Does Kohli's 5 bowler strategy develop culture of all-rounders in india?

[gakgupta]

not true....you got it all wrong.. matches are won by how effective your top3 or 4 are in the conditions. we took 20 wkts because ashwin and mishra were in business.end of story wonderful...continue the wonderful tradition of racing to stupid conclusions based on a few samples and keep seeing what you want to see. remember praveen is a 24 average bowler based on the 2011 england tour...:hysterical india also tried binny and jadeja in england..didn't make a difference. the big problem with your example is what is the quality of mitchell marsh? what is the quality of binny? australia is not going to win matches because of marsh or any other 5th bowler...their fate is tied to how the likes of hazelwood, pattinson,cummins evolve. if the big guns can come up with the heavy artillery , marsh's utility contributions would help. i.e on the majority cases. Yes marsh is one of the better allrounders in world cricket and australia is not exactly short changed by playing marsh.. but even if someone like marsh was never born, australia is not going to be hurt with the talent they have there are other ways to compensate he is a world class talent but that's not an excuse for playing binny binny is waste of space examples of other teams are irrelevant...australian cricket is not indian cricket and not everything is transferable. what is the so called "value"?..there is nothing... if a team bowling lineup's average capacity is 14 wickets. you will only get 14 wickets.4 or 5 or 6 it does not matter,. over a period of 10 -15 tests, this will be the case. your bowling's penetrative levels remains the same unless a superior class of bowler shows up. adding a part time hack or another average bowler is not going to change anything big...you are just sharing the workload a bit more... no quality is being added.so your value is bad logic.. you are not factoring in the guy being added and if he is coming up with anything extra,. extra bowler= extra wickets...what kind of logic is this??????? there is the small matter of 100+ years of test history and i have watched cricket for over 30 years,. there is enough evidence already...don't waste your time... its not possible to play without 6 batsmen...we have struggled to play 5 bowler even when kapil or prabhakar were there. it has taken one test to come from 5 bowlers to 4.25 bowlers..it won't be long before binn y is kicked out as well. these players are just great sportsmen but mediocre intellectually..they are not going to come up with world class startegy anytime soon. i pity the posters who pick from what dhoni or shastri says.

Looks like you are cocky with your opinions. Anyways, i didn't said Australia won the match because of Mitchelle Marsh. It's funny, you understood that way. When all the main stream bowlers are tired and not adding any value....captain dont have any options and have to still continue with tired bowlers....Now with mitchelle Marsh, not only does the main stream bowlers gets rest but he has also picked up wickets.. Looks like you know more than Australia think-tank and England think-tank knows...LOL...:giggle: Engalnd is playing STOKES...I am sure, they might have better batsmen than him in the county set-up and Australia is playing (watson or Marsh) and they have better batsmen then him.....but there is a reason why they play them....especially if it's a long tour Don't act like you know everything about cricket and ridicule others comments just because you have been watching cricket from last 30 years.. Get some life, if you cannot respect others opinions... Or take up sports journalism, if you really think, you are better than Australian and England Think tank

[Marut]

Looks like you are cocky with your opinions. Anyways, i didn't said Australia won the match because of Mitchelle Marsh. It's funny, you understood that way. When all the main stream bowlers are tired and not adding any value....captain dont have any options and have to still continue with tired bowlers....Now with mitchelle Marsh, not only does the main stream bowlers gets rest but he has also picked up wickets.. Looks like you know more than Australia think-tank and England think-tank knows...LOL...:giggle: Engalnd is playing STOKES...I am sure, they might have better batsmen than him in the county set-up and Australia is playing (watson or Marsh) and they have better batsmen then him.....but there is a reason why they play them....especially if it's a long tour Don't act like you know everything about cricket and ridicule others comments just because you have been watching cricket from last 30 years.. Get some life, if you cannot respect others opinions... Or take up sports journalism, if you really think, you are better than Australian and England Think tank

The think tank can go wrong too. Here on this forum we have dozens of users ridiculing the strategies of Dhoni and of course they are right some times. (Just because Dhoni has played international cricket does not make him right all the time) Because Dhoni think tank is not infallible nor are the strategies of any other teams.

[sensible-indian]

5th bowler HAS value. He doesn't have to have value 100% of the time to be selected. Just when its needed/ In the first innings, 5 BOWLERS helped us restrict SL to a decent total. Bowlers do get tired when batsmen get set in crease or if the pitch ain't aiding bowlers. Its those times a 5th bowler eases the workload of other bowlers. The key in using 5 bowlers is in knowing how to rotate them and when to use whom and when NOT to use whom (Kohli ain't doing this job that well - he could improve reg this). Yes batting is a weakness for us but its all about finding the right balance that gives us the best results.

[sensible-indian]

Looks like you are cocky with your opinions. Anyways, i didn't said Australia won the match because of Mitchelle Marsh. It's funny, you understood that way. When all the main stream bowlers are tired and not adding any value....captain dont have any options and have to still continue with tired bowlers....Now with mitchelle Marsh, not only does the main stream bowlers gets rest but he has also picked up wickets.. Looks like you know more than Australia think-tank and England think-tank knows...LOL...:giggle: Engalnd is playing STOKES...I am sure, they might have better batsmen than him in the county set-up and Australia is playing (watson or Marsh) and they have better batsmen then him.....but there is a reason why they play them....especially if it's a long tour Don't act like you know everything about cricket and ridicule others comments just because you have been watching cricket from last 30 years.. Get some life, if you cannot respect others opinions... Or take up sports journalism, if you really think, you are better than Australian and England Think tank

I see you met Young India. Argue with him for a minute and you will soon see abuses (nicely worded) flowing in. :giggle: Whether 5th bowler is needed for SC or not is debatable but how hard is it to understand the value of a 5th bowler goes beyond stats (that he keeps your PRIMARY 1-2 wicket takers fresh). Apparently very hard.

[Vijy]

5th bowler HAS value. He doesn't have to have value 100% of the time to be selected. Just when its needed/ In the first innings, 5 BOWLERS helped us restrict SL to a decent total. Bowlers do get tired when batsmen get set in crease or if the pitch ain't aiding bowlers. Its those times a 5th bowler eases the workload of other bowlers. The key in using 5 bowlers is in knowing how to rotate them and when to use whom and when NOT to use whom (Kohli ain't doing this job that well - he could improve reg this). Yes batting is a weakness for us but its all about finding the right balance that gives us the best results.

I've always wondered how it would be to have 2 genuine allrounders + 3 bowlers. That would offset the weakness of the batting (with only 5 regular batsmen). Even if Ashwin continues to avg 30+ with bat, it would be great to find a batting allrounder who can avg in late 30s (at the minimum) and take about 2 wkts per match.

[sensible-indian]

I've always wondered how it would be to have 2 genuine allrounders + 3 bowlers. That would offset the weakness of the batting (with only 5 regular batsmen). Even if Ashwin continues to avg 30+ with bat' date=' it would be great to find a batting allrounder who can avg in late 30s (at the minimum) and take about 2 wkts per match.[/quote'] It would be awesome but 4 out of 5 bowlers must be genuine wicket takers. 5th bowler (whoever it may be) can offer control with occasional wickets. 2 Binnys with 3 bowlers can be risky. But solid AR, Ashwin (bowling AR) and 3 bowlers is fine.

[Vijy]

It would be awesome but 4 out of 5 bowlers must be genuine wicket takers. 5th bowler (whoever it may be) can offer control with occasional wickets. 2 Binnys with 3 bowlers can be risky. But solid AR, Ashwin (bowling AR) and 3 bowlers is fine.

I've always felt that a complete team should have: 5 batsmen (with 1 part-timer), batting AR (can take 2-3 wkts per match), Wkt keeper (avg mid 30s with bat at the least), bowling AR (function as full bowler and 25+ runs with bat) and then 3 bowlers (of whom 1 can offer 15-20 runs). I dunno how far we are with respect to this goal.

[sensible-indian]

I've always felt that a complete team should have: 5 batsmen (with 1 part-timer), batting AR (can take 2-3 wkts per match), Wkt keeper (avg mid 30s with bat at the least), bowling AR (function as full bowler and 25+ runs with bat) and then 3 bowlers (of whom 1 can offer 15-20 runs). I dunno how far we are with respect to this goal.

Very very far. But that's a perfect team.

[Vijy]

Very very far. But that's a perfect team.

Might be closer than we think... yes, bowlers are ordinary but they do "exist". Amongst top 5, none bowl but perhaps one of them will pick it up. I think Saha can avg in mid 30s with sufficient rope; if not him, then someone already around in FC. Ashwin already fulfills bowling AR category. Thus, I'd say that we need to find batting AR and 3 very good bowlers.