Assessing the Sri Lankan changes for the final - Page 2

GingerFurball · 02-04-2011, 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jono

I don't understand the not picking Mendis because India reads him argument. That's fine if you're selecting Randiv over him. But you're selecting Randiv over Herath, and Kulasekera over Mendis.

So India may be able to pick Mendis, but it's not like they can't pick Kulasekera's bowling either

IMO they lost the game as soon as Malinga finished his first spell. Neither Kulasekara nor Perera put the Indian batsmen under any sort of pressure. Gambhir, for the first 20 or so deliveries looked scratchy as hell.

Jono · 02-04-2011, 03:36 PM

Not just Gambhir. Malinga was all over Kohli outside off. I was absolutely ****ting myself during Kohli's first 10 balls.

My mate immediately told me it was a mistake taking Malinga off. I responded "I guess they're saving him for the death". He rightly responded "they're not going to win by defending the total in 50 overs. They need to bowl India out".

Cevno · 02-04-2011, 03:38 PM

Tbf, same was the case with Zaheer and India today.

His overs were not used earlier to attack and in the end ,he was ineffective.

Jono · 02-04-2011, 03:46 PM

Yeah could have kept him on, but it would have been a huge call. SL were only 1 down.

Whereas India were 2 down, and SL knew what they were defending. One more Malinga over was worth it IMO.

Ultimately though, Malinga didn't have the support. India saw off any threat from Murali, and that was that.

Cevno · 02-04-2011, 03:49 PM

If not kept on Zaheer could have been brought on when Srilanka lost their 2nd or 3rd wickets,to add to the pressure.

But instead Dhoni was more preoccupied with finishing Sreesanth's quota of overs,but he kept releasing the pressure after every wicket with loose overs.

And Zaheer whose overs were saved for the PP like Malinga proved ineffective in the end.

NUFAN · 02-04-2011, 06:33 PM

An absolute joke of a decision by Sri Lanka.

I would hate to be Mendis at the moment. Sorry Ajantha, we know you've taken 4/69 from 19.5 overs across the quarters and semis but this is India, so we have to lose our minds and pick a guy who wasn't even in the squad.

I wonder what would have happened had Matthews played? Surely only one of Perera and Kulasekara would have played.

Really unusual captaincy too, I can't believe that Murali wouldn't have even bowled out his 10 overs, even with a dodgy knee.

KiWiNiNjA · 02-04-2011, 09:22 PM

Sacrificed bowling for some extra batting depth.

With my 20-20 hindsight I can safely say that it was very silly.

How does Randiv all of a sudden jump both Herath and Mendis for the 2nd spinner role? Why bring in Kapu over Silva? Strange.

But ultimately, it was poor captaincy by Sanga that brought India back into the game. Gambhir played a great innings, but Sri Lanka made it a little to easy from overs 10-20 after such a great start.

Spark · 02-04-2011, 09:26 PM

That period after Malinga's spell was where they lost it. Such sloppy cricket from SL.

social · 02-04-2011, 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KiWiNiNjA

Sacrificed bowling for some extra batting depth.
With my 20-20 hindsight I can safely say that it was very silly.

How does Randiv all of a sudden jump both Herath and Mendis for the 2nd spinner role? Why bring in Kapu over Silva? Strange.

But ultimately, it was poor captaincy by Sanga that brought India back into the game. Gambhir played a great innings, but Sri Lanka made it a little to easy from overs 10-20 after such a great start.

This

Not only was the lineup for the semis undoubtedly stronger but the chosen x1 for the final signalled a complete change in strategy from what they'd used all tournament

Very odd

Jono · 02-04-2011, 11:06 PM

But they didn't add batting depth. They only added batting firepower near the end.

They still only had 5 specialist batsmen, which is what resulted in Dilshan and Tharanga being so hesitant early (obviously Zaheer bowling a great spell helped!).

They were in a weird situation where they lengthened their batting lineup, but also made it shorter at the same time.

KiWiNiNjA · 02-04-2011, 11:13 PM

Well, you could call that batting depth, imo.
Shortened the tail, then?

Anyhoo, surely in a WC final you trust the top order that got you there. Yeah, Matthews injury sorta threw the balance of the side, but replacing Matthews with two players (Perera and Kula) came at the expense of one of their better bowlers of the tournament in Mendis.

Hindsight and all, but it did stink when the sides were announced too.

thierry henry · 03-04-2011, 02:07 AM

Mendis averages 19 in ODIs (19 FFS!!) and gets dropped for the final FOR A BLOKE WHO WASN'T IN THE SQUAD after playing like the gun he is all tournament, because of a perception that India play him well.

This decision is going to look more and more bizarre as time goes by

The way I see it Kapugedera/Silva was pretty meh (both crap), Kulasekera was a swap for Herath (as those two seem to have been fighting for a spot most of the tournament, and arguments can be made for both depending on pitch conditions) and Perera came in for Matthews as he's the next closest thing to an all-rounder.

vic_orthdox · 03-04-2011, 02:27 AM

Think it shows the difference between what the selectors gave the team management and what the senior players/coach wanted.

jeevan · 03-04-2011, 11:34 AM

This thread is dancing around the fact that Sri Lanka's bowling didnt have the depth to trouble India in the same way that Paksitan or even Australia and SA did.

Malinga had a dream first spell - but nobody else - including Murali or Malinga's subsequent spells - were able to create sustained pressure from that excellent start. Mendis would have to be formidably a better spinner than Murali or Randiv, and Matthews significantly more attacking a bowler than Kulasekara or Perera to make a difference.

In fact, having to replace Mathews with 2 seamers who could bat probably didn't hurt. Had SL really played 3 spinners, and elected to bat - wouldn't the dew factor hamper the 3rd spinner at least as much as the 2 best spinners in their squad?

jeevan · 03-04-2011, 11:44 AM

Mathews replacement with Kulasekara & Perera didn't hurt SL with the bat either. Yes their openers played in a circumspect manner, but even with Mathews their middle order was fragile &/or untested.

And in any case, Jayawardene was going at a ball a run from the start, and Mathews' replacements combined for 54 out of 39 balls with the bat.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Sri Lankan shirt	Amobokobokoboko	Cricket Chat	0	08-05-2010 12:53 PM
How many Indian, Pakistani and Lankan Forummers on this board?	Vikas Bhatt	Cricket Chat	0	13-12-2009 02:52 AM

02-04-2011, 03:36 PM	#17 (permalink)
Jono Request Your Custom Title Now! Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Virat Kohli Posts: 47,560	Not just Gambhir. Malinga was all over Kohli outside off. I was absolutely ****ting myself during Kohli's first 10 balls. My mate immediately told me it was a mistake taking Malinga off. I responded "I guess they're saving him for the death". He rightly responded "they're not going to win by defending the total in 50 overs. They need to bowl India out".

02-04-2011, 03:38 PM	#18 (permalink)
Cevno International Coach Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: India Posts: 14,950	Tbf, same was the case with Zaheer and India today. His overs were not used earlier to attack and in the end ,he was ineffective.

02-04-2011, 03:46 PM	#19 (permalink)
Jono Request Your Custom Title Now! Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Virat Kohli Posts: 47,560	Yeah could have kept him on, but it would have been a huge call. SL were only 1 down. Whereas India were 2 down, and SL knew what they were defending. One more Malinga over was worth it IMO. Ultimately though, Malinga didn't have the support. India saw off any threat from Murali, and that was that.

02-04-2011, 03:49 PM	#20 (permalink)
Cevno International Coach Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: India Posts: 14,950	If not kept on Zaheer could have been brought on when Srilanka lost their 2nd or 3rd wickets,to add to the pressure. But instead Dhoni was more preoccupied with finishing Sreesanth's quota of overs,but he kept releasing the pressure after every wicket with loose overs. And Zaheer whose overs were saved for the PP like Malinga proved ineffective in the end.

02-04-2011, 06:33 PM	#21 (permalink)
NUFAN International Coach Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: NSW Posts: 13,790	An absolute joke of a decision by Sri Lanka. I would hate to be Mendis at the moment. Sorry Ajantha, we know you've taken 4/69 from 19.5 overs across the quarters and semis but this is India, so we have to lose our minds and pick a guy who wasn't even in the squad. I wonder what would have happened had Matthews played? Surely only one of Perera and Kulasekara would have played. Really unusual captaincy too, I can't believe that Murali wouldn't have even bowled out his 10 overs, even with a dodgy knee.

02-04-2011, 09:22 PM	#22 (permalink)
KiWiNiNjA Cricketer Of The Year Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: In the kitchen Posts: 9,414	Sacrificed bowling for some extra batting depth. With my 20-20 hindsight I can safely say that it was very silly. How does Randiv all of a sudden jump both Herath and Mendis for the 2nd spinner role? Why bring in Kapu over Silva? Strange. But ultimately, it was poor captaincy by Sanga that brought India back into the game. Gambhir played a great innings, but Sri Lanka made it a little to easy from overs 10-20 after such a great start.

02-04-2011, 11:06 PM	#25 (permalink)
Jono Request Your Custom Title Now! Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Virat Kohli Posts: 47,560	But they didn't add batting depth. They only added batting firepower near the end. They still only had 5 specialist batsmen, which is what resulted in Dilshan and Tharanga being so hesitant early (obviously Zaheer bowling a great spell helped!). They were in a weird situation where they lengthened their batting lineup, but also made it shorter at the same time.

02-04-2011, 11:13 PM	#26 (permalink)
KiWiNiNjA Cricketer Of The Year Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: In the kitchen Posts: 9,414	Well, you could call that batting depth, imo. Shortened the tail, then? Anyhoo, surely in a WC final you trust the top order that got you there. Yeah, Matthews injury sorta threw the balance of the side, but replacing Matthews with two players (Perera and Kula) came at the expense of one of their better bowlers of the tournament in Mendis. Hindsight and all, but it did stink when the sides were announced too.

03-04-2011, 02:07 AM	#27 (permalink)
thierry henry International Captain Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Auckland, New Zealand Posts: 5,032	Mendis averages 19 in ODIs (19 FFS!!) and gets dropped for the final FOR A BLOKE WHO WASN'T IN THE SQUAD after playing like the gun he is all tournament, because of a perception that India play him well. This decision is going to look more and more bizarre as time goes by The way I see it Kapugedera/Silva was pretty meh (both crap), Kulasekera was a swap for Herath (as those two seem to have been fighting for a spot most of the tournament, and arguments can be made for both depending on pitch conditions) and Perera came in for Matthews as he's the next closest thing to an all-rounder.

03-04-2011, 02:27 AM	#28 (permalink)
vic_orthdox Global Moderator Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 24,371	Think it shows the difference between what the selectors gave the team management and what the senior players/coach wanted.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

03-04-2011, 11:34 AM	#29 (permalink)
jeevan International 12th Man Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: San Jose CA Posts: 1,677	This thread is dancing around the fact that Sri Lanka's bowling didnt have the depth to trouble India in the same way that Paksitan or even Australia and SA did. Malinga had a dream first spell - but nobody else - including Murali or Malinga's subsequent spells - were able to create sustained pressure from that excellent start. Mendis would have to be formidably a better spinner than Murali or Randiv, and Matthews significantly more attacking a bowler than Kulasekara or Perera to make a difference. In fact, having to replace Mathews with 2 seamers who could bat probably didn't hurt. Had SL really played 3 spinners, and elected to bat - wouldn't the dew factor hamper the 3rd spinner at least as much as the 2 best spinners in their squad?

03-04-2011, 11:44 AM	#30 (permalink)
jeevan International 12th Man Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: San Jose CA Posts: 1,677	Mathews replacement with Kulasekara & Perera didn't hurt SL with the bat either. Yes their openers played in a circumspect manner, but even with Mathews their middle order was fragile &/or untested. And in any case, Jayawardene was going at a ball a run from the start, and Mathews' replacements combined for 54 out of 39 balls with the bat.