieces allrounders is a waste of time, we dont have any ones that are worth a ****. jadeja, yusuf, and other guys like saxena will never be good enough to hold down a place in the side. i'd back a 7 man indian batting lineup to chase anything, this combination WORKS.

[Cricket Tragic]

Agree with most of what Manny has posted. I don't think Pathan can consistently get 2/40. I really don't think his bowling is good enough.

[vvvslaxman]

How many more runs will our part-timer go for compared to our weakest seamer? In fact, in conditions where batting is tougher, you need more batsmen. In flat conditions, you need more bowlers because the number 7 batsman will rarely get a hit.

http://cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/98/98945.html Irfan pathan is a better batsman than some of our "future stars"

[Ultimate_Game]

this wasnt the case recently in australia, where his bowling was harmless. your argument would make sense if his bowling was going alright, but it isnt, he still doesn't swing it enough to be effective. his batting is excellent though, he played some great cameos in australia and looked very confident. but there is no way you could pick him as a 3rd seamer, his bowling wasn't a whole lot better than what they got from jadeja or the other scrubs. that said, dropping him was still a stupid decision considering that he had a good domestic season, recently took a 4wicket haul against SL: the team we will play next whom he usually does well against. but what else can you expect with the rat-faced tamil being chief of selectors...he probably picks teams on astrological signs or something. the most successful indian ODI sides always played 7 batsmen. its all about maximizing your strength. looking for bits and pieces allrounders is a waste of time, we dont have any ones that are worth a ****. jadeja, yusuf, and other guys like saxena will never be good enough to hold down a place in the side. i'd back a 7 man indian batting lineup to chase anything, this combination WORKS.

Against teams like Aus, SA and Eng, or even WI, which have a decent pace attack I wouldn't back India to chase any total. It works once in a while and is especially tough in place like Aus. You may get a couple of venues like Adelaide but most of the Aussie pitches would be pace friendly and against decent pace attack India would not be able to chase 300 consistently. The only option we have is to back Irfan and see how we can make the best use of him. On venues like Perth (WACA) or Brisbane & MCG (seaming) he can be more than useful with the ball. Plus in such conditions I would back Irfan to score as many as India's no. 7 bat would score.

[saneindian]

Agree with most of what Manny has posted. I don't think Pathan can consistently get 2/40. I really don't think his bowling is good enough.

None of our frontline bowlers can do it either. Irfan, since his comeback, made decent contributions with the ball, 13 wickets@30 in 8 matches. For someone playing as our 3rd seamer, thats more than a decent result. Despite being a much better batsman than Jadeja, was never given a chance to bat ahead of him. Not sure what changed between those two series and now that he has been dropped. He made a comeback after 2-3 years, performs adequately and despite that is dropped. This when the talk in Aus was to build the team for next WC. So the question to be asked is, now suddenly have the selectors and the team management stopped planning for the 2015 WC (we have not picked any allrounders)? To me it looks very clear. MSD wanted Jadeja in the team, selectors did not want him hence MSD said no to Pathan as well and as a compromise, both Jadeja and Irfan have been dropped. On the basis of his performance, Pathan deserved a longer run in the side.

[Cricket Tragic]

http://cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/98/98945.html Irfan pathan is a better batsman than some of our "future stars"

Which of our top 7 is Pathan better than?