Spark
Global Moderator
On the other hand, Bumrah is currently better at, well, bowling.
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
*Official* India Tour of Australia 2018/19
- Thread starter Starfighter
- Start date
cnerd123
likes this
I think it's a fair argument to suggest that the attack of Cummins/Haze/Lyon/Starc as a whole will function better than Cummins/Haze/Lyon/Bumrah, even tho Bumrah is better than Starc
I don't know if it's a strong argument, but it's valid. Personally I think it depends on the conditions and the kind of batting lineup you're up again. A right-hand heavy lineup with a long tail favors picking Starc. A high-scoring pitch favours Starc. Otherwise go Bumrah.
mr_mister
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I remember they were all the rage in high school
CricAddict
Cricketer Of The Year
Lyon doesn't get in over Ashwin or Jadeja. Even if you could argue that they are on par in terms of bowling, Ashwin and Jadeja's superior batting gets them into the team.
cnerd123
likes this
Lyons scored more runs this test than Ashwin tho
stephen
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Which is exactly why stars don't tell the full story. Hazlewood was extremely unlucky (and not bowling-too-short unlucky).
cnerd123
likes this
Nah Ishant's 'unluckiness' has usually come from bowling too short or too wide to take wickets. He'll beat the bat and look good but never really threaten the stumps or the edge consistently.
Haze bowled very good areas, found the edge often, and was a constant threat. Also Pujara played him exceptionally well. In another game he'd easily take 6 wickets or more.
stephen
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Not when 1/3 of his balls are no balls. Then it's just natural statistical variation.
Burgey
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Shami was India's Starc. Mostly bowled pus but got some wickets in between. Haze and Bumrah were easily the pick of the quick bowlers in the match, third spot between Ishant and Cummins imo, both of whom bowled really well.
Burgey
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Yeah, keeping in short sleeves is an abomination at any level above under 10s.
sunilz
International Regular
Then it is umpire's fault to not point it out.
Burgey
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Yeah, I think Lyon's current bowling is better than Ashwin's by a bigger margin than Ashwin's current batting beats Lyon's.
It would also be gutsy to pick Jadeja over Lyon in a combined side from the first test given he didn't, well, actually play.
stephen
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Yes and we were all annoyed by it while he was bowling. It easily meant Australia lost 20 odd runs.
CricAddict
Cricketer Of The Year
Question was not on combined team from the first test. Below is the question posed.
What would combined IND/AUS side look like based on current form and available players ?
The bolded part is definitely contestable. I will take Ashwin's batting+bowling over Lyon's batting + bowling. We cannot decide just based on one test.