honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
Nah.. Sundar at #7 and Lord at #8. You know, the kind of batting line up that beats Australia at the Gabba.
-
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.
India's best T20 XI
- Thread starter aitorita12
- Start date
ankitj
Hall of Fame Member
Sundar is not that good an option either at #7. I mean he can come good as he showed in test format. But his t20 batting record is not all that great as yet. He should have 1-2 good seasons of IPL with bat before he is considered as #7 for India side.
#7 should be Pandya/Pant (for real #batdeep), Sundar can bat at #8 as long as he justifies his place as a bowler.
ankitj
Hall of Fame Member
Just to add, if you think Sundar is a rare prodigious talent who you are confident will do well at highest level, that's ok; he did show signs of great talent in tests. But as a general rule, I think you need someone who has much better batting record than Sundar's to be considered as India's #7.
Last edited:
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
I think the problem is that Washy does not get many opportunities to actually bat. I hope he bats at 5 or 6 for RCB this season as that is the only way we will know, really. But theoretically, it is still good depth. There are very few hitters who are as good with the ball as him, so you gotta back him to do a Jadeja, really. Maybe get better faster than Jaddu did learning on the job though.
h_hurricane
International Vice-Captain
I really do think specialists are more required in the shorter formats as opposed to tests. In tests, you have sufficient time to showcase all your skills.
In T20s, in most cases, batting beyond 6/7 is a surplus. Btw, not bad at all if you have gun T20 bowlers who can bat a bit at 8/9. Bhuvi as the obvious example, but he gets there on bowling alone.
Now, that is just my gut feeling, might backfire in this unpredictable format.
In T20s, in most cases, batting beyond 6/7 is a surplus. Btw, not bad at all if you have gun T20 bowlers who can bat a bit at 8/9. Bhuvi as the obvious example, but he gets there on bowling alone.
Now, that is just my gut feeling, might backfire in this unpredictable format.
h_hurricane
International Vice-Captain
On the Sundar topic, he is certainly a better batsman than Jadeja at the same age. I do think he has great potential if he focusses on batting alone and being the occasional bowler. Comes across as someone with an impressive technique and a clear mind, hopefully only gets better from here.
ankitj
Hall of Fame Member
Good chance you will end up with egg on face if you disagree with @honestbharani but still we will express our views
h_hurricane
International Vice-Captain
Actually, HB has backed a few players who I thought were not good enough, but he has been right in the recent past.Good chance you will end up with egg on face if you disagree with @honestbharani but still we will express our views
honestbharani
Whatever it takes!!!
*cries in Virat Kohli*
h_hurricane
International Vice-Captain
Kohli's record in T20s is truly amazing isn't it ? Averages more in this format than tests
. Also strikes at around 140. Gold class really.
There is a case for T20 averages being incrementally important when the SR is really good. For instance, I am not sure if a 130 SR/50 averaging batsman is better than 130/45 in T20s. But 140/50 is better than 140/45.
. Also strikes at around 140. Gold class really.There is a case for T20 averages being incrementally important when the SR is really good. For instance, I am not sure if a 130 SR/50 averaging batsman is better than 130/45 in T20s. But 140/50 is better than 140/45.
Manee
Cricketer Of The Year
Indeed - so reliable in a chase.
h_hurricane
International Vice-Captain
That is a ridiculous average.
Another interesting stat is that India have won only 38 tosses out of the 90 T20I matches Kohli has played i.e 42.22%.
Under his captaincy, it is 18 out of 45. Only 40%.
Another interesting stat is that India have won only 38 tosses out of the 90 T20I matches Kohli has played i.e 42.22%.
Under his captaincy, it is 18 out of 45. Only 40%.
Naheed
School Boy/Girl Captain
Impressive statistics. Under Kolis captaincy, if Inda has
won 18 out of 45 matches then it's not that good. And
yes, the average 82 is not that bad.