Quote:
Originally Posted by Arjun
Maybe you'll find these options better for T20? Not really 'your' top six- just lists, and then you pick the top six, and so on.
Code:
YOUR TOP SIX Mat Inns NO Runs HS Ave BF SR 100 50 4s 6s
M Vijay 84 82 3 2100 127 26.58 1670 125.74 2 10 181 87
Yusuf Pathan 122 110 19 2353 100 25.85 1552 151.61 1 11 186 135
Raina 125 118 18 3318 101 33.18 2386 139.06 1 19 284 138
Rohit Sharma 133 122 23 3174 109* 32.06 2434 130.40 2 21 276 125
Yuvraj 101 97 13 2259 71 26.89 1699 132.96 0 12 178 119
Dinesh Karthik 109 95 16 1942 90* 24.58 1521 127.67 0 9 201 45
Rayudu 75 72 10 1699 81* 27.40 1390 122.23 0 12 156 51
Mayank Agarwal 37 32 2 615 64* 20.50 464 132.54 0 3 51 32
If Sehwag can make it, you've got one more batsman who's got a seriously high strike rate. All four of the top five have at least one century scored, and with Sehwag, five of five. You can then add in at least one batsman very good on the field, and also striking over 125. Mandeep Singh and Mayank Agarwal are the top options now, although Sid Chitnis at seven is a decent pick- at least he's got an average boosted by not-outs, since he comes in so low down- which also explains lack of fifties. Rayudu is another seriously good alternative, as he's also got adequate T20 (75 games) experience. You also have two bowling options in this pack. |
Raina, Rohit and Yuvraj I'd all have either in the team or the squad. I really like the idea of having Yusuf in the team, but not after his abysmal IPL. Vijay is a good IPL performer but absolutely failed at international T20 cricket. With 122 runs at 17.42 and a strike rate of 98.38 - simply not good enough and 7 games is a big opportunity. Dinesh Karthik's record really isn't that good in T20s and he did not capitalize on his chances in T20Is. Agarwal's record is nowhere near good enough. As for Rayudu, I would not mind if he was given an opportunity in T20s. He seems pretty good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arjun
Then the bowling options
Code:
YOUR TOP FOUR Mat Inns Balls Runs Wkts BBI BBM Ave Econ SR 4w 5w
Munaf 66 66 1421 1723 78 5/21 5/21 22.08 7.27 18.2 2 1
Balaji 73 73 1451 1840 85 5/24 5/24 21.64 7.60 17.0 2 1
Dinda 65 62 1244 1434 68 4/13 4/13 21.08 6.91 18.2 3 0
PP Ojha 81 80 1705 1960 100 4/21 4/21 19.60 6.89 17.0 2 0
Awana 14 14 324 421 20 4/34 4/34 21.05 7.79 16.2 1 0
Amit Mishra 88 88 1915 2212 112 5/17 5/17 19.75 6.93 17.0 1 2
Irfan Pathan 113 110 2331 2973 115 4/27 4/27 25.85 7.65 20.2 1 0
All except Balaji and Irfan have got economy under 7.5, and every one of them has an impressive strike rate, all under 20. Irfan may have had a horrible IPL, but his T20I comeback was quite good- average under 18, and while his economy was over eight, he has a strike rate of 13- seriously effective when used well. He's also the only bowler capable of batting for T20. Of these, Balaji, Munaf and Dinda are not Test prospects, Awana is still raw, and Ojha, ideally, should be chosen for T20Is instead of Tests. |
You cannot separate strike rate and economy rate like you do. 2/45 off 4 overs is a poor performance, 0/16 off 4 overs is an excellent performance. Pathan in the long term will be an expensive bowler and he cannot guarantee wickets at the top. He should stay in the team for the moment in the name of consistency, but I think he will soon become a liability in the format. Munaf frustrates me because his overall numbers look good but he can be a total waste on a bad day - it really is hard for me to say if he should play for India in T20s.
I have no idea what you mean by "Awana is still raw". He is experienced and I have no clue what you mean by the word "raw". Ojha should play all formats, imo. He is a fine spinner. He is probably weakest in Tests but you cannot argue against his recent performances!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arjun
I would not risk Sehwag, Gambhir, Zaheer, Harbhajan, Dhoni, Ashwin and Kohli in T20Is, as their Test form is critical. Too much cricket in a calendar year can trigger a slump in form, and I am concerned about Kohli falling into one- he was woefully out of form in Australia till the last Test. Besides, some of them may not be fit enough for T20Is in the year 2014, when the next event will be held. It doesn't really help to have them in the T20I squad, as it won't result in instant wins- too many losses in T20Is, including their poor post-IPL performance in the Super Eights, suggest there's need- and room- for change and improvement in the T20 squad.
|
'Too much cricket in a calender year can trigger a slump in form' - I'd like to see some evidence for this!
"Poor post-IPL performance in the Super Eights" is NONSENSE. We lost one game and won the other two. All teams lose the odd game in T20. India played well in this tournament.
Also, a poor performance (not that there was one) does not always indicate need for change. Sometimes, the best team is not good enough.