If i was an indian selector........................

[Arjun]

Makes an Indian fan wonder...If the Indians were doing very well as a Test and ODI side, wouldn't they have a lot less unofficial selectors? Anyway, the same openers should play in Tests and ODI's, for better stability.

 

[Richard]

Hmm, don't know about that!
Most of India's best Test-players are also their best ODI players (Ganguly, Sehwag, Dravid, Tendulkar, Laxman, Agarkar, Pathan, Balaji, Khan, Nehra, Kumble, Harbhajan Singh) but there are also fringe Test-players (Yuvraj Singh, Kaif) whose ODI places are more secure.
The batting-order is the main thing that needs to change.
IMO neither Ganguly or Sehwag (who are my preferred ODI opening combo) are Test-match openers and certainly Tendulkar (the other option in ODIs) is not.

 

[Deja moo]

Makes an Indian fan wonder...If the Indians were doing very well as a Test and ODI side, wouldn't they have a lot less unofficial selectors? .

No, the reason could also be that the right players have been selected, and are just going through a poor phase.

 

[Arjun]

No, the reason could also be that the right players have been selected, and are just going through a poor phase.

Not too many teams have as many unofficial selectors as the Indian team. Not just a few players, but the whole team is going through a horrible phase, and have not won too many tournaments either.

 

[Arjun]

Hmm, don't know about that!
Most of India's best Test-players are also their best ODI players (Ganguly, Sehwag, Dravid, Tendulkar, Laxman, Agarkar, Pathan, Balaji, Khan, Nehra, Kumble, Harbhajan Singh) but there are also fringe Test-players (Yuvraj Singh, Kaif) whose ODI places are more secure.
The batting-order is the main thing that needs to change.
IMO neither Ganguly or Sehwag (who are my preferred ODI opening combo) are Test-match openers and certainly Tendulkar (the other option in ODIs) is not.

Surprisingly, there are some who don't want Laxman in the ODI side.

 

[Richard]

Oh, yes, there are plenty who make those sorts of noises on here.
I can see where they're coming from:
After 82 ODIs, Laxman's average is a none-too-impressive 31.47. The most infuriating thing is that almost all of his success has come against Australia, West Indies and Zimbabwe. Against the other 4 countries that matter (ie not Bangladesh, UAE and Kenya) he averages a quite appalling 18. Most of his success against Sri Lanka (he averages 40.75 against them, but in just 5 innings) was in a single innings of 87*. Of his success against Zimbabwe, if you remove the games after WC2003 (since when Zimbabwe, frankly, have not been good enough to play ODIs), he turns into a relative failure with an average of 26.71.
Yes, Laxman is better than Dinesh Mongia - if Mongia really is the next best option then Laxman should be playing ODIs.
What I ask myself is, surely there must be some better one-day batsmen in India than Dinesh Mongia and VVS Laxman?

 

[Arjun]

What I ask myself is, surely there must be some better one-day batsmen in India than Dinesh Mongia and VVS Laxman?

Yuvraj Singh could be that batsman. Sadly, he has never lived up to his potential, and may be a very good example of what could have been.

 

[Richard]

Yuvraj Singh's still got plenty of time to improve.
And he's played alongside both Mongia and Laxman plenty of times.
I mean, these batsmen have been near enough fixtures in the ODI side for the last 2 years:
Ganguly, Sehwag, Dravid, Tendulkar, Yuvraj Singh, Kaif. Just need one more batter (and, possibly, a replacement for Kaif - still not completely convinced about him yet).
The one thing we certainly can't do is bat Dravid at three and make him keep wicket - it'll take years off his career. If Dravid is going to keep (clearly best for the balance of the side) he needs to bat five. Which means you need a three. Some would say: simple, Tendulkar, Sehwag, Ganguly, Kaif, Dravid, Yuvraj. That's been tried a few times. Personally I don't rate Kaif especially at four, I think he's best coming in lower down, and I also think Tendulkar at four is best for the balance of the side, you have your best player coming in when the most variety of situations are likely to be presented.
I always thought Agarkar had some potential at three. That leaves you the option of another batsman down the order:
Ganguly, Sehwag, Agarkar, Tendulkar, Dravid, Yuvraj Singh, x, x, Pathan, Kumble, Harbhajan Singh. Of course, you can also play another bowler that way.
Trouble is, it can be construed as primarily a waste of two batsmen at seven and eight. And there's no point in playing a wicketkeeper otherwise you might as well bat Dravid at three.

 

[Deja moo]

What I ask myself is, surely there must be some better one-day batsmen in India than Dinesh Mongia and VVS Laxman?

Hemang Badani sadly finds himself left out every time.

 

[Richard]

Badani is a player I liked the look of when I first saw him, but he's wasted his share of opportunities, as well as playing the odd good innings. His List-A average is very impressive and certainly there are players I'd like less to see get more chances.

 

[Deja moo]

I always thought Agarkar had some potential at three. That leaves you the option of another batsman down the order:
Ganguly, Sehwag, Agarkar, Tendulkar, Dravid, Yuvraj Singh, x, x, Pathan, Kumble, Harbhajan Singh. Of course, you can also play another bowler that way.
Trouble is, it can be construed as primarily a waste of two batsmen at seven and eight. And there's no point in playing a wicketkeeper otherwise you might as well bat Dravid at three.

AA at three might not be as far fetched a move as it seems. IMO, he would do no worse than Laxman does vs teams other than Australia and the minnows. The advantage would be that AA plays every game instead of being dropped to accomodate Nehra , and also that Dravid could be allowed to concentrate on just his batting by playing a true keeper .

 

[Arjun]

Agarkar was tried at three, bu only had one good innigns, which was not even that great- the West Indians pounded those runs at a good strike rate of over 100, while Agarkar's was a scratchy 74-odd. His second innings failed. That said, his main skill-bowling, was never that great, and still isn't, so he should be played as a fifth bowler, in Indian conditions. But why can't they get more runs out of Irfan Pathan? His batting is better than that of other bowlers, and all keepers tried so far, except Dinesh Karthik. If promotion higher up the order worked for Mighty Slash Dhoni, why not Irfan Pathan?

 

[Richard]

Personally I think Pathan needs to be tried up the order in domestic cricket - it's only 4 or 5 years ago he was apparently a full-time all-rounder - before trying him in Tests and ODIs - IMO he's definately got some potential, but those domestic averages aren't awe-inspiring.

 

[Arjun]

Personally I think Pathan needs to be tried up the order in domestic cricket - it's only 4 or 5 years ago he was apparently a full-time all-rounder - before trying him in Tests and ODIs - IMO he's definately got some potential, but those domestic averages aren't awe-inspiring.

Agreed, but a pity the Indian captain and a grumpy rival of yours don't. Those domestic averages are not awe-inspiring, but won't get better at numbers 8,9,10 and 11.

 

[Deja moo]

Agarkar was tried at three, bu only had one good innigns, which was not even that great-

Since when is an innings of 95 not great ?And you must remember, it was the first time he was batting at number 3 too.

the West Indians pounded those runs at a good strike rate of over 100, while Agarkar's was a scratchy 74-odd.

95 at a strike rate of 74 is not too bad. His innings of 95 was not the reason India lost the match .

His second innings failed.

No he did not fail in his second innings.....namely because he was dropped for the next game.

 

[Arjun]

No he did not fail in his second innings.....namely because he was dropped for the next game.

He got the next two games, but did little of note.

 

[J-Train]

My Test Match Team for India would be:

1. Sehwag
2. Chopra
3. Tendulkar
4. Dravid
5. Laxman
6. Ganguly
7. Patel
8. Agarkar
9. Pathan
10. Kumble
11. Harbajian

12. Kartik

I think the India team is pretty good at the moment. They did really well last summer here, where I was expecting the Aussies to annihilate them. Agarkar bowled really well, but I couldn't believe he is almost considered for selection because of his all-rounder ability, he looked a mug with a block of wood when he was here. Kartik is a gun, he should be the next in the team when either Kumble or Harbs either have injury or a real dip in form.

I have heard of Sriram and co, but never seen them, so I can't really say if I would have them in the team. I can only relate it to the Aussies selection ideas (where I have a bit more knowledge!) The selectors are trying to slowly blood youngsters into the team. Lehmann (hardly young though) was finally given his chance in the test team when Mark Waugh retired, then Katich when Steve Waugh left, (2 years apart from memory,) while Clarke has been blooded in by using ODIs. The same can be said for Nathan Bracken, who I think the selectors think will be in for McGrath (kinda irreplaceable!!) The biggest problem for our team is that a large proportion is starting to age, even Ponting is 30 now! I think India and England will become really big powers soon, while us Aussies need to get a wriggle on and get some new lads in, particularly some good, young pace bowlers.

Phew!!

 

[Arjun]

Agarkar bowled really well

Just for one innings, with some help from some MAD Aussie batting.

I couldn't believe he is almost considered for selection because of his all-rounder ability

There are two other bowlers who can bat better, and even Boycott thinks so. One of them has hit Lee, Akhtar, Sami and even Muralitharan for big shots. These two, if they make full use of their batting ability, can prove vital selections in the Indian team.

Kartik is a gun, he should be the next in the team when either Kumble or Harbs either have injury or a real dip in form.

You do remember what happened to him in Australia, don't you? Ever since, he's been in awful form. Sehwag took him apart for 35 runs in an over. Besides, Bahutule is a much better bowler, Powar is a better batsman and fielder, while Sehwag can't do much wrong, given the ball, to support the strike bowlers.

I have heard of Sriram and co, but never seen them, so I can't really say if I would have them in the team.

Sriram's really, really good. e has good innings temperament, and he is very professional, and even though he's 31, I'd still have him in the team. Any team would want to have him.

Age is no criterion for selection. Skill and match-fitness, along with utility, have to be. Steve Waugh lasted till age 37, players made their debut aged 30, in this Australian team. IF the Indians are not a great team, it's this obsession with age that's responsible.

Anyway, the Indians need pace- lots of it, if they have to play 3 seamers in the near future.

 

[marc71178]

Those domestic averages are not awe-inspiring, but won't get better at numbers 8,9,10 and 11.

Maybe he's at 8 and lower because he isn't good enough to go higher?

 

[V Reddy]

If i were an Indian Selector i would replace Chopra with his Ranjimate Gambhir b'coz Chopra just doesn't seem to have the ability to get past 40's and if he is there just to see off the new ball then even Sanjay Bangar did the same thing and quite well too and also offered a useful option of medium pace in abroad places.

Then i would replace Yuvraj with Sriram. The poor guy just deserves a game and also Gavaskar shouldn't get anywhere near the team as he isn't just good enough . If Sriram doesn't succeed then there are other players like Kaif,Mongia, Badani ,Rao and obviously Yuvraj if and when he returns to form.

Parthiv to be replaced by Dhoni/Karthik. Reasons have already been specified a lot of times.