Umesh is not currently cut out for ODI cricket. He's had his chances and he has been poor. He did nothing of note in the Challenger Trophy. How he performs here should not impact on ODI selection, totally different formats.
Along with everyone else. But they are better on helpful decks. Hence, the likes of B Kumar and Vinay Kumar have better records then Yadav.
Which bowler, of any country, is great on flat decks in ODIs? You're way too quick to slag off bowlers for struggling in flat, limited-overs matches. Those matches are guaranteed runfests
Mcgrath
England's bowlers, who won a Test series against India. The combo of Steyn and Morkel, with the support. Why, even Australia's inexperienced Starc-Cummins-Pattinson-Johnson (left-and-right jokes notwithstanding) have had some strength on flats. Flat decks are not an excuse for poor bowling. If these bowlers are not good enough on flats, they're simply not good enough, because the team's not winning. We see such remarks about Indian batsmen struggling on seaming wickets, so why not pull up so many Indian bowlers who are incompetent when it doesn't help them?
You would, however, need someone at Yadav's pace to win more matches, instead of mere sessions. A more valid reason to keep him out is that he's not played much active cricket, is not in prime form and is a little raw. Let's follow the whole season. Unless you're rolling in options at high pace, you can't rule anyone out unless that someone has lost pace, like Munaf or Ishant.
But flat tracks in limited overs often lead to 180 v. 170 or 350 v. 310. Did the bowlers of both sides bowl crap the entire time? Morkel has bowled tons of filth and been hammered in test matches, not to mention some horrendous one day matches. Jimmy's ODI record is filled with spankings on flat pitches.
The exception that proves the rule.
You've mentioned two green-top bullies, who get spanked on flat decks, and end up bruised and battered, but still survive and take a few sticks each time. The Indian bowling, on the other hand, simply capitulates on a flat deck, often handing the match on a platter. Observe how India's bowling surrendered, and Australia's bowling posed a threat on a flat deck against a batting side that is by no means weak. The pacers simply had no firepower to survive the Pune pitch.
Absolutely disappointing. Knockouts should be done away with, and replaced with a league with a points system.
I want to see more Duleep Trophy. It is not ideal because people have no allegiances. However, I think the standard of Ranji Trophy is still too low. The best players average 60-70 over a season in Ranji Trophy cricket and this is not limited to one player. Tendulkar averages 80 for Bombay and 109 for Mumbai. Dravid averaged 76 for Karnataka. Laxman averaged 80 for Hyderabad. I know these players are/were great but this is too high. We should have a system where the greats average 45-65, domestically. This sort of average inflation means that someone averaging 55 for his state might be a fine Test player or an absolute hack. It is why we have no idea whether to persevere with the likes of Mukund and Rahane and even Badrinath.
I feel the introduction of foreign players in the Ranji Trophy will raise the bar. One or two a team, like it is in England. That way, when the Indian national players are away, the standard does not go down, nor are teams negatively impacted.
Largely agree with your thoughts though I don't know how much foreigners can really improve the standard play if they can only have 1-2 players. In my ideal world, players would have the freedom to play wherever and domestic FC teams from all over the world would play in a champions league
The advantage of having foreign players will be incremental, if not drastic. When the Indian frontline players are away, the standard of the Ranji Trophy falls to sub-IPL levels. Getting foreign players into teams when they are not playing for their national sides will add quality- there won't be easy runs/wickets/lead-pinches then.Largely agree with your thoughts though I don't know how much foreigners can really improve the standard play if they can only have 1-2 players. In my ideal world, players would have the freedom to play wherever and domestic FC teams from all over the world would play in a champions league
Wasn't a huge fan of the original zonal format. I'd rather have the a tiered system that only allows the top league to win the trophy, that too only through points.
First-class cricket is not conducive to knockout play, so I'm totally with you there.
Removing knockouts and only allowing the first tier teams to win the trophy would give more space in the schedule for the Duleep Trophy, which I do agree needs to be expanded (the quality of players is more concentrated).
