Should IPL performance be considered for National Team Selection ?

[Nate]

Yes.

Now that Hayden has gone home from the West Indies I have little doubt that the selectors will call up Marsh for the ODI series -- they wouldn't have done so if it weren't for the IPL and probably would've kept Katich over there or something.

Marsh was already in the ODI Squad.

 

[Arjun]

There's no surprise that Sehwag suggested it

I think to an extent yes, it should be considered for ODI and t20 selection...But that doesn't mean very good performances in 3-4 IPL matches (like Venugopal or Gony) should earn someone National cap; neiher is failue in IPL a huge point to ruin the career of a proven prospect (like Ishaant)...

But yes, if someone gives chances to Sehwag in ODI as an opener or drops Uthappa based on how they played in IPL, that's OK...This tournament is a good platform to judge them who are on the verge of selection...

Good point, though there are a few questions to answer-

1. How much has that player performed against internationals?
2. Where does he stand in the ratings?
3. How much impact has he had on a match?
4. How useful is he when he plays for a national team?
5. And of course, how fit is he?

Those who fit the bill this way should play for their national teams.

 

[weldone]

Come on we know who the 15 players are for ODI -
Sehwag, Sachin, Gambhir, Rohit, Yuvraj, Dhoni, Irfan Pathan, Chawla, Zaheer, Sreesanth, Ishaant, Yusuf Pathan, R.P. Singh, Amit Mishra and another batsman (ideally Ganguly or Dravid; but if seniors like them are not to be kept on the bench then someone like Raina).

 

[honestbharani]

Good point, though there are a few questions to answer-

1. How much has that player performed against internationals?
2. Where does he stand in the ratings?
3. How much impact has he had on a match?
4. How useful is he when he plays for a national team?
5. And of course, how fit is he?

Those who fit the bill this way should play for their national teams.

you missed the obvious question, Arjun.


How many SIXES can he hit?

 

[honestbharani]

Come on we know who the 15 players are for ODI -
Sehwag, Sachin, Gambhir, Rohit, Yuvraj, Dhoni, Irfan Pathan, Chawla, Zaheer, Sreesanth, Ishaant, Yusuf Pathan, R.P. Singh, Amit Mishra and another batsman (ideally Ganguly or Dravid; but if seniors like them are not to be kept on the bench then someone like Raina).

Ideally I won't want Sehwag anywhere near our ODI side. He seems to get confused playing ODIs. AS such, we can get the best use of him as our T20 and Test opener and not playing him in ODIs where his failures or even relative lack of success might hamper his confidence and the judgement of the selectors too (as has happened in the past). I would rather have an Abhishek Nayyar or a Badrinath there. They have been around in the domestic circuit for a while, know their games, proved themselves against international players in the IPL and in A tours (that is Badri alone, not Nayyar). I think they have it in them to do well at the international level. Nayyar might just be able to do a Robin Singh role for us. Whether we need a player in that role is a different question though...

 

[weldone]

Ideally I won't want Sehwag anywhere near our ODI side. He seems to get confused playing ODIs. AS such, we can get the best use of him as our T20 and Test opener and not playing him in ODIs where his failures or even relative lack of success might hamper his confidence and the judgement of the selectors too (as has happened in the past). I would rather have an Abhishek Nayyar or a Badrinath there. They have been around in the domestic circuit for a while, know their games, proved themselves against international players in the IPL and in A tours (that is Badri alone, not Nayyar). I think they have it in them to do well at the international level. Nayyar might just be able to do a Robin Singh role for us. Whether we need a player in that role is a different question though...

I've said in the other thread, why Sehwag can't be called an ODI failure by any stretch of imagination....If one says he didn't perform in ODIs anywhere near what he did in t20s and tests I would agree...But he performed well enough to be in the playing 11...

 

[Arjun]

Come on we know who the 15 players are for ODI -
Sehwag, Sachin, Gambhir, Rohit, Yuvraj, Dhoni, Irfan Pathan, Chawla, Zaheer, Sreesanth, Ishaant, Yusuf Pathan, R.P. Singh, Amit Mishra and another batsman (ideally Ganguly or Dravid; but if seniors like them are not to be kept on the bench then someone like Raina).

Pleeeeease doooon't justify numerology.

That extra batsman would be Swapnil Asnodkar. Zaheer has been blow-hot-blow-cold again, as also RP Singh, so Praveen Kumar should be in the mix again, on the bench. Spin options of Yusuf, Chawla and Mishra are a good idea (two leggies together is a risk worth taking- and no Harbhajan?), so then, close to an Indian XI?

 

[weldone]

That extra batsman would be Swapnil Asnodkar. Zaheer has been blow-hot-blow-cold again, as also RP Singh, so Praveen Kumar should be in the mix again,

O please, I feel we should stop discussing about it right now...

 

[Mister Wright]

Yes.

Now that Hayden has gone home from the West Indies I have little doubt that the selectors will call up Marsh for the ODI series -- they wouldn't have done so if it weren't for the IPL and probably would've kept Katich over there or something.

Read through the posts, we've already mentioned that Marsh is in the squad and that Watson could possibly be called in or Pomersbash given their IPL form.

 

[MrHat]

For batsmen I think so, IMO you can have pretty good guess if a player would make it as a decent OD or test cricketer. Could be different for a bowler but as a bat you're still playing basic cricket shots, if a player can block a good delivery in t20 he can do it in tests - does he play straight and does he use soft hands or really get behind the line of the ball? For determining how good a players range of strokeplay is, it could be very effective. For e.g if a player is always gliding the ball down to third man or slogging over cow corner the guy may make a good OD bat but not test. If he is cover driving, pulling and cutting effectively, and his defense (obviously critical) appears to be very sound, then one could tell then if he's got potential to be a good test cricketer. IMO a good player could always tell, given they know alot about technique and what it takes to be a test or OD player. It is an unlikely thing to influence selection but some countries are more desparate than others.

Bowling is more dificult given the shortness of the spells, but again if the bowler was taking wickets by swinging it more or bowling faster than anyone else, he should get a gernsey (sp) in OD cricket, but no way in tests as 4 overs won't test the players fitness or mentality all that much

 

[sanga1337]

Yes I think it should affect it to a certain degree in odi's and 2020's. You are playing against some of the top players from each country and its a good sign if you can do well against them. Shouldn't really affect the test team selection too much though.

 

[Richard]

I don't see how this is. Care to elaborate?

A typical scoring-rate in the First-Class game is 3-an-over, there or thereabouts. In the one-day game, 4-an-over is more typical.

In Twenty20, though, you've done well if you've kept it to 7-an-over.

The First-Class and one-day games are all about balancing attack and defence. The Twenty20 one is simply attack, attack, attack. It's why it's of so little interest to me.

 

[Isura]

A typical scoring-rate in the First-Class game is 3-an-over, there or thereabouts. In the one-day game, 4-an-over is more typical.

In Twenty20, though, you've done well if you've kept it to 7-an-over.

The First-Class and one-day games are all about balancing attack and defence. The Twenty20 one is simply attack, attack, attack. It's why it's of so little interest to me.

I'm not sure it's so simple, particularly for bowlers. OD and T20 are both about bowling containment. Yorkers, slower balls, and defensive bowling for the most part. Also a 2 over T20 spell has similar physical demands to a 5 over OD spell, both of which are much less physically and mentally demanding than bowling 3 or 4 5-6 over spells in a day. Test cricket is about keeping the pressure on the batsmen, and loose balls get punished a lot more often. Concentration and mental toughness is more important in FC games.

Batting is where there is more similarity in FC/OD than OD/T20. This is because batsmen need better technique and play straight for longer periods (but power plays have nullified this a bit). Also there is more time to get set and build a proper innings.

 

[Richard]

In Twenty20 your chances of bowling economically are near enough zero. You need a great deal of luck to do so. Otherwise a "good" economy-rate is a very, very expensive one - seven-an-over or so. In Twenty20 a bowler's only chance is to take wickets.

In proper (50-over) one-day cricket, good bowling will still produce economical figures (unless the batsmen truly throw the bat, in which case it might end-up expensive and get 4 or 5 wickets).

 

[four_or_six]

In Twenty20 your chances of bowling economically are near enough zero. You need a great deal of luck to do so. Otherwise a "good" economy-rate is a very, very expensive one - seven-an-over or so. In Twenty20 a bowler's only chance is to take wickets.

In proper (50-over) one-day cricket, good bowling will still produce economical figures (unless the batsmen truly throw the bat, in which case it might end-up expensive and get 4 or 5 wickets).

If it was luck to bowl economically, the same bowlers wouldn't be doing it consistently. McGrath, for example, has been bowling economically in a way that looks to me very similar to his ODI bowling.

 

[Richard]

What's his economy-rate been?

 

[four_or_six]

What's his economy-rate been?

It's been 6.6 in 14 games. If you look at the list of best economy rates, there are plenty of the good tight ODI bowler in there. Pollock, McGrath, Murali, Maharoof all going at less than seven an over.

Just because a good economy rate in T20 is higher than in ODI, doesn't mean that good bowling isn't rewarded any more than that a good economy rate in ODI being higher than tests means the same.

In fact, one thing that's been clear in watching the IPL is the importance of good intelligent bowling displays. It's a bowlers game in a lot of ways.

 

[Richard]

Anything where 6-7-an-over is a good economy-rate is never a bowler's game, as far as I'm concerned. That's not a "good" economy-rate at all in my books, simply fitting the requirements of the game.

I was talking about a "good" economy-rate being around the 4-an-over mark. Hence my comment "you need a hell of a lot of luck to maintain a good economy-rate".

 

[four_or_six]

Anything where 6-7-an-over is a good economy-rate is never a bowler's game, as far as I'm concerned. That's not a "good" economy-rate at all in my books, simply fitting the requirements of the game.

I was talking about a "good" economy-rate being around the 4-an-over mark. Hence my comment "you need a hell of a lot of luck to maintain a good economy-rate".

What else is a good economy rate if it isn't one that fits the requirements of the game?!

Seriously, you just need to watch and you'd see that you can say it's a bowlers game. The top sides are all those with the best bowling attacks, and good bowling spells are winning matches.

 

[Prince EWS]

I think it should be a very strong criteria for the selection of the Twenty20 team. I wouldn't factor the performances into ODI selection as such but factors such the ability to handle pressure without being overawed could be considered I suppose.