Team playing with lonely spinner in World cup 2015

[adi B]

Playing Two spinners is the last thing the captain should have in his mind .thats the worst kind of freebies in the middle overs to the opposition in aus and nzl pitches.

[Marut]

Playing Two spinners is the last thing the captain should have in his mind .thats the worst kind of freebies in the middle overs to the opposition in aus and nzl pitches.

If we had four pacers, then definitely yes.

[rkt.india]

Going for all or nothing strategy will make us lose 99 out of 100 times .

We are already losing 100/100, 99/100 is still better. We have lost all overseas ODIs in NZ and Aus by playing 2 spinners. We played 2 spinners on a Perth pitch and lost the game due to that.

[rkt.india]

For ODIs' date=' we need to go with two spinners because our pace attack looks docile compared to other teams. If we include pacers just for the sake of it, they will bleed runs and our pacers do not compensate with wickets either. Our spinners are usually more economical than the third pacer in the team. If our top two pacers are so bad, the third pacer and fourth pacers are going to be worse. We can afford to go with two spinners because all our spinners can contribute with the bat as well. Our fourth pacer will neither take wickets nor check the flow of runs nor buy any runs with the bat.[/quote'] and what we have done by playing 2 spinners. We have lost all matches in NZ and Aus playing 2 spinners. Even at Perth, lost because we played 2 spinners.

[MCGGG]

Australia have one specialist spinner (Doherty) and Maxwell, I reckon 1 specialist spinner is needed.

[Marut]

and what we have done by playing 2 spinners. We have lost all matches in NZ and Aus playing 2 spinners. Even at Perth' date=' lost because we played 2 spinners.[/quote'] We will win only if the two main pacers do well, and are ably supported by other bowlers. The two spinners will never win a match on their own in these conditions. But our fourth pacer is likely to be worse, perhaps going for 1/70 or so. I expect the two spinners to go for something like 1/50 and 1/60 on good batting pitches, and something like 2/45 and 1/50 in good bowling conditions. But I expect our fourth pacer to go for 1/70 or 0/80 in good batting conditions and 2/60 in good bowling conditions. Spinners will be better and save 20 runs. And our spinners are better batsmen as well, and we can expect additional 20 runs. Thus 2 spinner combo will fetch about 40 runs more than 1 spinner + 1 pacer combo for the 4th and 5th bowlers. This difference may or may not win the match for India depending on how the main bowlers do, and how the batsmen and fielders do.

[rkt.india]

We will win only if the two main pacers do well, and are ably supported by other bowlers. The two spinners will never win a match on their own in these conditions. But our fourth pacer is likely to be worse, perhaps going for 1/70 or so. I expect the two spinners to go for something like 1/50 and 1/60 on good batting pitches, and something like 2/45 and 1/50 in good bowling conditions. But I expect our fourth pacer to go for 1/70 or 0/80 in good batting conditions and 2/60 in good bowling conditions. Spinners will be better and save 20 runs. And our spinners are better batsmen as well, and we can expect additional 20 runs. Thus 2 spinner combo will fetch about 40 runs more than 1 spinner + 1 pacer combo for the 4th and 5th bowlers. This difference may or may not win the match for India depending on how the main bowlers do, and how the batsmen and fielders do.

Pacers are the key in Australia and you will have to depend on them to bowl well and win you games and take bit of a gamble. You are going to lose anyway whether spinner goes or 60 or a pacer goes for 80 in both situations, but on a good day, there is more probability of a pacer winning you a game than a spinner.

[Silva]

ashwin and jadeja suck in these conditions. They are probably the main reasons why india haven't won a single game so far in australia, Nz and south africa. http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?class=2;filter=advanced;host=2;host=3;host=5;orderby=bowling_average;spanmax1=04+Feb+2015;spanmin1=04+Feb+2013;spanval1=span;team=6;template=results;type=bowling They can't take wickets or keep the run rate down in these conditions. And as a result the opposing teams have wickets in hand during the slog overs which hurts the numbers of the pace bowlers. Even teams with good death bowling will struggle in slog overs if the batting team has plenty of wickets in hand. Jadeja and ashwin combined average less than 1 wicket per innings in these type of non spin friendly pitches. teams can't afford to go 20 overs and only pick up one wicket, and expect to win matches consistently. that's just pathetic.

[Marut]

Pacers are the key in Australia and you will have to depend on them to bowl well and win you games and take bit of a gamble. You are going to lose anyway whether spinner goes or 60 or a pacer goes for 80 in both situations' date= but on a good day, there is more probability of a pacer winning you a game than a spinner.

Yes, if we had four pacers. Naam ke vaaste pace bowlers won't do. Our pace bowlers bowling average over the past two years in Aus, NZ, SA and Eng combined. Shami average 24 eco 6.18 Ishant avg 29 eco 6.44 Aaron 40.75 7.03 Yadav 42.45 6.45 Bhuvan 50.4 5.2 Which are the four pace bowlers you are going to gamble with in Australia? Those good days you speak about, have a probability of 1/20 or so. Binny will be cannon fodder against good batting teams. All of Axar, Jadeja and Ashwin have no enviable averages, but they have better economies - all of them concede only in the region of 5 runs per over, while the so called pacers leak 6 runs and more without compensation in the form of wickets. India will effectively give away 40 runs to the opposition team by choosing the 4-1 combination over the 3-2 combination.

[Silva]

All of Axar, Jadeja and Ashwin have no enviable averages, but they have better economies

taking wickets even in ODIs is more important than economy rate. if spinners bowl 20 overs and take only wicket even the best death bowling attacks will go for run in the last overs.

[adi B]

Yes, if we had four pacers. Naam ke vaaste pace bowlers won't do. Our pace bowlers bowling average over the past two years in Aus, NZ, SA and Eng combined. Shami average 24 eco 6.18 Ishant avg 29 eco 6.44 Aaron 40.75 7.03 Yadav 42.45 6.45 Bhuvan 50.4 5.2 Which are the four pace bowlers you are going to gamble with in Australia? Those good days you speak about, have a probability of 1/20 or so. Binny will be cannon fodder against good batting teams. All of Axar, Jadeja and Ashwin have no enviable averages, but they have better economies - all of them concede only in the region of 5 runs per over, while the so called pacers leak 6 runs and more without compensation in the form of wickets. India will effectively give away 40 runs to the opposition team by choosing the 4-1 combination over the 3-2 combination.

The pacers have bad economy because the 2 spinners are useless in the middle overs,giving 5-6 runs an over without picking any wkt.batsmen just milk them comfortably and get settled and with wkts in hands they go full throttle in the end resulting in poor economy of the pacers. In the nzl one days we picked 2 wkts in almost every game in 1st 10-12 overs but the spinners didn't do anything in the middle and that was the main reason we lost that series. Its a gamble going with 4 pacers or maybe3+ bunny but certainly better than going with 2 useless spinners

[maniac]

The pacers have bad economy because the 2 spinners are useless in the middle overs,giving 5-6 runs an over without picking any wkt.batsmen just milk them comfortably and get settled and with wkts in hands they go full throttle in the end resulting in poor economy of the pacers. In the nzl one days we picked 2 wkts in almost every game in 1st 10-12 overs but the spinners didn't do anything in the middle and that was the main reason we lost that series. Its a gamble going with 4 pacers or maybe3+ bunny but certainly better than going with 2 useless spinners

True......Also our spinners are probably the easiest to hit for 6's.....I don't know what the stats...it will be great if some one can look it up..... but on an average from what I have seen, both Ashwin and Jadeja go for a lot of 6's.

[Marut]

The pacers have bad economy because the 2 spinners are useless in the middle overs,giving 5-6 runs an over without picking any wkt.batsmen just milk them comfortably and get settled and with wkts in hands they go full throttle in the end resulting in poor economy of the pacers. In the nzl one days we picked 2 wkts in almost every game in 1st 10-12 overs but the spinners didn't do anything in the middle and that was the main reason we lost that series. Its a gamble going with 4 pacers or maybe3+ bunny but certainly better than going with 2 useless spinners

Are you trying to say that our fourth pacer will not be milked? Pace bowlers, if they are not good enough will go for more runs than spinners because the ball's pace can be used to good advantage. All our spinners will fetch us runs with the bat too, unlike our pacemen who are good at only leaking runs.

[Marut]

taking wickets even in ODIs is more important than economy rate. if spinners bowl 20 overs and take only wicket even the best death bowling attacks will go for run in the last overs.

But our third and fourth pace bowlers have poor average, poor strike rate and poor economy. In this scenario, why can't we go with bowlers who will at least do some containing?