BeautifulGame Posted August 12, 2012 Posted August 12, 2012 It wasn't as if he was carted for 30 runs off his 2, was it? Eventually Dhoni still had to go to Zaheer for the 1st wkt when he saw the openers were getting in. Akmal's wkt was important for us as he was the batsman who could score at a brisk rate. Hafeez, Younus Khan etc. could be controlled but if Akmal had gotten in India would have struggled. How exactly bowling just one decent over in India's first 20 overs equate to "He never let Pak openers away". However way u want to twist it fact is Zaheer was well below average in that match.And was certainly the poorer of all our 5 bowlers. One of the reasons Pakis were 70/1 instead of 90/0 was due to Zaheer. He removed the dangerous Akmal who was the dangerman at the top. With batsmen like Hafeez, Younus Khan, Misbah and Asad Shafiq etc. the run-rate would have increased as none of them are natural stroke-makers. Akmal was the one wkt India needed early to ensure Pakis don't get away and Zak took that wkt. Nope.The main reason for that was Nehra's controlled spell after replacing Zaheer.Even then 70/1 is an excellent start considering they were just chasing 260.It was Munaf Yuvi and Bhajji who choked the innings midway and took vital wkts.And Hafeez Younis Umar Akmal Azad Shafiq all are capable of scoring 5 an over. We won against Pak mainly because we bowled exceptionally well in middle overs and choked them.Zak's contribution in that period was minimal (not nothing). He did bowl a great opening spell against Srl and was overall very good against Aus(Still didnt pick any wkts in his opening spell mind u).But also bowled one of the worst spells of the tournament in the final which could have easily lost us the match.
Ultimate_Game Posted August 12, 2012 Posted August 12, 2012 How exactly bowling just one decent over in India's first 20 overs equate to "He never let Pak openers away". However way u want to twist it fact is Zaheer was well below average in that match.And was certainly the poorer of all our 5 bowlers. He may not have been the best bowler in that match but he wasn't that bad either. He was taken for runs by Misbah when the match was already done and dusted and till that point he was fairly decent.
Crookbond Posted August 12, 2012 Posted August 12, 2012 Wasn't Zaheer India's best bowler during the QF and Finals? If Yuvraj Singh or Tendulkar are allowed to slack for one game - what makes a different yardstick for Zaheer? :idunno:
Raghav_12 Posted August 12, 2012 Posted August 12, 2012 One of the reasons Pakis were 70/1 instead of 90/0 was due to Zaheer. He removed the dangerous Akmal who was the dangerman at the top. With batsmen like Hafeez, Younus Khan, Misbah and Asad Shafiq etc. the run-rate would have increased as none of them are natural stroke-makers. Akmal was the one wkt India needed early to ensure Pakis don't get away and Zak took that wkt. Maybe you need to take a look at the Aus game as well as without Zak we would probably be chasing 300 or thereabouts and out in the Q/F itself. Oh by the way the tie against England in the league match was possible due to Zak when England had the match wrapped up. It was a pity that likes of Chawla and Munaf couldn't even manage to control England's bowlers coz Zak had teh match won for India from a losing position. I am all for credit to Zaheer. But why to Dhoni for that? My order would probably be Yuvraj Zaheer Gambhir = Sachin Raina then Rest of the team and then Chawla and SreeSanth
SLICKR392 Posted August 12, 2012 Posted August 12, 2012 My top 5 would go Zak Yuvi Sachin Raina Gambhir (For his knocks in QF and Finals)
Ultimate_Game Posted August 12, 2012 Posted August 12, 2012 I am all for credit to Zaheer. But why to Dhoni for that? My order would probably be Yuvraj Zaheer Gambhir = Sachin Raina then Rest of the team and then Chawla and SreeSanth Dhoni for two main reasons... 1. He played one of the best innings in the final. When he came in the score was 115/3 while chasing 274 and another wkt at the time would have been curtains for India and it would have been just like WC 2003 once again, i.e. so near and yet so far. 2. Dhoni marshalled his bowling resources wonderfully. He had just one attacking option in Zak and he used him perfectly, making optimal use of his 10 overs. And the way he used his part-timers and other bowlers was commendable. This was India's weakest bowling lineup in a World Cup - I don't know much about 75 & 79 World Cups but since 83 this was the wekest bowling we ever had. To win the tourney with such a bowling lineup does get the captain some credit. Dhoni never let any team get away in the field and made good bowling changes most of the time. For the above 2 reasons Dhoni would be in my top 5 for Wc 2011.
BeautifulGame Posted August 12, 2012 Posted August 12, 2012 Wasn't Zaheer India's best bowler during the QF and Finals? If Yuvraj Singh or Tendulkar are allowed to slack for one game - what makes a different yardstick for Zaheer? :idunno: QF? yes definitely. But in final Yuvi was our best bowler and Munaf was just as good as Zaheer. Again i am not critizing Zaheer's consistency or performance in the world cup but some go on as if Zaheer alone was the single biggest reason for winning the cup or saying he was our best bowler in all three knock outs which is totally nonsense.
BeautifulGame Posted August 12, 2012 Posted August 12, 2012 Dhoni for two main reasons... 1. He played one of the best innings in the final. When he came in the score was 115/3 while chasing 274 and another wkt at the time would have been curtains for India and it would have been just like WC 2003 once again, i.e. so near and yet so far. 2. Dhoni marshalled his bowling resources wonderfully. He had just one attacking option in Zak and he used him perfectly, making optimal use of his 10 overs. And the way he used his part-timers and other bowlers was commendable. This was India's weakest bowling lineup in a World Cup - I don't know much about 75 & 79 World Cups but since 83 this was the wekest bowling we ever had. To win the tourney with such a bowling lineup does get the captain some credit. Dhoni never let any team get away in the field and made good bowling changes most of the time. For the above 2 reasons Dhoni would be in my top 5 for Wc 2011. This attack was definitely better than 96 and 99 teams imo.
Number Posted August 12, 2012 Posted August 12, 2012 Munaf was just as good as Zaheer. Very harsh on Zak. His opening spell was a great one, bowled in the powerplay first 10 overs. Munaf couldn't take a wicket in that game.
Ultimate_Game Posted August 12, 2012 Posted August 12, 2012 This attack was definitely better than 96 and 99 teams imo. Let's see... 96 - Srinath, Prasad, Kumble, Prabhakar 99 - Srinath, Prasad, Kumble, Agarkar Both these tourneys had Srinath, Prasad & Kumble which would be better than any of the WC 2011 bowlers barring Zak.
BeautifulGame Posted August 12, 2012 Posted August 12, 2012 Very harsh on Zak. His opening spell was a great one' date=' bowled in the powerplay first 10 overs. Munaf couldn't take a wicket in that game.[/quote'] Zaheer was exceptional in the first spell but Munaf was very good too.Remember Munaf was brought on when there was huge pressure on us after Sreesanth was thrashed.But he bowled with real control in that spell and put a check on run scoring.(Ofcousre he was helped by our awesome fielding :hatsoff to Raina and co ) And in the death unlike Zaheer who was awful in the extreme he bowled decently.So IMO he was just as good as Zak considering the situation he bowled even if he didnt took wkts.
Andrew Peter Posted August 12, 2012 Posted August 12, 2012 Yaar , how is Prasad better than Munaf , Nehra in the Odis ?
BeautifulGame Posted August 12, 2012 Posted August 12, 2012 Let's see... 96 - Srinath, Prasad, Kumble, Prabhakar 99 - Srinath, Prasad, Kumble, Agarkar Both these tourneys had Srinath, Prasad & Kumble which would be better than any of the WC 2011 bowlers barring Zak. Harbajan is always as good if not better ODI spinner than Kumble more so when Kumble plays overseas (where the 99 world cup was played). Zaheer is just as good as Srinath.Prasad and Agarkar maybe better than Munaf and Nehra(which i dont think btw) but we had an excellent 5th bowler in Yuvi in this world cup.Whereas in both 96 and 99 both our 5th bowling were frankly rubbish.Also in 96 we mostly played Raju instead of Prabakar IIRC who is certainly not as good as Munaf.
adi B Posted August 12, 2012 Posted August 12, 2012 I am all for credit to Zaheer. But why to Dhoni for that? My order would probably be Yuvraj Zaheer Gambhir = Sachin Raina then Rest of the team and then Chawla and SreeSanth perfect...but msd in 5th spot bcoz of the finals :hatsoff:
Crookbond Posted August 12, 2012 Posted August 12, 2012 QF? yes definitely. But in final Yuvi was our best bowler and Munaf was just as good as Zaheer. Again i am not critizing Zaheer's consistency or performance in the world cup but some go on as if Zaheer alone was the single biggest reason for winning the cup or saying he was our best bowler in all three knock outs which is totally nonsense. If 21 wickets at Average = 21.76, Economy of 4.83 and SR 23.2 doesn't make you one of the best reasons for a WC win, nothing else can. If Tendulkar can be the reason, so can the same principle be stretched to Zaheer. I can argue against Tendulkar the same way you are arguing against Zaheer which will be like "a square root of a tomato".
Crookbond Posted August 12, 2012 Posted August 12, 2012 This attack was definitely better than 96 and 99 teams imo. Subjective and the 96/99 attacks didn't win us a WC . Not sure how this is relevant in the context of ranking the WC 2011 winning team.
Andrew Peter Posted August 12, 2012 Posted August 12, 2012 Our 5th bowling options during 96 wc were Jadeja and Tendulkar with either Raju/Kapoor bowling as a permanent spinner .
Crookbond Posted August 12, 2012 Posted August 12, 2012 Please stop these comparisons with the 96/99 WC teams. It has got nothing to do with the thread or neither will it help ranking. :orderorder:
Ultimate_Game Posted August 12, 2012 Posted August 12, 2012 Yaar ' date=' how is Prasad better than Munaf , Nehra in the Odis ?[/quote'] Watch Prasad's bowling against Pakis in 96 & 99 and you will understand. Prasad was anyday better than Munaf & Nehra. Harbhajan was never as good as Kumble. Even if I concede the point and say at his peak Harbhajan was on par with Kumble in odis, the 2011 version of Harbhajan was way below his peak. In fact Yuvraj outbowled Harbhajan in 2011 WC and even Ashwin looked much better when Ashwin did play in the tourney. Harbhajan of 2011 vintage was nowhere near Kumble.
BeautifulGame Posted August 12, 2012 Posted August 12, 2012 If 21 wickets at Average = 21.76' date=' Economy of 4.83 and SR 23.2 doesn't make you one of the best reasons for a WC win, nothing else can.[/quote'] That makes one of the reasons but certainly not the best reason or every other bowler rubbish particularly when the format was such that the 3 knock out matches are the ones that matter most. As for stats , only for the knock out matches. M overs Runs wkts Ave Econ SR Harbhajan Singh 3 30.0 0 143 3 47.66 4.76 60.0 Yuvraj Singh 3 30.0 1 150 6 25.00 5.00 30.0 Z Khan 3 29.5 3 171 6 28.50 5.73 29.8 MM Patel 3 26.0 1 125 2 62.50 4.80 78.0 R Ashwin 1 10.0 0 52 2 26.00 5.20 30.0 A Nehra 1 10.0 0 33 2 16.50 3.30 30.0 S Sreesanth 1 8.0 0 52 0 - 6.50 - Whatever way u look at him it doesnt make him our stand out bowler than any of our other bowlers.Every one had their ups and down in the knockout stand and he certainly didnt win us the world cup single handedly
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now