Arjun
Cricketer Of The Year
Sometimes, I think Ganguly's just plain stupid, when he repeats the same big mistakes so often.
Why 3 seamers? What sort of a seam attack is this? Why, when you have 2 quality spinners in your team? Against a batting side that is bred on seam bowling much better than what we are seeing now? In fact, Ganguly seems a better bowler than Agarkar at times, at least he uses the conditions well.
Look at Indian bowling attacks of the past that actually won matches for the team away from home. Who were the best bowlers? The spinners.
In Australia, the Indians have won just 3 matches. In 2 of them, Prasanna, Bedi and Chandrashekhar ran through the Australian teams, when they won those matches.
Even in the last away series they won, it was the spinners who had an important role to play. Even in the last few away Tests, the best bowlers have been spinners.
Look at the Test series in the West Indies that the Indians last played. The West Indian pitches favour the seamers. But who was your best bowler? Harbhajan Singh. He was the only bowler to average in the 20's and took a 5-wicket haul. He did far better than all the so-called fast bowlers put together.
In the Test series in England, the seamers disappointed, yet again. But it was likely to happen with Agarkar bowling. He bowls rubbish, so does the rest of the seam 'attack'. But when the Indians played both Kumble and Harbhajan, they won that match in Headingley. The pair were the best bowlers in that series for the Indians.
Even in New Zealand, on those seamer-friendly grasslands that are sometimes called cricket pitches, Harbhajan put up a better bowling performance than Nehra and Agarkar put together. Even on 'seamer-friendly' Mohali, Kumble and Harbhajan took 15 wickets between them to defeat the English in 2001.
You can have one good look at the bowling averages of the spinners, then the 'seamers', then decide who are the best bowlers at hand. The Indians always make this mistake of picking 5 'fast' bowlers for an away series and what happens? At least 1 or 2 don't even get a match! They are just net bowlers! At least if they played that extra spinner, he would get that odd match.
Whenever the Australians come to India or Sri Lanka, do they load the team with spinners? No, just Shane Warne and a back-up spinner, mostly for Test matches. The West Indians don't believe in picking a spinner just to have one in your team. They always play their best bowlers, irrespective of whether they are spinners or seamers. These teams play to their strengths. If the Indians played to their main strength, they would have won a few more matches abroad.
On present form, Kumble is a better bowler than Agarkar and Nehra put together. Why he was not picked is a mystery. Same for Karthik's exclusion. Australian pitches may suit seamers, but Australians thrive on seam bowling just as much. I think teams should be picked more on opposition strengths and weaknesses. Which cannot be said of the selectors.
Why 3 seamers? What sort of a seam attack is this? Why, when you have 2 quality spinners in your team? Against a batting side that is bred on seam bowling much better than what we are seeing now? In fact, Ganguly seems a better bowler than Agarkar at times, at least he uses the conditions well.
Look at Indian bowling attacks of the past that actually won matches for the team away from home. Who were the best bowlers? The spinners.
In Australia, the Indians have won just 3 matches. In 2 of them, Prasanna, Bedi and Chandrashekhar ran through the Australian teams, when they won those matches.
Even in the last away series they won, it was the spinners who had an important role to play. Even in the last few away Tests, the best bowlers have been spinners.
Look at the Test series in the West Indies that the Indians last played. The West Indian pitches favour the seamers. But who was your best bowler? Harbhajan Singh. He was the only bowler to average in the 20's and took a 5-wicket haul. He did far better than all the so-called fast bowlers put together.
In the Test series in England, the seamers disappointed, yet again. But it was likely to happen with Agarkar bowling. He bowls rubbish, so does the rest of the seam 'attack'. But when the Indians played both Kumble and Harbhajan, they won that match in Headingley. The pair were the best bowlers in that series for the Indians.
Even in New Zealand, on those seamer-friendly grasslands that are sometimes called cricket pitches, Harbhajan put up a better bowling performance than Nehra and Agarkar put together. Even on 'seamer-friendly' Mohali, Kumble and Harbhajan took 15 wickets between them to defeat the English in 2001.
You can have one good look at the bowling averages of the spinners, then the 'seamers', then decide who are the best bowlers at hand. The Indians always make this mistake of picking 5 'fast' bowlers for an away series and what happens? At least 1 or 2 don't even get a match! They are just net bowlers! At least if they played that extra spinner, he would get that odd match.
Whenever the Australians come to India or Sri Lanka, do they load the team with spinners? No, just Shane Warne and a back-up spinner, mostly for Test matches. The West Indians don't believe in picking a spinner just to have one in your team. They always play their best bowlers, irrespective of whether they are spinners or seamers. These teams play to their strengths. If the Indians played to their main strength, they would have won a few more matches abroad.
On present form, Kumble is a better bowler than Agarkar and Nehra put together. Why he was not picked is a mystery. Same for Karthik's exclusion. Australian pitches may suit seamers, but Australians thrive on seam bowling just as much. I think teams should be picked more on opposition strengths and weaknesses. Which cannot be said of the selectors.
