Are we missing the bigger picture?

[asterix]

We can easily drop nehra on turning track.

 

Sent from my MX5 using Tapatalk

 

 

Drop Nehra and Play which bowler?

[Ultimate_Game]

Drop Nehra and Play which bowler?

If it's a turner similar to the pitches we've played on, go with Negi or Harbhajan.

Ashwin and Bumrah can bowl a couple each at the front, followed by Harbhajan/Negi, Jadeja and Raina/Yuvi in the middle overs and Bumrah & Ashwin come back after 16th over to bowl at the death. This would also help us lengthen our batting lineup as Negi/Harbhajan can hit a few.

[asterix]

If it's a turner similar to the pitches we've played on, go with Negi or Harbhajan.
Ashwin and Bumrah can bowl a couple each at the front, followed by Harbhajan/Negi, Jadeja and Raina/Yuvi in the middle overs and Bumrah & Ashwin come back after 16th over to bowl at the death. This would also help us lengthen our batting lineup as Negi/Harbhajan can hit a few.

You guys know very well that the same team will play. You guys know that. And drop Nehra, an Ex-CSK mate? For Bhajji whom he's managed keep on bench for so long? Only chance could be another Ex-CSK, Negi to come in to make it 3 SLAs in the team including UV.. That'll be a joke... People will laugh...

 

[Ultimate_Game]

You guys know very well that the same team will play. You guys know that. And drop Nehra, an Ex-CSK mate? For Bhajji whom he's managed keep on bench for so long? Only chance could be another Ex-CSK, Negi to come in to make it 3 SLAs in the team including UV.. That'll be a joke... People will laugh...

 

It may not be that big a joke if the pitch behaves the way other Indian match venue pitches have behaved. Also, given that there are plenty of right handers in the Aussie lineup, having another left arm spinner who can tonk a few wouldn't be a bad idea. Again it all depends on whether the pitch's a turner or not.

[asterix]

It may not be that big a joke if the pitch behaves the way other Indian match venue pitches have behaved. Also, given that there are plenty of right handers in the Aussie lineup, having another left arm spinner who can tonk a few wouldn't be a bad idea. Again it all depends on whether the pitch's a turner or not.

I'll be very very surprised if the same team doesnt plays, whatever may be the pitch...

[Ultimate_Game]

I'll be very very surprised if the same team doesnt plays, whatever may be the pitch...

I think so too but this is more of a hypothetical scenario.

[zen]

This would also help us lengthen our batting lineup as Negi/Harbhajan can hit a few.

What is the need for lengthening the batting? Matches are not played on paper.

Tomorrow someone will make a great suggestion like this: 

Open bowling with Pandya and Binny instead of Nehra and Bumrah as the first two can bat too. Replace Ashwin with Negi as Negi can hit better in T20s. Bhajji can hit a few so he plays. Jadeja can bat as well 

Playing 11 - Dhawan, Rohit, Kohli, Yuvi, Raina, Dhoni, Pandya, Binny, Negi, Bhajji, Jadeja

With Jadeja at 11, it bats deep. Now have turners so even Raina and Yuvi would be effective as bowlers 

The above sounds good on paper but is unlikely to deliver consistently on field 

 

 

[Ultimate_Game]

What is the need for lengthening the batting? Matches are not played on paper.

Tomorrow someone will make a great suggestion like this: 

Open bowling with Pandya and Binny instead of Nehra and Bumrah as the first two can bat too. Replace Ashwin with Negi as Negi can hit better in T20s. Bhajji can hit a few so he plays. Jadeja can bat as well 

Playing 11 - Dhawan, Rohit, Kohli, Yuvi, Raina, Dhoni, Pandya, Binny, Negi, Bhajji, Jadeja

With Jadeja at 11, it bats deep. Now have turners so even Raina and Yuvi would be effective as bowlers 

The above sounds good on paper but is unlikely to deliver consistently on field 

 

 

We are not talking about replacing specialist bowlers with bits and pieces players. We are talking about replacing a pacer with a spinner on a turner a la NZ. They have sat Boult and Southee so far and I'm sure we can do the same with Nehra if it's a turner. Ashwin and bumrah are good enough to open the bowling and do so often and then it's all spinners on the turner.

Your argument is incorrect as the suggested change is to have "horses for courses" in case of a turner and the increased batting depth is just a benefit, and not the reason for making the change.

Edited March 26, 2016 by Ultimate_Game

[zen]

Double post

Edited March 26, 2016 by rett

[zen]

We are not talking about replacing specialist bowlers with bits and pieces players. We are talking about replacing a pacer with a spinner on a turner a la NZ. They have sat Boult and Southee so far and I'm sure we can do the same with Nehra if it's a turner. Ashwin and bumrah are good enough to open the bowling and do so often and then it's all spinners on the turner.

and if the other team bats first on turners, it is advantage opponent (despite Ind packing the side with spinners)  

[Ultimate_Game]

and if the other team bats first on turners, it is advantage opponent (despite Ind packing the side with spinners)  

Why would that be? Spinners are going to be more effective on turners compared to Nehra whether you bat first or second. On all the three surfaces we have played so far - Nagpur, Kolkatta and B'lore - an additional spinners in place of Nehra wouldn't have cost us additional runs. This fallacy of spinners being only useful in the 2nd innings on a turner is plain wrong.

[rkt.india]

Drop Nehra and Play which bowler?

Bhajji

Sent from my MX5 using Tapatalk

[asterix]

Bhajji

Sent from my MX5 using Tapatalk

 

 

Good idea! Unfortunately not gonna happen...

[zen]

Why would that be? Spinners are going to be more effective on turners compared to Nehra whether you bat first or second. On all the three surfaces we have played so far - Nagpur, Kolkatta and B'lore - an additional spinners in place of Nehra wouldn't have cost us additional runs. This fallacy of spinners being only useful in the 2nd innings on a turner is plain wrong.

lol the point is that batting 2nd on square turners is a disadvantage as it gets difficult to bat as the game progresses. Opposition spinners will most often than not defend whatever they have posted vs Ind spinners 

also your analysis on Nehra is not spot on as he did give early breakthroughs iirc. Nehra bowling upfront also saved some of the Bumrah's overs for the death. They work as a combination .... A team does NOT strengthen its batting by playing out of form batsmen. If a spinner has to come in, it should in place of ONE of the lottery players - Dhawan, Raina, Yuvi and Pandya 

 

[Ultimate_Game]

lol the point is that batting 2nd on square turners is a disadvantage as it gets difficult to bat as the game progresses. Opposition spinners will most often than not defend whatever they have posted vs Ind spinners 

also your analysis on Nehra is not spot on as he did give early breakthroughs iirc. Nehra bowling upfront also saved some of the Bumrah's overs for the death. They work as a combination .... A team does NOT strengthen its batting by playing out of form batsmen. If a spinner has to come in, it should in place of ONE of the lottery players - Dhawan, Raina, Yuvi and Pandya 

 

Again, the question is not whether it's more difficult to bat 2nd. The question is whether an extra spinner gives you a better chance instead of a pacer on a turner. E.g., in all three matches we've played so far if we had an extra spinner in place of Nehra I'm sure we would've restricted the opponents to a lower score. The point about Bumrah's over is incorrect as Bumrah wil stil bowl only 2 upfront and Ashwin will bowl 2-3 as we will have the luxury of another spinner in the middle overs. As to the last point about "strengthening" batting, I've already explained in my previous post that it's not the reason for playing an extra spinner. Extra spinner would be played as it gives us a better option to succeed on turners - the sort of pitches we've seen for India matches so far - and if the spinner is a better batsman than the pacer, that's bonus.

[asterix]

What's the point of playing an extrra spinner when the existing ones are unable to bowl their full quota or not even getting to bowl a single over? No point in bringing another spinner just to bowl one or two overs... You guys not focussing on the main issues...

[Ultimate_Game]

What's the point of playing an extrra spinner when the existing ones are unable to bowl their full quota or not even getting to bowl a single over? No point in bringing another spinner just to bowl one or two overs... You guys not focussing on the main issues...

Well maybe the current ones (Yuvraj) isn't getting to bowl as he's a part-timer. Maybe getting a specialist spinner in Harbhajan/Negi will change that. Either way another spinner will gives us a far better bowling attack on turners.

[zen]

Again, the question is not whether it's more difficult to bat 2nd. The question is whether an extra spinner gives you a better chance instead of a pacer on a turner. E.g., in all three matches we've played so far if we had an extra spinner in place of Nehra I'm sure we would've restricted the opponents to a lower score. The point about Bumrah's over is incorrect as Bumrah wil stil bowl only 2 upfront and Ashwin will bowl 2-3 as we will have the luxury of another spinner in the middle overs. As to the last point about "strengthening" batting, I've already explained in my previous post that it's not the reason for playing an extra spinner. Extra spinner would be played as it gives us a better option to succeed on turners - the sort of pitches we've seen for India matches so far - and if the spinner is a better batsman than the pacer, that's bonus. 

A team needs 2 quality pacers. Not every spinner can bowl well in the PPs. Ind is lucky to have Ashwin who is one of the spinners who can bowl well with the new ball .... So if Ind does not have a bowler like Nehra, Bumrah will probably have to bowl 3 overs in the PPs, therefore leaving him with only 1 over for the death vs 2-3 currently .... In the absence of Nehra, Ashwin would probably need to bowl 2-3 overs in the PPs so Ind could potentially miss out on some of his overs with the slightly older ball 

More than Nehra, it is Pandya's overs that have cost Ind as he has given runs and not picked up enough wkts too. If you replace Nehra with Bhajji that 5th bowler weakness is not addressed

In short, you are keeping Ind's weaknesses and replacing its strength .... Anyways, continue with your theories .... 

 

Edited March 26, 2016 by rett

[Ultimate_Game]

A team needs 2 quality pacers. Not every spinner can bowl well in the PPs. Ind is lucky to have Ashwin who is one of the spinners who can bowl well with the new ball .... So if Ind does not have a bowler like Nehra, Bumrah will probably have to bowl 3 overs in the PPs, therefore leaving him with only 1 over for the death vs 2-3 currently .... In the absence of Nehra, Ashwin would probably need to bowl 2-3 overs in the PPs so Ind could potentially miss out on some of his overs with the slightly older ball 

More than Nehra, it is Pandya's overs that have cost Ind as he has given runs and not picked up enough wkts too. If you replace Nehra with Bhajji that 5th bowler weakness is not addressed

In short, you are keeping Ind's weaknesses and replacing its strength .... Anyways, continue with your theories .... 

 

I would go with the bowling as follows...

Ashwin - 3 overs in the PP
Bumrah - 2 overs in the PP
Harbhajan - 1 over in the PP
Middle overs (7 to 17) - combo of Harbhajan, Jadeja, Raina, Yuvraj
Last 3 overs - Bumrah (2) and Ashwin (1)

Again, this is for turners where it's difficult to hit the spinners even at the death. If this was a regular pitch, stick to 2 pacers. As the pitches for Indian matches have shown, the "theory" to play an extra spinner in place of a pacer wouldn't be such a bad idea.

Edited March 26, 2016 by Ultimate_Game

[zen]

I would go with the bowling as follows...
Ashwin - 3 overs in the PP
Bumrah - 2 overs in the PP
Harbhajan - 1 over in the PP
Middle overs (7 to 17) - combo of Harbhajan, Jadeja, Raina, Yuvraj
Last 3 overs - Bumrah (2) and Ashwin (1)

Again, this is for turners where it's difficult to hit the spinners even at the death. If this was a regular pitch, stick to 2 pacers.

That is wasting an extra over from Ashwin in PP and then wasting overs with part timers with slightly older ball when an extra over from Ashwin with the older ball would be more effective 

Below is a rough math for square turners: 

Batting 1st - a team can get say 110-120

Batting 2nd - a team can get say 80-90

Ind does not know if it is batting first or second so it needs a bowling attack that can bowl out the opposition for 80 or less in case if it is bowling first. 80 is 2/3rd of 120. That is how difficult the task is for sides bowling first on square turners. A team cannot waste 1/5 of its overs on non regular bowlers 

That is one of the reasons, why Ind has never won (from what I recall) batting 2nd vs strong teams on square turners in major tourneys in Ind