***Official*** India in Sri Lanka

[adharcric]

Good discussion on here but I'll comment later - India need to play all seven batsmen (Kohli as an opener, Badri in the middle-order) in the second match, that's for sure. Pathan still looks harmless, go with Zaheer, Munaf, Harbhajan and Ojha/Praveen.

 

[pup11]

Good discussion on here but I'll comment later - India need to play all seven batsmen (Kohli as an opener, Badri in the middle-order) in the second match, that's for sure. Pathan still looks harmless, go with Zaheer, Munaf, Harbhajan and Ojha/Praveen.

I would rather have Pathan and Gambhir opening and playing Badrinath in the middle-order instead of Kohli, i agree Pathan has looked harmless, and he seriously needs to work on his bowling, he should take likes of Bracken or Vass as examples, he should work on his cutters and slower-balls, rather than looking to swing the ball in conditions unfavourable to swing.

 

[adharcric]

Pathan's fine as long as he's opening, I'm sure he's a better bet than the young Kohli.

 

[SJS]

Badrinath likely to make his debut today. Lets wish him the best of luck. Even better, let him win the match for India and put the series back on track as far as India are concerned.

 

[SJS]

I am amazed that in a place that was abuzz with 'bring back Ganguly' sentiments a couple of years ago and 'I told you placards' when he did come back a year or so back and back amongst the runs, no one has yet talked of why India should have had Ganguly in this squad at least as standby opener.

Of course, someone will come up with the laughable suggestion that a senior like Ganguly can not be kept as standby suggesting that there is more 'honour' in being considered not even 'top sixteen' material.

Or that being 20 year old but absolutely clueless than being a 36 year old better bet with the bat at the top of the order in an odi.

The only logic, if we are willing to be honest about it, is to say that Virat Kohli is a better odi opening batsman than Ganguly as of today. How many can say that and actually mean it?

This is what happens when you think youth is the 'one and only criteria' for selection OR when someone for whom we were willing to justify riots in the streets and disturbances in the country's parliament, falls from the favour of a billion self-appointed selectors or a couple of dozen TV news-readers *** cricket pundits.

 

[honestbharani]

The thing is, SJS, it seems as though the selectors have made up their minds that Ganguly and Dravid wont be considered for ODIs like Laxman and Kumble. And now for them to bring him back.... They would consider it a risk. I understand it is stupid but then again, these are Indian selectors we are talking about...... What's the big surprise there?

 

[SJS]

The thing is, SJS, it seems as though the selectors have made up their minds that Ganguly and Dravid wont be considered for ODIs like Laxman and Kumble. And now for them to bring him back.... They would consider it a risk. I understand it is stupid but then again, these are Indian selectors we are talking about...... What's the big surprise there?

I understand what the selectors are thinking (dont necessarily agree) but whats happened to the fans ?

 

[Top_Cat]

You maybe right but I dont know if that is entirely the explanation.

Someone mentioned that Badri is not a youngster in the sense that he has been around for eight seasons or so. Thats true and there is something to learn from that.

He made his debut in 2000-01. In the first five years (2000-01 to 2004-05) he averaged 39.0 with five hundreds. He had just one good year in this which was his fourth and he averaged over fifty and scored four of the five hundreds in that five year period. Again next year (2004-05) he was in the 30's with a top score of 97.

So his real bright patch has started from 2005-06. From then till the last season (2007-08) he actually came to lime light so its not correct to say that he has been knocking on the doors of selectors WITH performances to talk of for many years.

In the last three years he has averaged a very impressive 75.4. But it should not be expected that in the very first of those three years, he would be a contender, particularly since he already had a history.

I think it is fair to say that he is in contention since early 2007 when his second golden year was halfway through.

If these three years were his first three or three of his first four years he would have been looked as a great youngster with a great potential but in 2006 he was already 26.

Just look at it like this. He is 28 years old (born August 1980) and has had\, after ordinary performances for four out of his first five years, he has finally had three good years.

I am not sure this shows any great injustice done to him by the selectors. Maybe he could have been considered for the squad that went for the Asia cup. Sure. But its not that dramatic as it sounds when you say someone has been averaging over fifty for eight years, has paid his dues (whatever that may mean) etc.

I think he has blossomed late, which is fine for most countries and for me too personally, but in this country, as I have been trying to impress, we are besotted with youth. For us Laxman was too old when he was still not 30 and he had already played some of the greatest innings played by an Indian.

I think Badrinath has played enough first class cricket to be considered experienced at that level and is at the right time to be inducted into the Indian side.

Whether that right time was a year earlier is cutting too fine a point and will need going into the claims of others as one presumes the selectors would have done.

Very similar to Mike Hussey for many years. Throughout his 20's, he'd belt English county attacks then he'd come back to Australia and average in the 30's for the season. This is why he was never seriously considered for a spot in the Aussie line-up throughout the 90's even when opportunities came up (Slater being dropped for Elliott and later for Langer, Taylor retiring, etc.) It was only when he strung together a few 50+ seasons for WA that he got his shot and was probably picked at the right time in the end.

 

[SJS]

Very similar to Mike Hussey for many years. Throughout his 20's, he'd belt English county attacks then he'd come back to Australia and average in the 30's for the season. This is why he was never seriously considered for a spot in the Aussie line-up throughout the 90's even when opportunities came up (Slater being dropped for Elliott and later for Langer, Taylor retiring, etc.) It was only when he strung together a few 50+ seasons for WA that he got his shot and was probably picked at the right time in the end.

You are absolutely spot on.

Hussey is a great example. Indian cricketers have a lot to learn from their Australian counter parts but no one in the Indian cricketing establishment needs more by way of lessons from the Australians as do the Indian selectors from those who do the job for Australia.

Its not feasible for the Indian fans in their zillions to be sent to Australia but surely we could send five gentlemen ....

 

[SJS]

Gambhir out of the game !!

*Puts on his monk's robes and goes into the monastery to pray for the Indian team*

 

[adharcric]

I'm glad Gambhir didn't make it. India's young middle-order has nowhere to run now - show some responsibility or get demolished again. Come on boys.

 

[adharcric]

Zaheer!

 

[jeevan]

Zaheer 3-1-4-3!!

Sangakarra, Jayawardene, Kapagedera too.

 

[jeevan]

And with no Vaas or Maharoof among the 5 bowlers today, SL batting has a long tail look to it.

 

[adharcric]

I understand what the selectors are thinking (dont necessarily agree) but whats happened to the fans ?

Ganguly being out of our full-strength one-day side is fine IMO. Ganguly being out of the side while someone like Kohli is opening is absolutely not. However, temporarily going back to Dravid or Ganguly at this stage doesn't make much sense. Picking Kohli was a poor move but instead of suggesting the return of Ganguly, I'd suggest picking Dhawan or even using Parthiv as the reserve opener.

 

[alternative]

Zaheer, WAG.

 

[sanga1337]

Why the hell is Kulasekera at number 7 ? He's a number 9 at best. At least if your going to play 5 bowlers put someone at number 7 who can bat a bit.

 

[adharcric]

Badri!

 

[SJS]

Ganguly being out of our full-strength one-day side is fine IMO. Ganguly being out of the side while someone like Kohli is opening is absolutely not. However, temporarily going back to Dravid or Ganguly at this stage doesn't make much sense. Picking Kohli was a poor move but instead of suggesting the return of Ganguly, I'd suggest picking Dhawan or even using Parthiv as the reserve opener.

Did I suggest going back to ..... Ganguly at this stage ?

 

[sanga1337]

Typical. As soon as I say Kulasekera can't bat he gets 20 odd. Great partnership here. Hopefully the tailenders can get just enough runs to give Murali and Mendis a chance to bowl India out.