India Team Discussion
- Thread starter MattW
- Start date
One positive from the recent ODI series, is that Dravid and co. have finally recognized the need to groom a few batting allrounders. They made Shreyas Iyer bowl some overs. Can also try the same with Suryakumar Yadav in the coming games. India need a Yuvraj/Raina type player who can bowl useful overs and provide some crucial breakthroughs.
And on that, India could also consider Hanuma Vihari for ODI's. This might sound a radical thought, but currently India is cluttered heavily at the top with too many opening options but a pretty slim middle-lower option. Maybe India can remove one of Ruturaj/Ishan (tell them they're in the scheme of things post 2023 ODI WC) and bring in Vihari into the ODI side. Vihari can bowl useful off spin and from what I see, he has a 82+ S/R in List A cricket. Not a bad idea to try him out. Its about who works out best.
And on that, India could also consider Hanuma Vihari for ODI's. This might sound a radical thought, but currently India is cluttered heavily at the top with too many opening options but a pretty slim middle-lower option. Maybe India can remove one of Ruturaj/Ishan (tell them they're in the scheme of things post 2023 ODI WC) and bring in Vihari into the ODI side. Vihari can bowl useful off spin and from what I see, he has a 82+ S/R in List A cricket. Not a bad idea to try him out. Its about who works out best.
Bevab
Staff Member
Vihari is considered to be slow by test standards. Are you genuinely considering him for the already outdated Indian ODI setup?
That's why I said its a radical thought. The focus, imho, should be on batsmen who can bowl. Also I know Vihari is slow by test standards, but his List A strike rate doesn't sound bad (82).
Not a bad option to have in the mix. Obviously the first preference would be to see if we can groom Shreyas and SKY to bowl some part time overs (along with one or both of Rohit and Kohli).
wasteyouryouth
Verified
It seems wild to me to want to groom a bowler in international cricket. Surely by that point, they should be able to bowl? I was surprised that Iyer was bowling ahead of Yadav. My first memory of Yadav was a batting all rounder batting about six or seven in the IPL.
Deepak Chahar and Thakur are showing that things might not be all bad in the lower order. Hardik, Jadeja at 6 and 7 followed by one or both of them and you have a decent tail and six bowlers.
Ideally, you would want 2 other to complement the set of 5 genuine bowlers. Making Shreyas bowl didn't make sense to me, for:
1. He was given too few overs
2. He was tried out as a last resort
Since we had Kohli in, I'd have ideally wanted him to bowl a few overs. He has done so in tbe past and believe he has picked up wickets too.
With Rohit back, we do have the option of the captain bowling himself.
No!
I well and truly believe he is in the BCCI's discard lane at the moment. If they wanted, they would have played him in the Test series, a longer rope given that he was already accustomed to the conditions in South Africa.
For ODIs, far shot. Maybe could have tried him a couple of yewrs ago instead of 3D Shankar.
1. He was given too few overs
2. He was tried out as a last resort
Since we had Kohli in, I'd have ideally wanted him to bowl a few overs. He has done so in tbe past and believe he has picked up wickets too.
With Rohit back, we do have the option of the captain bowling himself.
No!
I well and truly believe he is in the BCCI's discard lane at the moment. If they wanted, they would have played him in the Test series, a longer rope given that he was already accustomed to the conditions in South Africa.
For ODIs, far shot. Maybe could have tried him a couple of yewrs ago instead of 3D Shankar.
wasteyouryouth
Verified
That's where England's side in the 2019 WC was so well balanced. Woakes, Archer expert power play bowlers, Plunkett perhaps the ultimate middle overs bowler, Rashid and Wood alongside. Archer excellent at the death. Then Ben Stokes and Joe Root in the top 6 who you could easily get 10-15 overs from.
Since then we've discovered Liam Livingstone can play pretty much as an all rounder (at least in T20) and we still have Moeen Ali.
Batting wise Rashid bat at 10/11 and he has more first class centuries than Jos Buttler.
NILAYSHAH60
Dreamcatcher
Couple of days ago I was thinking about the English batting line-up and compared that to India. I was looking at this line-up
Roy
Bairstow
Root (can bowl)
Morgan
Stokes (can bowl)
Buttler
Moeen (can bowl)
Woakes (can bat)
Archer/ Saqib (can bat)
Tom Curran/ Wood (Curran can bat)
Adil Rashid (can bat)
Back-ups
Sam Curran (can bat)
Liam Livingstone (can bowl)
Vince (can bowl)
Foakes
So out of the 17 players that are regular members of England's ODI team, 10 players have multiple abilities (i.e. they can both bat & bowl)
Compare that to India (this in my view is the side that India are looking at),
Rohit (can bowl)
Dhawan (banned from bowling)
Virat Kohli (can bowl)
Shreyas (can bowl)
KLR
Pant
Hardik (can bowl if fit) / Jadeja (does equally well in both areas)
Shardul (can bat)
Bhuvi (can bat)
Bumrah (current version of his can hang around)
Chahal
Back-ups
Deepak Chahar (can bat)
Axar (can bat)
Krunal (can bat)
SKY (can bowl)
Shami (can hit the ball a long way)
Kuldeep (can bat)
So India have these 18 players. Out of these 18, atleast 12 of them can be relied in both areas). So both of them does have these versatile players. But the quality differs a bit. Infact, both teams are equally capable. Something to worry about is their batting approach. It is too sedate and conservative. The ones who score well aren't playing at right positions.
I think I've said it, Shardul isn't a limited overs player. He would score runs but gives away freebies while bowling. He would always end up conceding close to 7 an over. So it's high time he gets replaced by Deepak Chahar.
I like the comparisons between the Indian and English sides. However, the English play fearlessly and play an aggresive- er brand of cricket than India. Its not as if India cannot play so.We have seen the very same players set the stage on fire in the IPL. I believe, the management change might be goo, if it brings about this aggressive approach.
If India can go ahrd in the first 10-15, you are essentially looking at 350+ almost every match.
If India can go ahrd in the first 10-15, you are essentially looking at 350+ almost every match.
wasteyouryouth
Verified
I think it's generous to say Kohli, Shreyas and even Rohit can bowl - compared with someone like Joe Root. I'd put them into the James Vince category of, 'they can bowl, but you really know things are going poorly when they do'. Rohit was perhaps a bit better but most captain's are reluctant bowlers so I don't see him using himself much.
Equally, the England team still picks their best 5 bowlers, it is just lucky that they can all do something with the bat. That's where I'd say players like Shami and Bumrah should just bat to their strengths, which is swinging. Like Jofra might get a couple of boundaries or sixes, it's better than just using up balls.
This is a good point and it's easy to get distracted by having a long batting order and in how other teams play. It's difficult to know what comes with greater risk. To go aggressive throughout and risk running out of wickets or to save wickets until the last 10-15 and hope they can push you past 300.
India are, in my opinion, the favourites for the next WC because they have quality players and home advantage. How they play can be really effective and will win most matches but there are matches like this one where if things go well for at team like England they will blow them away. Although in that series I remember they were cruising in the first game and then the middle order had a collective brain fart. Or maybe Kohli did some good captaincy, but let's not consider that as a possibility.
--
I made a little chart. I was just interested to compare. This is England and India batting over the last five years, 10 innings minimum. Strike rate and balls per boundary (how often they score a 4 or 6). Someone can probably make more from this than me, it's very basic and broad data and doesn't cover batting positions. The orange dot is the average.
You can see India's middle order options (Rahul, Jadeja, Kohli, Iyer) are all below average strike rate. But they do have Pant and Pandya above average in both factors, so you can see more of that big finish approach.
England's openers are above average on both counts. So they're always getting big starts and then Buttler comes in can do more of the same. Moeen is spot on average strike rate. Morgan, Woakes, Rashid, Stokes all below average for boundary scoring. Interestingly Adil Rashid has almost identical strike rate and boundary hitting to Virat Kohli and he (Rashid) hits sixes more often.
So, you could say (if you want to be really cheeky) that our number 10/11 is as productive as the guy averaging 72.
The only below average (boundary hitter) for England is Joe Root and he averages 58 in the time period. So hitting fours and sixes isn't everything, but when everyone else does it makes him almost a luxury player who rotates the strike to let everyone else score quickly.
NILAYSHAH60
Dreamcatcher
Agreed. But what I want to throw the light on the fact that these players can try to improve their skills with the ball given they can bowl a bit. But again that is not the wisest of moves. That is why someone like Yuvi in his pre-Cancer days was so important to the Indian side. He was a better striker than Stokes and was a bowler atleast equivalent to Moeen on turning tracks.
wasteyouryouth
Verified
It's one of those things that if Hardik can bowl it's not a problem. But if he can't I think you need someone to fill similar overs. That's why it seemed so odd playing Venkatesh Iyer and not bowling him in the first match.
Lack of maturity again! The interview seems to be on lines of "I didnt start well, but my captaincy will be brilliant". Does KLR really think he will be a full-time captain? Times like these, I really feel that Cricket Australia's take on Warner, Bancroft and Smith captaincy bans wasn't wrong. Wish BCCI did the same when the Pandya-KLR duo appeared on Coffee with Karan.
www.espncricinfo.com
KL Rahul: 'Time to transform our white-ball cricket'
"I'd rather have a longer run as a successful captain and leader, than start off with something big and then go downwards"
www.espncricinfo.com
B
Bigby Wolf
Guest
asprin
Administrator
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2012
- Online Cricket Games Owned
- Don Bradman Cricket 14 - Steam PC
Looking at the recent decisions for the WI tour, can't help but wonder if Dravid and Co. have pegged K.L.Rahul as someone who will lead India full time in the near future. S.Iyer doesn't seem to be in the scheme of things as far as captaincy goes. On one hand it's good that a successor is being looked at but on the other hand not sure if KLR is the right candidate at this moment.
