What was wrong with Kohli to begin with?
Absolutely. Or Raina in place of Ash on a bowler friendly pitch.Okay India need to go for the win, and going for the win means having the bowlers to take 20 wickets. Hearing news of Bhuvi returning. Lets go with this side -
Vijay
Dhawan
Pujara
Kohli
Rahane
MSD
Bhuvi
Ashwin
M Ozil/Aaron
Yadav
Ishant
Too ambitiious I know, but go for it guys.
Okay India need to go for the win, and going for the win means having the bowlers to take 20 wickets. Hearing news of Bhuvi returning. Lets go with this side -
Vijay
Dhawan
Pujara
Kohli
Rahane
MSD
Bhuvi
Ashwin
M Ozil/Aaron
Yadav
Ishant
Too ambitiious I know, but go for it guys.
Here's the thing with 4 men pace attacks and 5 men bowling attacks, it seems logical that the more bowlers in your side would mean the better shot you have at taking 20 wickets, but it's quite the contrary, this makes sense in ODIs or T20Is where there's a limit on how many overs a certain player can bowl, which is not the case in Tests and there's only 2 ends to bowl from at the same time, so what ends up happening is the 4th pace bowler is always useless and you only end up decreasing your chance at scoring more runs.
The West Indies pace quartet was the exception if you ask me, they had 4 pace bowlers all equally good, that's not what we get when any team of today puts out a 4 man pace attack, there's 2 bowlers easily better (Bhuvi & Yadav), 1 who might compete with the two on his best day (Ishant) and 1 definitely not in the two's league (Aaron), so unless you're worried about injury to your main 3 quicks, you're always better off playing a lone spinner just to have that option of variety.The WI bowling of the 80's proved this wrong, all four pace bowlers attacked with full force and reaped great success. In the case of India I understand your point, with their poor stocks of pacemen over the years and now a poor batting lineup to make up for the fifth genuine bowler!
Home Ground ( 1-0 )
Away Series ( 0-1 )