*Official* India in South Africa

[Blaze 18]

Granted that Virender Sehwag has been very successful at the top of the order, but batting him at five could be an option worth considering in South African conditions. Is it a mere coincidence that his only century in South Africa came when he batted in the middle-order ? I dunno.

 

[G.I.Joe]

I have a really radical idea for India's batting lineup. I know it may be a little out there but hear me out.

Firstly, Sehwag and Gamhir open the batting. I know it's a philosophy that the likes of Australia, New Zealand, Bangladesh and Pakistan don't subscribe to so I may be scoffed at, but I have this theory that picking the best two opening batsman in the country to open the batting could be a secret weapon. It's a gamble, but a gamble I'd be willing to take in these desperate times.

Dravid bats three. While the number three position is usually reserved for underperfoming young batsmen who average under 27 domestically like Martin Guptill, I think India can afford to go with the potentially outrageous option of picking an experienced Test batsman with 12,000 Test runs at an average of over 50 and an excellent technique adaptable to all conditions. Who knows - maybe the ability to score top order runs on lively wickets will actually be useful while trying to score top order runs on lively wickets.

In my most controversial suggestion of the lot, I'm going to put forward the unprecedented idea of Tendulkar batting four. While no batsman has ever gone out to bat at number four at any level of cricket having scored more than 14530 Test runs, I think the old chap might just be good enough to do it.

Laxman bats five. He's terrible under pressure, hopelessly out of form and has the worst record in South Africa of all the Indian batsmen but number five's a completely inconsequential position that couldn't possibly ever be the difference between India winning or losing a Test, so I think they can hide him there.

Traditionally the number six spot would be filled by a one day specialist hack cricketer who wasn't up to Test cricket mentally or technically, but I think the element of surprise could work for India here as that's the exact sort of player South Africa will be expecting them to pick. Instead I'm going to give a gun young batsman with a good technique and a stupidly good First Class record (Pujara) an actual run in the side of more than one game. They definitely won't see that coming.

On top of all the problems I admitted this lineup had earlier in my post, I also have concerns over the fact that it's the exact same team that would've played the second Test if Gambhir was fit. Who in their right mind actually makes a forum post advocating no changes to a batting lineup? It's almost enough to make me scrap the whole idea and go with a top six of; Tendulkar, Raina, Laxman, Pujara, Dhoni, Sehwag.

Who da thunk it?

 

[Dissector]

Never thought I would see an Indian pacer do that.

That was exactly my thought when I saw the replay after it happened. I know Sree will probably revert to his usual mediocrity sooner or later but hell that was a moment to treasure.

 

[silentstriker]

I didn't realize that SA only won 1/5 of their last series. If so, why aren't people questioning their #2 rating?

 

[Manee]

I have a really radical idea for India's batting lineup. I know it may be a little out there but hear me out.

Firstly, Sehwag and Gamhir open the batting. I know it's a philosophy that the likes of Australia, New Zealand, Bangladesh and Pakistan don't subscribe to so I may be scoffed at, but I have this theory that picking the best two opening batsman in the country to open the batting could be a secret weapon. It's a gamble, but a gamble I'd be willing to take in these desperate times.

Dravid bats three. While the number three position is usually reserved for underperfoming young batsmen who average under 27 domestically like Martin Guptill, I think India can afford to go with the potentially outrageous option of picking an experienced Test batsman with 12,000 Test runs at an average of over 50 and an excellent technique adaptable to all conditions. Who knows - maybe the ability to score top order runs on lively wickets will actually be useful while trying to score top order runs on lively wickets.

In my most controversial suggestion of the lot, I'm going to put forward the unprecedented idea of Tendulkar batting four. While no batsman has ever gone out to bat at number four at any level of cricket having scored more than 14530 Test runs, I think the old chap might just be good enough to do it.

Laxman bats five. He's terrible under pressure, hopelessly out of form and has the worst record in South Africa of all the Indian batsmen but number five's a completely inconsequential position that couldn't possibly ever be the difference between India winning or losing a Test, so I think they can hide him there.

Traditionally the number six spot would be filled by a one day specialist hack cricketer who wasn't up to Test cricket mentally or technically, but I think the element of surprise could work for India here as that's the exact sort of player South Africa will be expecting them to pick. Instead I'm going to give a gun young batsman with a good technique and a stupidly good First Class record (Pujara) an actual run in the side of more than one game. They definitely won't see that coming.

On top of all the problems I admitted this lineup had earlier in my post, I also have concerns over the fact that it's the exact same team that would've played the second Test if Gambhir was fit. Who in their right mind actually makes a forum post advocating no changes to a batting lineup? It's almost enough to make me scrap the whole idea and go with a top six of; Tendulkar, Raina, Laxman, Pujara, Dhoni, Sehwag.

It is rather baffling why people suggest anything different than your thesis.

 

[Prince EWS]

I didn't realize that SA only won 1/5 of their last series. If so, why aren't people questioning their #2 rating?

Rightly or wrongly, people don't tend to judge teams on recent results (or results of any time-length in fact) - they judge them based on how they think they'd perform if they managed to simultaneously play every team at full strength home and way right now. Their opinions on how that would all go are largely dependant on the sums of the parts - players on paper rather than team results.

What people think would or should happen in their minds plays on their opinion a lot more than what has actually happened. It happens when people rate players to some extent but it happens a lot more when people rate teams.

I suppose what I'm getting at is that which team people think is the best is a totally separate argument to which team deserves to be ranked #1 based on actual team results, and that people blur those debates regularly.

 

[Shri]

I have a really radical idea for India's batting lineup. I know it may be a little out there but hear me out.

Firstly, Sehwag and Gamhir open the batting. I know it's a philosophy that the likes of Australia, New Zealand, Bangladesh and Pakistan don't subscribe to so I may be scoffed at, but I have this theory that picking the best two opening batsman in the country to open the batting could be a secret weapon. It's a gamble, but a gamble I'd be willing to take in these desperate times.

Do you honestly feel Sehwag is ever going to be successful when opening in conditions supporting swing bowling a lot? He would be of more use to the side if there is less swing when he comes out to bat say after 20-30 overs.

 

[silentstriker]

I don't think people realize how ****ty the results have been. I watch more cricket than 99% of fans and I didn't quite realize this.


England clearly the much more deserving side it seems to me.

 

[Dissector]

I hadn't quite realized how ordinary SA have been in the last two years either. To be fair they were excellent in the two years before that winning several series in a row. When they won in Australia the no.1 ranking was theirs for the taking but they seemed to freeze and they have regressed in terms of actual series results since then. So while a potential 2-1 win against India would be a huge step forward for them I don't think it's enough to make them no.1.

As for England they did lose to SA at home, lose two series to India and lose to the West Indies which is the reason they are generally ranked below SA. However they are obviously getting better and if they beat India in the summer they will have a strong case to be at least 2.

 

[Hit Wicket]

Sehwag scored a 60 odd at Centurion and was the second highest scorer of the match from either side at Durban after Laxman. He has been looking good and it's only a matter of time he converts to a big one. Not sure how he is being counted as a failure?

 

[Turbinator]

 

[silentstriker]

Sehwag scored a 60 odd at Centurion and was the second highest scorer of the match from either side at Durban after Laxman. He has been looking good and it's only a matter of time he converts to a big one. Not sure how he is being counted as a failure?

 

[Hit Wicket]

 

[kingkallis]

Some work there!

 

[Contra]

Great win by India. A few unfortunate decisions but I still think we would have won without them. All to play for at Cape town. I'm hoping for a Sehwag blitz. Oh and MS plz win the damn toss this time. 1/14 is just horrible.

 

[b1acksun]

I am sorry but I don't really understand all the gungho that is going on cricinfo about how this is supposedly more exciting cricket. Can someone explain why exactly are the recent test matches played in India any less exciting than the low-scoring affairs in Australia and S. Africa?

Maybe it is just me, but I am not a big fan of such ultra-low scoring test matches which barely scrap up to four days. I dislike them almost as much as I dislike flat tracks with nothing to offer for the bowlers. However, almost all the recent test series in India have been result-oriented with some very exciting twists and turns. I enjoy the fact that there is some strategy involved around when to declare in the opening innings, instead of all out for 150-200 runs.

I feel like throwing up listening to the apologists like Sanja Manjrerkar on crickinfo. I swear to god that guy drives me insane. I wish there was another website of the same caliber as cricinfo because the editorial staff there can be really biased, imho.

 

[silentstriker]

Because it's absolutely refreshing to see batsman having to work for each run. It's a great change to see how fast bowling (and spin) can be encouraged and lead to excitement. It's amazing to see batsmen not being able to plonk their front foot down, close their eyes, and stroke away to centuries. It's nice to see bowlers not being reduced T20 fodder. And it's fantastic to know from day one that there will be a result, and that the game isn't over after the first innings. It's exciting to watch batsmen being asked questions they don't normally get asked, and to see who adjusts and how. And it's thrilling to see every single player being Tested, mentally and technically.

 

[vcs]

Believe it or not, there are certain Indian pitches that lie somewhere in the continuum between Ahmedabad and Durban. Personally, I don't like people imposing their idealized cricketing tastes on me, I enjoy cricket in India and the occasional bore draw just as much as series like this one. Why should batsmen give their wickets away to bowlers that aren't good enough to take them in conditions that aren't entirely helpful to them, if it results in the occasional draw, so be it.

 

[b1acksun]

Because it's absolutely refreshing to see batsman having to work for each run. It's a great change to see how fast bowling (and spin) can be encouraged and lead to excitement. It's amazing to see batsmen not being able to plonk their front foot down, close their eyes, and stroke away to centuries. It's nice to see bowlers not being reduced T20 fodder. And it's fantastic to know from day one that there will be a result, and that the game isn't over after the first innings. It's exciting to watch batsmen being asked questions they don't normally get asked, and to see who adjusts and how. And it's thrilling to see every single player being Tested, mentally and technically.

I clearly stated that I don't like flat tracks with nothing to offer the bowler either. You don't really get RESULTS in the type of tracks you are describing. Please, improve your reading comprehension.

On a side note, DRAW is part and parcel of Test cricket. A draw can be as exciting as a result. To know from day one that there will be a result is a slap on the face of test cricket and only serves to make it poorer. I can guarantee downfall of test cricket in less than 5 years if all matches ended up such as this.

 

[Jarquis]

Bad bowling will still get punished though, half trackers and wide half volleys can still be punished. Just bowlers with the right tools can make the most of conditions, pitches which offer literally nothing for the bowler are dull as ****. You just have to wait for batsmen to get themselves out which is horsecrap.