India's opening pair

[Deja moo]

Pointless if you ask me.
Dravid should bat three all the time and Laxman five all the time, simple as.

Its not as "simple as"

If Dravid batted 3 and Laxman 5 all the time , the Kolkata test of 2001 would have had a very different result .

 

[Deja moo]

... or rather Ganguly doesn't like, eh?

Nope , its the entire team management .

 

[NikhilN]

I am gonna go with Jaffer and Sehwag...Jaffer should be given more chances at tests...he looks like a good player to me

 

[marc71178]

In place of whom in the middle order?

India's middle order spots are as certain as Stephen Fleming's captaincy of New Zealand.

In that case he's not good enough.

If he can't displace someone in the current team, then he's by definition not as good as them, and therefore not good enough.

 

[Craig]

So you don't consider Sehwag good enough for the Indian team?

By that logic Martin Love must not be good enough for Test cricket because he can't displace Ricky Ponting or Damien Martyn?

 

[Adamc]

So you don't consider Sehwag good enough for the Indian team?

By that logic Martin Love must not be good enough for Test cricket because he can't displace Ricky Ponting or Damien Martyn?

If Love is not good enough to displace anyone in the current Australian team, he is not good enough to play for Australia.

 

[GermanShepherd]

... or rather Ganguly doesn't like, eh?

Well when Sachin Tendulkar was captain. he wasn't exactly keen on Mongia's inclusion in the team.

 

[masterblaster]

Wasim Jaffer has been tried and tested many times. He hasn't been up to it, plus there are more valuable openers around.

Why waste time with Jaffer?

 

[tooextracool]

In place of whom in the middle order?

India's middle order spots are as certain as Stephen Fleming's captaincy of New Zealand.

you pick batsmen according to their batting position see key......IMO if they want yuvraj in the side then one of the experienced middle order players must move up the order and IMO it should be either ganguly or tendulkar.

 

[Richard]

You cannot compromise a strength, especially if it is SRT, by batting them in the wrong position.
If you want to bring someone in, someone proven should not have to leave the position they have made their own.

 

[Richard]

In that case he's not good enough.

If he can't displace someone in the current team, then he's by definition not as good as them, and therefore not good enough.

Not good enough - or not got the chance?
IMO "good enough" means good enough to make a success of yourself at that form and level of the game. Just because someone can't displace someone because that person got there first doesn't mean they're not as good as them.
For instance, it is now clear that there is one and only one better Australian batsman than Darren Lehmann, but Lehmann still had to wait his turn because Mark Waugh, Stephen Waugh, Martyn and the like got there first.
It doesn't mean they're better than Lehamnn.

 

[marc71178]

Yet in some people's minds that is what is happening

 

[tooextracool]

You cannot compromise a strength, especially if it is SRT, by batting them in the wrong position.
If you want to bring someone in, someone proven should not have to leave the position they have made their own.

why not?tendulkar has the ability,experience and the technique to open the batting and i for one believe that he will be a better opener than a no 4. regardless even if it doesnt work he can always move back down the order.
you dont want to compromise someone experienced but you would much rather have a youngster who has had barely had any experience at the intl arena and isnt a genuine opener bat in the wrong position so that he can probably fail and then never be considered in the side again?

 

[Richard]

Its not as "simple as"

If Dravid batted 3 and Laxman 5 all the time , the Kolkata test of 2001 would have had a very different result .

Well, probably, but not certainly.
Anyway, glorious spontenaity has it's moments, usually.
That's all it was, though. As we saw in Australia, it does work the other way around, and as we've seen in many subsequent home series, it certainly works in India.
I don't think Laxman should be batting three, I think it's Dravid's position and doing something at home, something else away is a very risky strategem.

 

[Richard]

Yet in some people's minds that is what is happening

"that is what is happening"?
Sorry, but that doesn't make any sense to me.

 

[Richard]

why not?tendulkar has the ability,experience and the technique to open the batting and i for one believe that he will be a better opener than a no 4. regardless even if it doesnt work he can always move back down the order.
you dont want to compromise someone experienced but you would much rather have a youngster who has had barely had any experience at the intl arena and isnt a genuine opener bat in the wrong position so that he can probably fail and then never be considered in the side again?

IMO that's better than tainting Tendulkar.
The best choice is just to pick another opener.
If Yuvraj is so good his time will come in his proper position anyway.
It's the selectors' fault if they base failings when batting out of position on future selection considerations.

 

[tooextracool]

IMO that's better than tainting Tendulkar.
The best choice is just to pick another opener.
If Yuvraj is so good his time will come in his proper position anyway.
It's the selectors' fault if they base failings when batting out of position on future selection considerations.

no its not tainting at all....kirsten recently moved away from a place that he made his own so that smith could open and he didnt do too badly at 3 either. the point is that even if tendulkar failed, he could always go back to 4, if yuvraj failed it might just be the end of his career. i dont see how you can say that it would be better to put an inexperienced youngster up against the new ball instead of an experienced batsman(pretty much past his prime) batting at the top. it doesnt work that way at all.

 

[Deja moo]

why not?tendulkar has the ability,experience and the technique to open the batting and i for one believe that he will be a better opener than a no 4. regardless even if it doesnt work he can always move back down the order.
you dont want to compromise someone experienced but you would much rather have a youngster who has had barely had any experience at the intl arena and isnt a genuine opener bat in the wrong position so that he can probably fail and then never be considered in the side again?

I agree with that . There is no one with a better technique than Sachin for opening ( Except Dravid )...Better send him up the order than some middle order guy .

 

[Arjun]

you dont want to compromise someone experienced but you would much rather have a youngster who has had barely had any experience at the intl arena and isnt a genuine opener bat in the wrong position so that he can probably fail and then never be considered in the side again?

That is exactly what happened to Badani, Rathore, some wicketkeepers and almost happened to Laxman. The way Sachin is batting, he would make a far better 'makeshift' opener than these raw players.

 

[marc71178]

"that is what is happening"?
Sorry, but that doesn't make any sense to me.

It was the reply above that about replacing someone having to leave a place they've proven themselves in.