posted by Prem Panicker at
sorry for posting it on a different thread :-)A couple of interesting points on yesterdays game..first..the way Jayasuriya got out.This seems a patented strategy for India to get Jayasuriya out.First instance when t his worked was during the world cup semis in India, when Srinath had himcaught at third man of a wild slash..after which though Desilva freaked out on kumble and Co.Happened a couple of times after as well.The second instance is with the super sub...wonder why we had sreesanth as the super sub.The strategy seems to be, keeping the playing XI well balanced, there by not having tobase the strategy on the supersub.This way when either the spinners are bowling too badly or that the seamers are findinggood purchase, bring in Sreesanth.have to say that dint convincing even to me.:-)I assume, dravid won the toss, and if he was gonna bowl on winning? why did he select a bowleras the super sub?But looks like, they wanted to test out our batting second and see how we cope...Good performance, otherwise, just one sour note.Sad to see Ganguly getting the boot.Was expected and prolly wat the doc ordered.But this is not the way to treat him..Maybe, something was worked out. But why cant people accept the fact and sayokay. things have gone bad. We are facing trust in the coach and going by him.Unless you improve your attitude, itz curtains for you. or that we are looking beyond and dont want anybody that is a liability in the field.Hmm...thts prolly expecting too much, aint it:-)Lets see what argument they put forward when Kaif gets into the team.Will they still say, no changes cause the team performs well at that time?I doubt it. I see Kaif walking into the team., the moment he is declared fit.Oh Ganguly, looks like itz just test matches for you.They dare not remove him frm the captaincy for test cricket.that day , when they annoucne the test team, should be fun :-)
By Ginkgo, at 14:16
I do not understand the rationale behind dropping VVS Laxman from the ODI team. None of the batsman rao, kaif, yuvraj, sehwag are in a class of him. Remember the world cup is not played in India's backyard where the above guys can can score some runs. The cup is played in WI and though it is a shorter version of the game the role of specilist batsman/bowler always comes into picture in tight games involving good teams.In a scenario where we are 20/2 or so against a Australia, England, Pakistan in a key game I would take Laxman over anyone including Tendulkar or Dravid. For one he scores freely and is realible under these conditions. So all these theories of building the squad for World cup is non sense. You can have the likes of Rao/Gambhir have 25 -30 games under their belt but it does not matter.Their is nothing wrong in grooming for the future but why it has always be at the cost of Laxman, especially if he is performing well. On top of that he is younger than Dravid or Tendulkar.With the supersub rule in place his role should be more prominent now.I do not know what it is but something does not smell right with the way Laxman is treated and no one says a thing about it except saying that he is a liabilty on the field. Trust me he is no more bad than a Dravid/Sachin/Sehwag.I can understand GC present theory if we are building a team for ASIA cup. But come on we are talking of world cup on a foreign soil and he prefers rao, gambhir, raina over Laxman.Who is he kidding????
By ramshorns, at 14:18
gingko,I remember that semi when Kalu and Jayasurya were dismissed in similar fashion. I am not so sure of this though. For this, the bowler would have to bowl short of length outside the offstump and you might get one Jayasurya dismissal but more often, the ball will scream to the fence. I think this mainly happens when he plays this shot too early in his innings (2nd ball today and 2nd ball in that semi) or when there is a bit of extra bounce for the bowler.
By Toney, at 14:29
gingko, I am assuming u select the supersub before the toss. If this is correct, What if India lost the toss and put into bat first ? Then Santh would have been a good choice because of the dew factor when spinners would have found it difficult to grip the ball.
By Poondu, at 14:30
Prem..I wonder how good the whole Mali system is that we have in India...instead of curators. There are pros and cons....wonder if you have some insight? Ever dealt closely on this matter? Personally I feel that this kind of craft can be learnt through apprenticeship..which the maali groudnsmen have gone through over years. And that its not rocket science....it doesnt need 'soil experts' to teach them much about making a pitch. What say?
By worma, at 14:51
hmm Poondu, yeah true...guess the coin spins both ways:-)Just wondering if there is a thinking that went into it or are we just selecting bowlers, or players ( generally) based on their showin in the previous games and making them the super sub.Toney,yes thts true. But it seems to be the most succesful way for us against him. Another is when he tires and holes out.:-)worma,I think exp teaches u as much and infact even more than wat class room stuff does.Im sure our malis are pretty knowledgeable and can get you what you want.May be they may not know the modern ways of aerating and letting the soil 'breathe' more.But im sure it would make sense to educate them in that, rather than bringing in people from outside ot handle such stuff.
By Ginkgo, at 15:10
poondu,Your hypothetical of India being put in is valid, but take a look at the mathematical odds. If you know you are going to bowl first, then there is at least a 50% chance you will (if you win the toss). If you lose the toss, the opposing captain may decide to bowl or bat. Assuming he chooses each option roughly equally, the average overall percentage chance of you doing exactly what you wanted first is 75%. Therefore, you should select the supersub with you winning the toss in mind. It's always going to be a bit of a lottery in the current format, but this way it will play out in your favor more often than not. If you plan on bowling first, select a batsman as your supersub and vice versa.
By Sahir, at 15:33
For whom the bells, tole?
By Ashvin Iyengar, at 15:36
Prem, the knocks may have been top-notch, but were they really "seminal"? Seminal efforts, as far as I know, are efforts which lead to something. Seminal research, for instance, usually spawns a whole field. I'm not exactly sure how a batsman's innings can be seminal, unless it is something that was a significant first in a major body of work.lol @ ashvin, good oneAs for the supersub, why does everyone think that the supersub not being used is a bad thing. In this case, India knew they were going to field first on winning the toss, but they were also pretty sure SL would do the same thing. So there was a pretty good chance they would be fielding second, and since they were playing two spinners (who have the greatest difficulty bowling with a wet ball), thought it might be worthwhile to have a safety valve in an extra seamer. I thought it was a very smart use of the supersub. Imagine, for instance that they had picked a batsman as the supersub. He would still have not been used, because we didn't need an extra batsman. The supersub doesn't have to be valuable only when used, he can also be valuable in just providing a safety valve, if things don't go as planned.
By Sudo Nima, at 16:00
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
By Sahir, at 16:36
Alvin,"there was a pretty good chance [India] would be fielding second"What was the chance of this? From India perspective, mathematically speaking it was less than 50%.From India's perspective, there was a greater chance of fielding first. Logic would tell you to play the odds and choose your sub based on what you intend to do if you win the toss. The only time one should hedge their bets, as India did today, is when you are absolutely certain what the opposing captain will do upon winning the toss (i.e. bat first on an extremely dry wicket likely to crumble; bowl on a moist greentop). Other than that, as my post above explains, a captain should play the odds (75%) to utilize the supersub to its fullest effect. That way the supersub will bolter the batting or bowling, whatever the case may be, in approximately 3 out of every 4 matches.
By Sahir, at 16:39
Post a Comment
'What do they know of cricket, who only cricket know?' - thus, from CLR James. Duh! I donno -- do you?