IPL is Useless

[kruiser]

IPL has not produced a single bowler who can bowl at the death or a single batsman who can bat at the death for India.Am i wrong?

IPL kaunhu khet he ka jo produce karega?

[Marut]

if you are going to rely on no.7 and no.8, then stop playing cricket as well. India rightly aimed at solidifying their top order and middle order to do the job, which they did till today.

Australia have packed their lineup with batsmen who play all the way to #10. Good luck winning any matches against such a team without players who are half as good as Maxwell or Faulkner. We were lucky to win some of the matches without hard hitters at the death. Which is why we were never able to reach 350 in any match. Our upper limit was 300, with our batting. Most of us expected India to get exposed in one of the matches due to this weakness. SA, Aus and NZ have batsmen who can get them to 350-400 and they did this quite a few times in this WC.

[vvvslaxman]

Not for Dinesh Karthik :cantstop:

[sensible-indian]

Conversely, had Williamson and Taylor done their stuff well, there wouldn't be the need for the "tight chase" in the first place. Also, never knew Grant Elliot could be called a "powaar hitter" :giggle: Corey Anderson scored at run a ball as well. It was not power hitting that saved NZ but cool headedness of Elliot and **** ups by SA.

Its not about what saved them. Its about what gives you balance. If top order scores, you don't even need a finisher. But that doesn't mean a team doesn't need finisher. It needs one cos in many games a finisher would be in play. Same way, you NEED proper hitters in your lower order or else you are dependent on your top order FULLY. NZ by the way has Corey Anderson, Vettori and even Southee who can smash it. Aus...no need to even mention. They have so many till Starc.

[Precambrian]

IPL has not produced a single bowler who can bowl at the death or a single batsman who can bat at the death for India.Am i wrong?

Yet somehow we have won two ICC events since ipl began, while we won jacks hit for many years before that. Seems like it throws up match winners.

[Precambrian]

Australia have packed their lineup with batsmen who play all the way to #10. Good luck winning any matches against such a team without players who are half as good as Maxwell or Faulkner. We were lucky to win some of the matches without hard hitters at the death. Which is why we were never able to reach 350 in any match. Our upper limit was 300, with our batting. Most of us expected India to get exposed in one of the matches due to this weakness. SA, Aus and NZ have batsmen who can get them to 350-400 and they did this quite a few times in this WC.

What jackshit did Maxwell do today? What is this talk about them batting till 9? They are crazy sloggers who get lucky sometimes. You might talk about Aus posting 350 plus scores, but you forget conveniently how they folded like a pack of cards given the slightest assistance for bowlers as well. Sorry, I will take the regular 300s than 155 or 400s. Maybe this concept is dense for you, but if the top 7 bats on an average 40 balls among themselves and score 45 then the team score would be consistently 350. Let's not overcomplicate things. Look to staff your team with good batsmen from 1 to 7 and rest will take care of itself. If your batsmen cannot, your bowlers too cannot. No team post 300 plus scores without their top order firing.

[vijay50]

Jadejas batting is useless on non-Asian pitches. Cant count on him to make 20 runs against quality teams. Should stick a fork when we can find another pace bowling allrounder.

[Precambrian]

Its not about what saved them. Its about what gives you balance. If top order scores, you don't even need a finisher. But that doesn't mean a team doesn't need finisher. It needs one cos in many games a finisher would be in play. Same way, you NEED proper hitters in your lower order or else you are dependent on your top order FULLY. NZ by the way has Corey Anderson, Vettori and even Southee who can smash it. Aus...no need to even mention. They have so many till Starc.

Ah now we move down a step from sloggers to proper hitters. Well, sunshine, we have two able finishers, two of the world's best, in Raina and Dhoni. As far a single know these guys aren't turds. Please, Vettori? He is NZ's aswin. Southoe is like old Zaheer who thwacks a few occasionally. Even Shami or Yadav can play like him. And u just do not understand what difference having lower order power hitters would have done ANYTGING for today's cause!

[sensible-indian]

Ah now we move down a step from sloggers to proper hitters. Well, sunshine, we have two able finishers, two of the world's best, in Raina and Dhoni. As far a single know these guys aren't turds. Please, Vettori? He is NZ's aswin. Southoe is like old Zaheer who thwacks a few occasionally. Even Shami or Yadav can play like him. And u just do not understand what difference having lower order power hitters would have done ANYTGING for today's cause!

There is no stepping down and stepping up. We needed brutal hitters who can get going from the word Go. Slogging ability is needed. Batsmen like Faulkner, Maxwell, Anderson, and even lower order guys like Johnson, Southee who can whack a few. Raina can do it but he is our only bat like that. Dhoni takes time or else can't slog fast. That explains his 114 SR in international T20s. And LOL at comparing Vettori the smasher to Ashwin. Vettori, Southee can whack it if needed WAY MORE FREQUENTLY than Ashwin. Ashwin is a good batsman but just not good enough for hitting. As for today's match, I am not saying today's match would have been won. I am saying in general its needed. Somehow you have taken it to mean for TODAY'S match.

[Stuge]

So ipl is to be blamed ?

[sensible-indian]

What jackshit did Maxwell do today? What is this talk about them batting till 9? They are crazy sloggers who get lucky sometimes. You might talk about Aus posting 350 plus scores, but you forget conveniently how they folded like a pack of cards given the slightest assistance for bowlers as well. Sorry, I will take the regular 300s than 155 or 400s. Maybe this concept is dense for you, but if the top 7 bats on an average 40 balls among themselves and score 45 then the team score would be consistently 350. Let's not overcomplicate things. Look to staff your team with good batsmen from 1 to 7 and rest will take care of itself. If your batsmen cannot, your bowlers too cannot. No team post 300 plus scores without their top order firing.

Nope. if you have a solid lower order comprising of 3 or 4 guys who can whack it, atleast 1 or 2 would come good. And in a close game it matters. We can win 10 out of 11 games with our top order but there will come a time when a team is stretched to the core and in those cases, India just doesn't have any firepower at the bottom. You are simply taking an example of top order and calculating the score for an AVERAGE game. But in reality, when you are stretched, average game doesn't matter. Your entire resource capability matters and for us, lower order is a problem. A lower order comprising of Dhoni (who needs time to slog), Jaddu, Ashwin, Shami is horrible beyond measure. Don't take it to mean Dhoni is horrible cos I don't mean that.

[sensible-indian]

Leaving aside proper innings from Finch and Smith... Among hitters, Warner flopped. Maxwell flopped. Watson did the job. Johnson did the job. Faulkner did the job. A real life example of what happens when you have an explosive lineup. When one doesn't click, another will. For us, there is no firepower in the lower order. It didn't matter in this game but it will in close games. Just because we are beastly in India and these lower order batsmen don't get to play DOES NOT mean this is not a weakness.

[vijay50]

Leaving aside proper innings from Finch and Smith... Among hitters, Warner flopped. Maxwell flopped. Watson did the job. Johnson did the job. Faulkner did the job. A real life example of what happens when you have an explosive lineup. When one doesn't click, another will. For us, there is no firepower in the lower order. It didn't matter in this game but it will in close games. Just because we are beastly in India and these lower order batsmen don't get to play DOES NOT mean this is not a weakness.

This.Top post.

[David Boon]

You allow too many imports into the IPL and lose your advantage from it. You need to limit the number of imports more than its already limited.

[CricketWise]

Kedar Jadhav seems to be good.

[Cricket_Hacker]

We need more muscular batsmen,too many batsmen with arms like twigs playing

[CricketWise]

Leaving aside proper innings from Finch and Smith... Among hitters, Warner flopped. Maxwell flopped. Watson did the job. Johnson did the job. Faulkner did the job. A real life example of what happens when you have an explosive lineup. When one doesn't click, another will. For us, there is no firepower in the lower order. It didn't matter in this game but it will in close games. Just because we are beastly in India and these lower order batsmen don't get to play DOES NOT mean this is not a weakness.

Conditions also have a big say. This same explosive line up failed match after match in the WT20 in Bangladesh where pitches did not suit them. In sub continental conditions guys like Rohit, Jadeja, Sanga, Mathews become power hitters.

[sensible-indian]

Conditions also have a big say. This same explosive line up failed match after match in the WT20 in Bangladesh where pitches did not suit them. In sub continental conditions guys like Rohit' date=' Jadeja, Sanga, Mathews become power hitters.[/quote'] I am not saying we should have ONLY explosive hitters. But we need a balance.

[youngindia]

Your entire resource capability matters and for us, lower order is a problem. .

do you understand basic technique? if you are stretched, people with weak techniques will break down in Chennai 1999, we had joshi,kumble and srinath who all can wield the bat.they could not score 16 runs SA tried this bat deep business many a time and failed even with boucher and polllock at no 8 and no 9 against Australia it won't help if the top order flops you cannot rely on the likes of Johnson to win you matches. don't complicate your mind with garbage. The vast majority of the games are won by top order. no 7 has to be a finisher. batsmen up to 7 are important

Watson did the job. Johnson did the job. Faulkner did the job

There is a difference between expecting Watson/Faulkner to succeed and expecting vettori/Johnson/southe to succeed...the probability of the latter duo contributing is too irregular.. they "did the job" only because 250+ was already scored. otherwise their cameos are bloody useless. Watson and Faulkner belong to top 7 the probability of someone succeeding among the top 7 is important. only no7 can be a finisher however one would be a fool to rely on the lower order who have limited technique to no technique at best. the chances of Johnson ,vettori scoring 30 is very low as shown by their low averages and their range is limited.you have an inflated view of vettori who scored only 15 sixes in his career against a strong side with a quality attack they will be most likely thrashed their contributions shud be treated as bonus...nothing more. batting deep may occasionally have uses against traditionally mediocre attacks like india...but in a battle for the top , it won't help

[sensible-indian]

do you understand basic technique? if you are stretched, people with weak techniques will break down in Chennai 1999, we had joshi,kumble and srinath who all can wield the bat.they could not score 16 runs SA tried this bat deep business many a time and failed even with boucher and polllock at no 8 and no 9 against Australia it won't help if the top order flops you cannot rely on the likes of Johnson to win you matches. don't complicate your mind with garbage. The vast majority of the games are won by top order. no 7 has to be a finisher. batsmen up to 7 are important they "did the job" only because 250+ was already scored. otherwise their cameos are bloody useless. Watson and Faulkner belong to top 7 the probability of someone succeeding among the top 7 is important. only no7 can be a finisher however one would be a fool to rely on the lower order who have limited technique to no technique at best. the chances of Johnson ,vettori scoring 30 is very low as shown by their low averages and their range is limited.you have an inflated view of vettori who scored only 15 sixes in his career against a strong side with a quality attack they will be most likely thrashed their contributions shud be treated as bonus...nothing more. batting deep may occasionally have uses against traditionally mediocre attacks like india...but in a battle for the top , it won't help

Wow. Your entire analysis misses some fundamental points: 1. Yes top order scoring is needed for any chase. 2. But when a tight chase will have you COMPLETELY STRETCHED and in those cases, a strong lower order helps you win those tough games when one of the top 6 batsman stays till the end (like SA NZ game) 3. Moreover a weak lower order puts a HELL A LOT OF PRESSURE on your middle order batsmen when 2 top order wickets fall. Why? Cos they know they have to not only score but also finish. I have repeatedly said that in today's game we would have lost anyway. But a better lower order would have given us more odds. In a SA-NZ, when NZ was stretched but having a lower order firepower helps. Your example about stretched are HORRIBLY flawed. SA tried this bat deep business many a time and failed even with boucher and polllock at no 8 and no 9 against Australia That's cos they choked and their top order kept getting out fast. Why does discussion about needing a strong lower order always turn into an argument about top order having to score? Of course they have to. But in our case, in a tight big chase, if you get Dhawan and Kohli out, its almost over. Why? Cos middle order is in SO MUCH pressure cos they have to consolidate, take it to the end and finish.