Has fallen a bit off the radar in recent times.How has RP gone recently?
He bowled good last time he went to England and looked at least serviceable for a while. What happened?
Oh God, I can so see them doing that!Knowing how the Indian selectors operate, Deepak Chahar could be a outside bet for on of these tours too ,specially England.
Meh, 37 wickets @ 22 isn't that impressive at all. Impressive average, sure. Good start, certainly. I wouldn't really call it an impressive overall record though, especially when he took over 20% of his career wickets in one innings.Chahar's stats actually look quite impressive. Admittedly, he did bowl in Division 2, but he played a huge role in Rajasthan's dream run home.
Not that I'm usually a fan of five bowlers at all, but I'd look at Harbhajan, Ashwin and three quicks in the West Indies, especially if they field an attack consistent of Roach and no-one else. The pitches have been ridiculously flat there of late so India should be able to comfortably score enough runs with five batsmen and Dhoni. Harbhajan's batting form has been out of this world over the last year, and Ashwin bats in the top seven domestically and averages 35 in First Class cricket. The biggest risk for India is that, in a short series, they won't be able to roll the West Indies on those decks - having three quicks and two spinners could really be the difference.I hope we play two spinners in WI. I'd be looking to give Ashwin a go if he impresses in the WC. He is somewhat similar to Mendis who troubled WI's middle order recently.
I don't think Ashwin's done enough to displace Ojha if you're not going to play five bowlers. And I'm no Ojha fan.Ashwin had a top FC season this year, with the ball. Get him to West Indies. Two spinners and just two pace bowlers though. Ashwin is an able batsman with a good record. However, we don't know if he'll be easily bounced out by pace, or how well he can play pace, so he'll probably bat at nine below Harbhajan, for the time being. Three pace bowlers will not be a good strategy - we do not have three pace bowlers of quality and the third will likely be a dead weight whether it is Ishant, or Unadkat, or whoever the selectors go with. Heck, I don't back Sreesanth to perform on West Indian pitches.
I can't be the only one waiting for SS to weigh in on this one.
There is really nothing to weigh in on. Throw darts to decide which player you want to pick and drop next - will certainly be more useful than the current selection strategy of picking Test players off IPL performances and U-19 World Cups.Nope...
over to you SS...
I'd agree with this, the West Indian pitches have been taking a fair bit of turn lately and Ashwin has done enough to get a go.Ashwin had a top FC season this year, with the ball. Get him to West Indies. Two spinners and just two pace bowlers though. Ashwin is an able batsman with a good record. However, we don't know if he'll be easily bounced out by pace, or how well he can play pace, so he'll probably bat at nine below Harbhajan, for the time being. Three pace bowlers will not be a good strategy - we do not have three pace bowlers of quality and the third will likely be a dead weight whether it is Ishant, or Unadkat, or whoever the selectors go with. Heck, I don't back Sreesanth to perform on West Indian pitches.
Who, though? First name to come to mind was Irfan, but, yeah...The problem with going with two seamers is that you know at least one bowler not named Zaheer will throwdown **** spells this match and you can't ever predict which one. While it's probable that they all will bowl crap - it's a certainty that at least one definitely will. So if you're going to go with two spinners, I think you still need three seamers - with one seamer who can bat a bit replacing India's ever-revolving door in the middle order. At least that spot will be somewhat-useful.
I think Dhoni, Ashwin and Harbhajan is a good enough 6-8 when you consider the dead pitches and the likely West Indian attack; I don't think you really need to find a seamer who can bat a bit.The problem with going with two seamers is that you know at least one bowler not named Zaheer will throwdown **** spells this match and you can't ever predict which one. While it's probable that they all will bowl crap - it's a certainty that at least one definitely will. So if you're going to go with two spinners, I think you still need three seamers - with one seamer who can bat a bit replacing India's ever-revolving door in the middle order. At least that spot will be somewhat-useful.
I kinda agree with this. WI'an bowlers might not be a huge threat specially if the wickets are gonna be flat/slow. In that case we need five bowlers to take 20 wickets. Rather than going with 2 pace men we can go with 3 pacers and 2 spinners to make sure if one bowls **** others can back it up. Scenario changes if the wickets have a bit of bounce. Since India does not have a great history with their batting under such conditions they would always go with an extra batsman.I think Dhoni, Ashwin and Harbhajan is a good enough 6-8 when you consider the dead pitches and the likely West Indian attack; I don't think you really need to find a seamer who can bat a bit.
The danger for India isn't going to be losing; it's going to be finishing 0-0. As you said, the problem with India's non-Zaheer seamers (particularly Sree) isn't so much that they can't bowl well at all, but that they're ridiculously inconsistent. If you've got five bowlers can cover for the fact that at least one of them will invariably send down rubbish. It's not a tactic I particularly like under normal circumstances but if you're ever going to play five bowlers it should be this series.
I completely agree.I don't think Ashwin's done enough to displace Ojha if you're not going to play five bowlers. And I'm no Ojha fan.