*Official Third Test at Headingley* 25-29 August

[silentstriker]

Neither is Pant. I think india have to go with four bowlers and pick another batsman. It’s their batting that’s letting them down, five bowlers, four of whom can’t bat at all is not the answer.

 

[silentstriker]

rohit
rahul
pujara
kohli
Agarwal
sky
pant
Jadeja/Ashwin
ishant
bumrah
siraj

 

[Spark]

Maybe, maybe not. The Indian pace line-up is a tad overrated though. Numbers are numbers and I know they've always been loved here but I think they've played on a lot of bowler friendly pitches over the past few years. They are obviously very strong but not without weaknesses, such as Siraj being loose, Shami bowling an "unlucky" length in England, Ishant's tendency to go missing for spells at a time (despite his recent strong form) and lose his action and Bumrah often going wicketless for long periods of time, e.g., the NZ series. Jimmy and Robinson seem like much easier bowlers to captain because they provide genuine steadiness and clear plans for taking wickets. India's attack seems to have lots of flair as seen in the Lords Test but vulnerable to a good batsman (e.g., Root) getting on top of them and capitalising on the loose balls or lack of consistency.

What attack in Test history has not been "vulnerable" to a batsman of Root's class and in the sort of form he is in cashing in? Short of 1980s WI bowlers, I really don't quite understand what more you could reasonably expect from what your fast bowlers have delivered in the last four years. I would say the contention that they've mostly played on pitches that are friendly for fast bowlers is mostly untrue; they've played a lot of Tests in India and Australia!

 

[neerajchopra]

Rohit
Rahul
Pujara
Kohli
Shaw/Vihari/Mayank
Jadeja
Ashwin
Pant
Shami
Bumrah
Siraj

Rahane is completely useless now. Hope that Shaw/Vihari/Mayank can eke out a 20-30 odd. Jadeja is looking ok, just getting out on the slog at the end. Looks better than Pant. Ashwin also good for 15-20 odd. Pant should come in late and just slog everything with the tail.

This team can do 200-250 odd which given the bowling will at least be competitive.

 

[Teja.]

Six specialist batters to guard against collapses? 'I don't believe in that balance,' says Virat Kohli

"If your top six or seven don't do the job, that extra batter is no guarantee of bailing you out"

www.espncricinfo.com

With two collapses - 78 all out in the first innings and eight wickets for 63 in the second - bookending India's innings defeat at Headingley, there have been suggestions, not all post-facto either - that India should play six specialist batters and that their bowling unit is good enough to take the 20 wickets without a fifth bowler. But Virat Kohli has practically ruled that combination out, saying he doesn't believe in that plan, and never has.

"I don't believe in that balance," Kohli said at the post-match press conference on Saturday. "I have never believed in that balance. Because either you can try to save a defeat or try to win the game. We have drawn games in the past with similar number of batters in the team. So, if your top six or seven don't do the job, that extra batter is no guarantee of bailing you out every time.

"You have to accept that as a team you take responsibility and pride in doing the job for the team. If you don't have the ability or the resources of taking 20 wickets going into as Test, then you are only playing for two results. And that's not how we play."

 

[Apex Predator]

Rohit
Rahul
Mayank
Kohli
Suryakumar
Pant
Jadeja
Ashwin
Shami/Shardul
Siraj
Bumrah.

 

[neerajchopra]

rohit
rahul
pujara
kohli
Agarwal
sky
pant
Jadeja/Ashwin
ishant
bumrah
siraj

shami in place of ishant. jadeja in place of agarwal/sky (should have a move up the order).

shami might never run through sides but he does bowl magic balls etc.

ashwin/bumrah the prime bowlers. siraj/shami/jaddu support.

 

[Gob]

India just need to go with 3 fast bowlers and a proper spinner from here on in. Jadeja is clearly out of his depths as a spinner in these conditions (2 wickets in 3 games at 93 lol) and if he is playing, it should be as one of the top six batsmen and provide some support to Ashwin

I think India has all the basis covered now that Rohit proved himself as a test batsman out side the SC and I've always been a Rahul fan. Pant is not going to consistently score runs in these conditions and as long as he produces a clutch innings or two, he is alright. India's biggest problem is that the thing that worked well for them for so long (middle order) is just out of form.

 

[Flem274*]

What attack in Test history has not been "vulnerable" to a batsman of Root's class and in the sort of form he is in cashing in? Short of 1980s WI bowlers, I really don't quite understand what more you could reasonably expect from what your fast bowlers have delivered in the last four years. I would say the contention that they've mostly played on pitches that are friendly for fast bowlers is mostly untrue; they've played a lot of Tests in India and Australia!

Yeah this is the best I have ever seen Root play over a series. I would not be surprised at all if this series is his pinnacle. He looks invincible.

 

[Arachnodouche]

Neither is Pant. I think india have to go with four bowlers and pick another batsman. It’s their batting that’s letting them down, five bowlers, four of whom can’t bat at all is not the answer.

Not happening. Kohli doesn't believe in the four bowler theory. He's going to gamble on the same batting and switch out Ishant/Shami for Ashwin.

At least there's something to be said for his loyalty to his players.

 

[neerajchopra]

Rohit
Rahul
Mayank
Kohli
Suryakumar
Pant
Jadeja
Ashwin
Shami/Shardul
Siraj
Bumrah.

this aint bad. shardul has done well with the ball in both his tests and seems like an ok batsman good for a 15-20 odd.

 

[Burgey]

Not fair on Jadeja's batting. He's been in some very difficult situations where he's had to tee off with the tail.

He’s not a genuine test batsman though, he’s a bowling all rounder. The idea he needs to be promoted is the wrong one, imho. He doesn’t need people to support/ bat with him. He needs to be the bloke supporting a set batsman.

They’d do better with him at eight than at six, back him to bowl long spells like Howe said and play three quicks. Although as Morgie says it’s at OT and it used to turn there a bit, not sure if it still does. Maybe two spinners is worth a shot. Shame Pandya’s not there if you did that -he could bowl some third seamer overs

 

[silentstriker]

Not happening. Kohli doesn't believe in the four bowler theory. He's going to gamble on the same batting and switch out Ishant/Shami for Ashwin.

At least there's something to be said for his loyalty to his players.

Well I know. I don’t actually have any say in the Indian team selections. But that’s just what I think is best.

 

[Victor Ian]

Best bit about that win was they way the ***** let India rekindle belief yesterday.

 

[silentstriker]

Rohit
Rahul
Mayank
Kohli
Suryakumar
Pant
Jadeja
Ashwin
Shami/Shardul
Siraj
Bumrah.

You can’t drop Ishant given how well he has bowled the last few years. He is an automatic selection for the duration of this series.

 

[Burgey]

Six specialist batters to guard against collapses? 'I don't believe in that balance,' says Virat Kohli

"If your top six or seven don't do the job, that extra batter is no guarantee of bailing you out"

www.espncricinfo.com

With two collapses - 78 all out in the first innings and eight wickets for 63 in the second - bookending India's innings defeat at Headingley, there have been suggestions, not all post-facto either - that India should play six specialist batters and that their bowling unit is good enough to take the 20 wickets without a fifth bowler. But Virat Kohli has practically ruled that combination out, saying he doesn't believe in that plan, and never has.

"I don't believe in that balance," Kohli said at the post-match press conference on Saturday. "I have never believed in that balance. Because either you can try to save a defeat or try to win the game. We have drawn games in the past with similar number of batters in the team. So, if your top six or seven don't do the job, that extra batter is no guarantee of bailing you out every time.

"You have to accept that as a team you take responsibility and pride in doing the job for the team. If you don't have the ability or the resources of taking 20 wickets going into as Test, then you are only playing for two results. And that's not how we play."

Same logic says if three quicks aren’t going to do the job, four won’t either. A five man attack is a luxury they can’t currently afford. Take 20 wickets all you like. You’ll still lose if you’re defending sub 150-200 totals all the time. Englands batting is as junk as India’s, in fact it’s actually worse, man-for-man. You don’t need five bowlers to dismiss them in these conditions.

 

[Flem274*]

Five bowlers would be ideologically fine even with the middle order shambles if Jadeja and Pant were pulling their weight with the stick, but they're not, so they get demoted to the engine room where they belong and India bring in a real batsman.

 

[Bijed]

Same logic says if three quicks aren’t going to do the job, four won’t either. A five man attack is a luxury they can’t currently afford. Take 20 wickets all you like. You’ll still lose if you’re defending sub 150-200 totals all the time. Englands batting is as junk as India’s, in fact it’s actually worse, man-for-man. You don’t need five bowlers to dismiss them in these conditions.

Yeah, I've got no issue with Kohli preferring 5 bowlers on principle, but using something being "no guarantee" of working in any context as a definitive reason not to make a change is a terrible approach to decision making imo

 

[Arachnodouche]

Agree with Burgey. Five bowlers have worked well for India but if conditions are forcing your batting to be defensive to such a great extent and at which task you're so obviously failing, isn't it implicit that you need to shore up that aspect first? There's adequate help on offer for bowlers, its the batting that needs backup.

 

[Niall]

Same logic says if three quicks aren’t going to do the job, four won’t either. A five man attack is a luxury they can’t currently afford. Take 20 wickets all you like. You’ll still lose if you’re defending sub 150-200 totals all the time. Englands batting is as junk as India’s, in fact it’s actually worse, man-for-man. You don’t need five bowlers to dismiss them in these conditions.

They need a wicket keeper so Pant stays and Jadeja has been ok with the bat tbf. Its doubtful any of the reserves would do any better than him anyhow batting.

Jadeja also has to bat under insane pressure, he has rabbits for company all the time this series. I don't think he has ever batted when India were in any sort of dominant position due to the uselessness of the middle order.

Lets see Vihari, Yadav do any better at 7 when the middle order has failed next test and all they have for company is Pant and rabbits.