Old guy Posted January 20, 2015 Posted January 20, 2015 How many runs Bhuvi and ashwin scored in same series?? :giggle:
Kalia_Test Posted January 20, 2015 Posted January 20, 2015 who were getting wkts against sri lanka' date=' Eng, west indies??[/quote'] Where? In places where our batting fired and there was scoreboard pressure. This is Aus. No comparison.
Old guy Posted January 20, 2015 Posted January 20, 2015 Where? In places where our batting fired and there was scoreboard pressure. This is Aus. No comparison. so you know batting wont fire yet want weaker bowling ?
-Robin- Posted January 20, 2015 Posted January 20, 2015 Where? In places where our batting fired and there was scoreboard pressure. This is Aus. No comparison. They even got wkts bowling first as well lol
Old guy Posted January 20, 2015 Posted January 20, 2015 just look at new zealand tour 5 matches 1 wicket for ashwin
Kalia_Test Posted January 20, 2015 Posted January 20, 2015 Selective stats much ? How many matches has shami played ? Hr is strike bowler in odi and highest wicket taker last year ! In Aus - 2. Same as Bhuvi. Bhuvi's economy is 5.23. SR is 71. Avg is 62. And I don't even want Bhuvi in playing 11. Prefer Shami. I don't know what your point is.
Kalia_Test Posted January 20, 2015 Posted January 20, 2015 They even got wkts bowling first as well lol When opposition knew what Indian batsmen can potentially chase and had to put up a defend able total.
Kalia_Test Posted January 20, 2015 Posted January 20, 2015 so you know batting wont fire yet want weaker bowling ? You are making so many assumptions sabby. I DONT believe we are weakening our bowling. All our bowlers are more or less equally effective/ineffective ( I still said go with 2 proper pace bowlers Shami and Ishant/Umesh in playing 11). When there are no standout steyn/Johnson/Anderson in the squad who can blow opposition away, I would rather go with a Vettori who can hold a bat than an Imran Tahir. Hope you get the point. I give up otherwise and will take English lessons from Warner.
-Robin- Posted January 20, 2015 Posted January 20, 2015 Except Bhuvi, Jaddu and Patel none of our bowlers can not even contain
Old guy Posted January 20, 2015 Posted January 20, 2015 You are making so many assumptions sabby. I DONT believe we are weakening our bowling. All our bowlers are more or less equally effective/ineffective ( I still said go with 2 proper pace bowlers Shami and Ishant/Umesh in playing 11). When there are no standout steyn/Johnson/Anderson in the squad who can blow opposition away, I would rather go with a Vettori who can hold a bat than an Imran Tahir. Hope you get the point. I give up otherwise and will take English lessons from Warner. what assumption man ? shami was only guy getting single wicket in new zealand and south africa and he has best record in last year in world in terms of taking wickets and how can you even compare bhuvi to him ? you think he will maintain 4 rpo if there is no wicket falling at other end ? do you think playing containing bowlers will mean opponent will be contained to 280-2 like scores ? that never happens! and only reason we get hammered at death is because we do not pick wickets at start and in middle and without picking wickets you cannot restrict opponent its not possible .
youngindia Posted January 20, 2015 Posted January 20, 2015 My simple point is that we really don't have those fictional wicket taking economical bowlers. We have bowlers that can be economical given the large grounds and captain's comfort in setting fields.) :hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical: goodbye...time for me to run far far away
Kalia_Test Posted January 20, 2015 Posted January 20, 2015 what assumption man ? shami was only guy getting single wicket in new zealand and south africa and he has best record in last year in world in terms of taking wickets and how can you even compare bhuvi to him ? you think he will maintain 4 rpo if there is no wicket falling at other end ? do you think playing containing bowlers will mean opponent will be contained to 280-2 like scores ? that never happens! and only reason we get hammered at death is because we do not pick wickets at start and in middle and without picking wickets you cannot restrict opponent its not possible . Assumption is that I wanted weaker bowling. :banghead: I always wanted Shami in team and not Bhuvi. Check my posts in different threads. Stats and other stuff in this thread are responses to specific queries and to put forth my point that for more or less equal prowess with bowling, I would prefer someone that can hold a bat. :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: OK...thinking of sleeping now. Good night :two_thumbs_up:
Marut Posted January 20, 2015 Posted January 20, 2015 In Tests, getting wickets will restrict scores ( as there are unlimited overs practically ) In ODIs, restricting runs is also ONE OF THE WAYS to get wickets and wickets are in general secondary ( primary objective is to restrict runs ). Further complexity is added when you need to look at team balance and who your best bowlers are ( pacers or spinners ). I will personally go for 2 genuine wicket taking pace bowlers ( Shami and Umesh/Ishant ) + Binny + Jadeja + Ashwin. Add Rohit and Raina and we can get through 50 overs. Very important factor to consider is that Dhoni is comfortable setting fields to spinners and big grounds will help too. Getting wickets is the only reliable way to restrict scores. Have you seen any team ending up with scores like 195/1 or 224/2 or even 240/3 recently? If you don't get wickets, be ready for the leather hunt.
Kalia_Test Posted January 20, 2015 Posted January 20, 2015 Getting wickets is the only reliable way to restrict scores. Have you seen any team ending up with scores like 195/1 or 224/2 or even 240/3 recently? If you don't get wickets' date=' be ready for the leather hunt.[/quote'] Why can't we see 80/2 in 20 overs due to tight bowling becoming 140/5 in 30 overs because wickets fell due to tight bowling earlier and batsmen getting out due to rash shots created due to pressure? No one is saying wickets are not important. The point is - bowlers have inswing/outswing/slower ball as part of armory. Bowling economically is also part of the armory as it will force the batsman outside his comfort zone and make him do something stupid. Bowling tightly will fetch wickets as we have seen repeatedly so it is not either or scenario. It is about one leading to another.
putrevus Posted January 20, 2015 Posted January 20, 2015 Why can't we see 80/2 in 20 overs due to tight bowling becoming 140/5 in 30 overs because wickets fell due to tight bowling earlier and batsmen getting out due to rash shots created due to pressure? No one is saying wickets are not important. The point is - bowlers have inswing/outswing/slower ball as part of armory. Bowling economically is also part of the armory as it will force the batsman outside his comfort zone and make him do something stupid. Bowling tightly will fetch wickets as we have seen repeatedly so it is not either or scenario. It is about one leading to another. Question is who will bowl tight, if they had that capacity we would have won at least one Test.
Number Posted January 20, 2015 Posted January 20, 2015 Akram leading a poll over Sunny by 12-2 on an Indian forum ?? :omg: Where is the patriotism ??
adi B Posted January 20, 2015 Posted January 20, 2015 Agree with akram but u need a swing bowler who can keep it tight as well.2 genuine pacers,1swing bowler,maybe 2 and a lone spinner
The Outsider Posted January 20, 2015 Posted January 20, 2015 To each his own but in ODIs' date=' I prefer an opposition batting first at 260/4 rather than 301/9[/quote'] Quite obviously, 260/4 but how are you going to restrict a good team at 150/2 in 30 overs to that score without taking wickets? On the other hand a 180/5 can be restricted to 280-290 with a couple of more wickets. With the new rules and lack of a wicket taking spinner, the kind of positions India puts the opposition in at the 30-35 overs mark, even McGrath will find it difficult to contain. Zaheer with his reverse swing used to take 1-2 wickets in the middle overs to set the opposition back. I haven't watched much cricket recently to know if we have someone capable of taking wickets outside of slog overs due to too many risks by batsmen, but if we do he should be the first name on the sheet.
The Outsider Posted January 20, 2015 Posted January 20, 2015 Why can't we see 80/2 in 20 overs due to tight bowling becoming 140/5 in 30 overs because wickets fell due to tight bowling earlier and batsmen getting out due to rash shots created due to pressure? . It's possible and happens on pitches either supporting spin or reverse swing. We don't have a Warne to pick up wickets on good ODI tracks and reverse swing has been negated by 2 new balls. Teams will simply play risk free cricket scoring at 5-6 RPO with zero pressure knowing that the big hitters towards the end can target anyone over a short enough window of 15 overs with 7-8 wickets in hand.
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