Ind-NZ afterthought
This is my first post on sight screen. I feel honoured to post here as this blog is becoming my favorite as far as cricket is concerned. It could not be better to start on a day when India have won a cricket match (notwithstanding the absence of Bond and Vettori). I feel nice and hope that all feel the same too. Although not much should be read on just a single victory (especially as we Indians have mastered this habbit of pampering our cricketers just too much, which to me is the topmost reason for what happened after pak'04), still there are some things which could be taken note of:
1. Emergence of kaif as a No.3/4- I think the time has come for Kaif to cement his place in that position. When SRT comes, he can grab the opener's slot, though I personally would see VS, SG and SRT rotating 1,2 and 3 positions according to team needs. Then we can have Dravid and Yuvraj at 5 and 6 who played so beautifully at those positions in WC. Dravid of 02-03 was a vital cog in the Indian wheel. Off late, he has been a little bit subdued which takes me back to his old ODI years. Dravid will be at his best in ODI, when he keeps on rotating strike, giving yuvrajs and dhonis the chance to expode from other end. Also, he can provide stability if the top order fails occasionally.
2. Issue of supersubs- I think SG could have been more astute today. He had Karthik today as supersub. Now, what was the point of wasting one player by taking a frontline bowler. An allrounder could have been a better bet or even a batsman-part timer. In fact, he could have got 4-5 overs from karthik by exhausting one of three seamers early when they were going for plenty. Somehow SG does not seem to show and confidence in Karthik who has bowled brilliantly sometimes.
Whoever has formulated this supersub rule probably was in too much of a hurry. The rule just gives so much favor to the team winning toss. Would it not be better if we had 12 players selected before the toss and then have playing 11 from them after the toss (and not before it)?
3. Agarkar has been so much maligned but he seems to come up with some good performances every time. I think he is one person who should be on GC's top priority list. GC must mould him in a utility cricketer given his outstanding fielding skills. Two of his problems are: inconsistency and not supporting his bowler mates adeqately (for example, releasing pressure often after new ball bowlers did their job). There has to be someone who can sort it out.
4.And please somebody tell Saurav that he did not make 10k runs with hook and pull shots...Looks like his ego has completely done him..Even when he was regaining his strengths he looked up to his weaknesses:).. Wonder what happens if Bond was there..He just lost a golden opportunity today I guess and we may see implications after the finals:).
1. Emergence of kaif as a No.3/4- I think the time has come for Kaif to cement his place in that position. When SRT comes, he can grab the opener's slot, though I personally would see VS, SG and SRT rotating 1,2 and 3 positions according to team needs. Then we can have Dravid and Yuvraj at 5 and 6 who played so beautifully at those positions in WC. Dravid of 02-03 was a vital cog in the Indian wheel. Off late, he has been a little bit subdued which takes me back to his old ODI years. Dravid will be at his best in ODI, when he keeps on rotating strike, giving yuvrajs and dhonis the chance to expode from other end. Also, he can provide stability if the top order fails occasionally.
2. Issue of supersubs- I think SG could have been more astute today. He had Karthik today as supersub. Now, what was the point of wasting one player by taking a frontline bowler. An allrounder could have been a better bet or even a batsman-part timer. In fact, he could have got 4-5 overs from karthik by exhausting one of three seamers early when they were going for plenty. Somehow SG does not seem to show and confidence in Karthik who has bowled brilliantly sometimes.
Whoever has formulated this supersub rule probably was in too much of a hurry. The rule just gives so much favor to the team winning toss. Would it not be better if we had 12 players selected before the toss and then have playing 11 from them after the toss (and not before it)?
3. Agarkar has been so much maligned but he seems to come up with some good performances every time. I think he is one person who should be on GC's top priority list. GC must mould him in a utility cricketer given his outstanding fielding skills. Two of his problems are: inconsistency and not supporting his bowler mates adeqately (for example, releasing pressure often after new ball bowlers did their job). There has to be someone who can sort it out.
4.And please somebody tell Saurav that he did not make 10k runs with hook and pull shots...Looks like his ego has completely done him..Even when he was regaining his strengths he looked up to his weaknesses:).. Wonder what happens if Bond was there..He just lost a golden opportunity today I guess and we may see implications after the finals:).
posted by Ravi Agrawal at
5:48 PM
8 Comments:
Ravi, welcome mate. On SG, atleast in ODIs leaving those balls alone would also not be an option, since that means virtually handing the opposition the license to bowl dot balls (remember not all short balls are bouncers, hence don't always fall in the over limitations). But he has to find a way to play it. Either play them for singles or, as he is trying to do, take the initiative and score big runs of those balls. That would discourage bowlers for that match atleast.
By
worma, at 19:00
Worma: problem is that he tries non-percentage shots everytime..only if he could regain the wisdom to play attacking shots on his strengths...steve waugh never used to pull..saurav used to score on the off and he can't get perfect on short deliveries now..As you said, he should take singles off these bowls and wait for some decent score before opening his arms for these shots..
By
Ravi Agrawal, at 19:08
ravi...waugh did play some of those shots in the ODIs..and anyway his role in the team was different, so it didn't demand him to have an attacking shot to all the lines. And btw, if you have to plan an attacking shot to the shot pitched on-side stuff...then the percentage shot is pull and hook...its only his exection of those which has been awry
btw when steve played (and also when saurav made many of those 10k runs) there were no bouncers allowed, neither were the weaknesses of batsmen so well researched and exploited by bowlers all around the world.
Ganguly, during his peak days in ODI cricket, has always played the pull shot when its there to be hit. He just played it differently from others (the complete body swivel instead of just the upper half). In his role as an opener, there is no way he can escape playing it.
By
worma, at 19:24
but i agree with u, he should bide his time. As i said earlier, there are two equally good approaches to it, and he just seems to be trying one of them(to score and make the bowler change line of attack).
By
worma, at 19:26
yeah if they continue to use bhajji in this mode...no point in having the specialist bowler...heck even JP is doing same stuff(doesnt matter whether you save runs bowling spin or seam or dibbly-dobbly)...so move him to bhajji's position and get another specialist bowler ;-)
By
worma, at 19:31
Worma: I agree that SG has to play these shots in ODIs but my point was that for some time, until he regains his touch completely, he could do away with those.
After all nothing is better than staying at the wicket. But yes, you are right that in ODIs you can not escape the short deliveries completely.
Maher: Yeah, I think we should not be making headlines with individuals as often as we do especially with SG and AA. But, it was largely in the context of today's game. Especially these two guys who have got so much to give, disappoint so often, you have to raise a question or two.
Changing the subject, what do you think of Fleming's captaincy. Bond is a factor and its really difficult to understand why he dropped him. And in the last 5 overs, when it could have been close, he chose a Patel and an Adams..staggering to me.
By
Ravi Agrawal, at 19:50
akshay I do recall there was some talk between them..but it didn't look like an argument to me. The commentators did pick it up..but nothing consequential. I guess it could have started when Pathan dropped a catch off Agarkar's bowling.
And btw, Agarkar later took a catch off Pathan's bowling :-)
By
worma, at 05:50
The problem is not only that We discuss SG too much, but look at the way even a short comment on him becomes a topic of sharp discussion. If you look at my blog, I had some good points on the batting order and supersubs on which I wanted more discussion. I left only a short note for Ganguly, only because it was so relevant for that particular game. Still, it was only a SHORT END note..We could have better discussion on other points.
And anyways, I am not a SG basher by anymeans. In fact, to me his contribution to Indian cricket has been as imp as from SRT or RD (which has been widely unacknwoledged).
By
Ravi Agrawal, at 11:21
Post a Comment
<< Home