*Official* Australia in India - ODIs

[Pratters]

In ODIs, Pathan averages 37 with the ball because he's rarely got a chance to finish even seven overs. If he finished ten or at least seven regularly, the figures would be different. The List-A figures are a tad disappointing, but he's had an upswing lately, and has largely done well, bar one series or two. In the last ODI he played, he went for fewer runs than any bowler, bar Ishant. In FC cricket, he's a regular spinner and has repeatedly taken five wickets, including a ten in the same match where he scored a 150. These haven't been equalled by any batsman called on to bowl.

I'll again go back to your Pratosphere post on dropping Harbhajan. He's got a dreadful average this year, which would be worse without the five-wicket haul. Likewise, Ojha has looked largely unimpressive in ODIs. This is despite both being carried for long and given a very long run. Yet one's still tipped as the best ODI spinner and the other is largely, despite absence of batting, tipped as a hopeful for ODIs.

The current crop of bowlers isn't outstanding. There's nobody running riot like a Mendis or Mitch or even Saeed Ajmal. The option would be to pick as many bowlers who can score runs specially for ODIs- at least they'll recover some of what is lost.

Nah, disagree with you. If we give away 290-320 runs per game, we will lose more often than win whatever our batting because of the pressure a high score builds up.

Our bowling is weak and it needs to be improved and there are no two ways about it IMO.

 

[Manee]

Is Balaji special like Zaheer or Pollock to do it though? I don't think so.

Vaas and Pollock were mostly very accurate when operating at low speeds; it is not beyond Balaji to do the same.

 

[Cruxdude]

I went to bed with India 6 down and woke up to see us losing by 4 runs. Bhajji's innings has now assured him his place for a few more matches. Ishant looked good. Yet again PK looked out of sorts in the death overs. Some hard decisions have to be taken now in the bowling department. Get in Mishra.

 

[Pratters]

Vaas and Pollock were mostly very accurate when operating at low speeds; it is not beyond Balaji to do the same.

It is very difficult to do what Vaas and Pollock did. A LOT of bowlers bowl at lower speeds. Most of them don't end up playing tests. I don't think Balaji can do it. If you talked about Munaf Patel doing it, I would think that might be possible but not Balaji.

 

[inbox24]

Munaf McGrath should play the rest of the series.

 

[Top_Cat]

Brett Lee apparently had a sore elbow.

If it's his right elbow, New Zealand just colletively choked on their own rage.

 

[Burgey]

Nah because Siddle isn't exactly slow.

Lee's pace has hurt him often bowling at the death, but he still consistently does it in ODIs and T20s, both for Aust and NSW.

No way was it a tactical decision.

Bit of a chuckle last night when the TV coverage listed Siddle as Right Arm Medium Fast, and he sent the first ball of his over down at 144 kph.

 

[Sylvester]

Lee has had his moments at the death and I've called for him to be dropped from death bowling, in the heat of the moment but when he gets it right there aren't many better at the death. Pace and reverse swing are the two things you don't want to face when trying to slog. With his current form I've sure he would have done the job.

 

[duffer]

Vaas and Pollock were mostly very accurate when operating at low speeds; it is not beyond Balaji to do the same.

Doesn't have the cricketing brain or the requisite control to fill that role for us. SO I do think it's well beyond him.

 

[howardj]

Long live one-day cricket!

 

[honestbharani]

Jadeja would be a good pick if he wasn't so hopeless with the bat at no.7...



Man.. what a fight from Bhajji and PK.. Ponting must be kidding himself when he said they were never in the game.. 9 off 6 with two set batsmen.. I would go for the batting side 9 times out of 10..

 

[Arjun]

Nah, disagree with you. If we give away 290-320 runs per game, we will lose more often than win whatever our batting because of the pressure a high score builds up.

Our bowling is weak and it needs to be improved and there are no two ways about it IMO.

If the bowling is weak enough to cost matches, why do we still have Sehwag and Yuvraj and even Raina bowling more than ten overs a game? Even when it makes the bowling ridiculously weak? And cuts off at least 15 runs an innings from each? Under such circumstances, the idea should be to pick five bowlers, of which three can score runs. Right now, three of your best ODI bowlers- Harbhajan, Kumar and Mishra- and by a long shot, Zaheer, and in form, the Pathans, can do the job well. That should be used to good effect.

Look at the Aussie lower order- they have Johnson, Lee and Hauritz, who can all score some runs. That is in addition to a batsman who can bowl a lot (Watson) and someone who's here and there but settled at neither (Hopes). Likewise, the Kiwis have a lower order of Vettori, Franklin and Mills, in addition to Oram. Even Sri Lanka have a very strong bottom five, with all but Murali and Mendis capable of scoring regularly. Why can't India? Why should they be stuck with bowlers who can't bat- and thus, batsmen who can't bowl but yet come on to bowl and make things so tough?

It's about managing your resources. The Indians have mismanaged their resources time and again, and the impact has been adverse.

 

[Arjun]

Doesn't have the cricketing brain or the requisite control to fill that role for us. SO I do think it's well beyond him.

Balaji is one more talented player laid by the wayside. They've lost one too many, and as of now, they can consider going back to him. He doesn't have too much to offer, though.

 

[Arjun]

Munaf McGrath should play the rest of the series.

Beware- you might just get Munaf Mick Lewis or Munaf de Mel or Munaf of the High-scoring Christchurch Riot. In addition to a compounded fielding problem.

The existing bunch need a longer run.

 

[Arjun]

I went to bed with India 6 down and woke up to see us losing by 4 runs. Bhajji's innings has now assured him his place for a few more matches. Ishant looked good. Yet again PK looked out of sorts in the death overs. Some hard decisions have to be taken now in the bowling department. Get in Mishra.

Bhajji's place was often assured for some time. Each time he was dropped, he was missed- be it in England in 2007 (Chawla and less so Powar not striking enough, Powar costing matches on the field), or in BD/Pak in 2008 (Chawla and Ojha smashed for lots of fours and sixes, with few wickets to show). With Irfan out for some time (injury, a break in domestic cricket till Nov 3), Bhajji may have to be the run-scoring bowler, with PK. I wouldn't say the lacklustre performance was just because of these two, but that could happen to anyone. Ishant just got lucky and a little back. Nehra was a tad unlucky later in the game and could have suffered. Jadeja got away with some inept bowling because the Aussies just milked him for singles and attacked the rest.

If PK has a problem with the final overs, that was because he faced set batsmen who built a partnership on Jadeja's overs, in addition to an off-colour Bhajji. His figures would have been a lot better if he ran through the middle-overs. Less runs scored, and a few wickets taken, and tailenders in the final overs. They can have him finishing before the final ten overs, with the spinners and part-timers coming in later. They can have a Gayle in their bowling- spinner at the close of innings.

 

[Streetwise]

Jadeja would be a good pick if he wasn't so hopeless with the bat at no.7...



Man.. what a fight from Bhajji and PK.. Ponting must be kidding himself when he said they were never in the game.. 9 off 6 with two set batsmen.. I would go for the batting side 9 times out of 10..

I have read some of Pontings comments about the game such as,

""It was a terrific game of cricket in the end and we would have been disappointed had we lost," he said.

"They kept fighting until the last ball and Harbhajan got them really close, but we are obviously happy we are 1-0 up."

"Our performance was pretty good until the last six or seven overs of the game."

"We did a good job batting first to get to that sort of total, but we knew that they could chase it down because the outfield was so fast and the wicket held up pretty well right through the course of the game."

"The ball swung around a bit in the morning, but we expected that and perhaps it was a good toss to win."

"We started well with the ball and had them under pressure earlier on, but I think we were just good enough to get across the line."

Any chance you can give a link to your comments.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Think it's worth reiterating that there is persistent talk in the news of Lee being under an injury cloud, which is a fair reason for not bowling Lee.

 

[Streetwise]

Think it's worth reiterating that there is persistent talk in the news of Lee being under an injury cloud, which is a fair reason for not bowling Lee.

Lee was unable to bowl because of a elbow injury and could also miss the next game. During the game when Ponting asked Lee to bowl he told Ponting that his elbow was hurting and he couldent bowl. Was there ever any doubt that Lee was injured, everyone knew about it so unless you live under a rock how could you not know about his injury.

 

[honestbharani]

I have read some of Pontings comments about the game such as,

Any chance you can give a link to your comments.

http://www.hindu.com/2009/10/26/stories/2009102659461600.htm



Reading it again, I guess he meant something different but initially, I thought he was wrong and that Bhajji did take the game away from them with 9 required off the last over.


Apologies if that is indeed the case.. I read it in bed juz after waking up and didn't read anything more substantial on what Ponting had said (most sites have not opened here for me today)...

 

[Streetwise]

http://www.hindu.com/2009/10/26/stories/2009102659461600.htm



Reading it again, I guess he meant something different but initially, I thought he was wrong and that Bhajji did take the game away from them with 9 required off the last over.


Apologies if that is indeed the case.. I read it in bed juz after waking up and didn't read anything more substantial on what Ponting had said (most sites have not opened here for me today)...

I did a search on you with Ponting posts and you are allways quick to critisize him and have allways looked to tarnish anything about him so I kinda guessed that there was no substance to you putting shyte on him again.