***Official*** India in England

[sohummisra]

I'll have to apologize on Gul, I hadn't been following his test career too closely. with 34 wickets in his last 7 tests, he definitely is looking promising. Hope he comes back strongly from injury (but not against India. )

 

[shortpitched713]

anyway bac to topic
what do people think will be the teams?
i dont know much about india but i know forsure as does everone who follows pakistan cricket this will be the team

Butt
Nazir
Younis/Malik
Yousuf
Younis/Malik
Afridi
Razzaq
Akmal
Shoaib
Asif
Gul

Personally this is the team I would have for the match against India.

1. Butt
2. Akmal+
3. Hameed
4. Yousuf
5. Malik*
6. Younis
7. Afridi
8. Razzaq
9. Sami
10. Akhtar
11. Asif

Hameed has done better than Younis at number 3 so he is in. Nazir does not at all look like an international class opener to me. Akmal gets the job because hes as well suited for it as anyone else. Gul is out of form so he is not included, and Iftikhar's bowling, though reliable, lacks bite. Considering his lackluster bowling, Razzaq barely justifies his place at 8, but Pakistan's batting order has a tendency to make like a deck of cards and fall flat on their face in foreign conditions so a bit of batting depth can't hurt. For the match against Scotland I'd bring in Nazir, Alam, Iftikhar, and Gul for Yousuf, Afridi, Sami, and Asif so all the players in the squad can get a match.

 

[adharcric]

I would predict the following XI for India:

1. Gambhir
2. Ganguly
3. Yuvraj
4. Tendulkar
5. Dravid
6. Karthik
7. Dhoni
8. Powar
9. Agarkar
10. Zaheer
11. Sreesanth

I would like to see Chawla and Sharma against Pakistan but I think they will use them for the South Africa ODI's and prefer this 'safer' option.

Uhh, why would they opt for the safer option against Pakistan? South Africa is easily the superior one-day side.

Sharma should get some action, btw.

 

[Sanz]

Indeed I have. I don't know where you got Gambhir's name from, by the way, because I put him in a different group from Chopra and Jaffer. And by style, I mean that they are built in the same mould: defensive. It's the same mould that Dravid comes from. It's a different mould from what Sachin, Sehwag and Ganguly came from, although the former and the latter seem to have changed, now.

Well Jaffer and Chopra aren't in the same mould. Ganguly was never in that mould as a Test batsman.

 

[honestbharani]

Dravid isn't a great batsman then? Karthik certainly has more power than Dravid does. By the way, Karthik can find the boundary and play quick innings - there are several examples from his u-19, A-level and domestic career. Unlike someone like Yuvraj or Dhoni, he cannot hit sixes at will ... but he can certainly find the boundary efficiently when required. Besides, we will rarely require him to go berserk. Dhoni can take over a match and Yuvraj has the ability as well - as long as they can both cement a place in the test side, we should be fine.

Of course Dravid is a great batsman. And I would honestly think he is better off at forcing the pace than Karthik, at least as of now.


One more thing, I think you have all taken what I said the wrong way. I never said it was completely necessary for guys like Karthik or Dhoni to bat the other way and bat well at that. But I was just pointing out that with the exception of Dhoni (when needed), India don’t have the batsman who are ready to take charge of the match from say 250*2, which is something that most other teams don’t lack. That is all. If that is rectified, I think India’s chances in tests will improve drastically when it comes to winning.

 

[sohummisra]

Well Jaffer and Chopra aren't in the same mould. Ganguly was never in that mould as a Test batsman.

They are both primarily defensive batsmen (at least in the roles they have thus played in the international game) although Jaffer has more strokes to offer once he gets settled in. Ganguly didn't start out being primarily defensive but he has shifted towards that attitude. His performances in ODI's surrounding his comeback show this as he prefers to stabilize the innings, even when there is no stability required, as such.

 

[sohummisra]

Uhh, why would they opt for the safer option against Pakistan? South Africa is easily the superior one-day side.

Sharma should get some action, btw.

Good point, however I think they will opt for the safer XI simply since it's a one-off.

 

[Dasa]

They are both primarily defensive batsmen (at least in the roles they have thus played in the international game) although Jaffer has more strokes to offer once he gets settled in. Ganguly didn't start out being primarily defensive but he has shifted towards that attitude. His performances in ODI's surrounding his comeback show this as he prefers to stabilize the innings, even when there is no stability required, as such.

You shouldn't mix up ODIs and Tests....Ganguly has been more defensive in ODIs since his comeback, but he's been as aggressive as usual in Tests.

 

[gunner]

Uhh, why would they opt for the safer option against Pakistan? South Africa is easily the superior one-day side.

obviously they would rather lose a match against south africa than pakistan

 

[Turbinator]

India's gonna' whoop some Pakistani butt!

 

[Sanz]

India's gonna' whoop some Pakistani butt!

 

[Turbinator]

Oh dear, don't tell me I just jinxed India...




































once again .

 

[Manee]

They are both primarily defensive batsmen (at least in the roles they have thus played in the international game) although Jaffer has more strokes to offer once he gets settled in. Ganguly didn't start out being primarily defensive but he has shifted towards that attitude. His performances in ODI's surrounding his comeback show this as he prefers to stabilize the innings, even when there is no stability required, as such.

Regarding Ganguly in ODIs, no matter the strike rate, which imo has not been terrible, you cannot argue with 629 runs in 11 matches at 62.90 with 7 fifties.

 

[gunner]

India's gonna' whoop some Pakistani butt!

not this pakistani butt,
india may have got lucky in 2006 but now this is a new era in pakistani cricket.

i have a feeling india will be caught out with their new full of flaws policy of playing 6 batsmen and also dhoni and karthick in the same line up

 

[R_D]

not this pakistani butt,
india may have got lucky in 2006 but now this is a new era in pakistani cricket.

i have a feeling india will be caught out with their new full of flaws policy of playing 6 batsmen and also dhoni and karthick in the same line up

How's winning 4 out of 5 matches lucky ? That too quite easily. there were one or 2 close ones but the others were convinving wins.

 

[Shaggy Alfresco]

I think what Sanz means is:

India's gonna' whoop some Pakistani butt!

 

[Richard]

Poor use of the Naughty, TBH, Shahid.

 

[Richard]

I don't think (or rather, hope) Panesar will have a series-changing effect on this series, but I definitely see him stifling the batsman... a lot. India carry around the traditional reputation of being the best players of spin in the world but the last two years has pointed to anything but that. Panesar was impressive when he toured India, and I think with the recent successes under his belt, he may have the confidence to do a lot of harm.

That's all it is, though - a stereotype. Mostly, of course, it's been the case - India have usually had a large number of excellent players of spin. They still do now, of course - but it doesn't mean that a good spinner on a turning pitch can't outdo them, as a good seamer with a swinging ball and a seaming pitch can outdo even the best batsmen.

I can't see Panesar causing the Indians problems, though, without turning pitches.

Secondly, Panesar has usually come on to bowl after successful early pressure from the pace bowlers of England. Kumble will not have this advantage most of the time, whereas Panesar may still, against India. Thus, Panesar may get more, 'cheaper' wickets than Kumble, thus meaning that the tracks may not be ripping turners, but sufficiently useful.

I don't really mind too much about getting the cheap wickets, TBH - almost by definition taking the cheap wickets isn't having a massive effect on the game.

You may well be right about him doing so, but if it comes down to Kumble vs Panesar for the series, I'd still back India. Hence, I'm hoping it won't do so.

 

[Turbinator]

How's winning 4 out of 5 matches lucky ? That too quite easily. there were one or 2 close ones but the others were convinving wins.

Yea that too in there own backyard... .

 

[gunner]

well in a way you just returned the favour

hardly record breaking is it
we beat you 4 straight matches in your back yard

you did the same to us 1 year later

only difference was we actually battered you in 2005