***Official Pujara and co in Zimbabwe 2013***

[honestbharani]

England believes in economical bowling even in tests, ffs.

 

[Jono]

See my comment about Mohammed Hafeez - the rankings are clearly ****ed up if he gets ranked so highly.

Since when was Hafeez a bad ODI bowler when he got to that ranking? I don't think he was to be honest. I obviously agree he was never the #1 bowler in the world, so there is some flaw in the rankings.

The point is people were saying Jadeja shouldn't be in the Indian team, was a hack etc. Jadeja, like Hafeez, belong in their team's best XI (at the time they were ranked #1). So I guess the point was the critics of Jadeja were proven wrong by the fact he got so high in the ranking. Surely no one can get that high in the ranking (even with its flaws) and still not deserve to be in their teams's best XI?

 

[Jono]

He takes less than 1 wicket per match - that he is near the top indicates that the system is ****ed.

True, but that is his whole career. He became more and more of a bowler later in his career right? Don't think the rankings take into account his entire bowling career, but the specific period. I guess he had good stats in that period?

 

[Maximas]

True, but that is his whole career. He became more and more of a bowler later in his career right? Don't think the rankings take into account his entire bowling career, but the specific period. I guess he had good stats in that period?

I ran a statsguru for the last two years, his average was mid thirties and he was still taking less than a wicket a game, his economy rate was under 4 though, that is of huge value to any team, a one year analysis turned up similar results. As I said earlier, the rankings seem to be based off consistency of performance, something Hafeez and Jadeja do well because they have fairly niche roles, while Marc can say all he likes about matchwinning bowlers who get more wickets, they are less consistent, so they aren't ranked as well, the system itself is flawed, but it shows you who is doing their job well IMO

 

[Arjun]

Let's just call this a flash in the pan, much like India's 2007 World T20 victory. There's not much a bowler can do if he needs so much protection. Steyn, Morkel, Ajmal, Umar Gul, Malinga, Starc and Pattinson have done well without those layers of protection that a couple of top-10 ICC ODI bowlers have.

Put them in the initial overs. Ring them into the final fifteen, only. Have them facing two batsmen who have clobbered the opening bowlers for plenty and are set. Let's see how they play on a flat pitch with nothing in it for bowlers. That will separate them from the real table-topping bowlers.

 

[Maximas]

Let's just call this a flash in the pan, much like India's 2007 World T20 victory. There's not much a bowler can do if he needs so much protection. Steyn, Morkel, Ajmal, Umar Gul, Malinga, Starc and Pattinson have done well without those layers of protection that a couple of top-10 ICC ODI bowlers have.

Put them in the initial overs. Ring them into the final fifteen, only. Have them facing two batsmen who have clobbered the opening bowlers for plenty and are set. Let's see how they play on a flat pitch with nothing in it for bowlers. That will separate them from the real table-topping bowlers.

OK, I think we all agree Hafeez/Jadeja aren't the best ODI bowlers going around, but they do a fine job in their specialized roles, although they deserve credit for this, they do a little too well in the rankings compared to specialist bowlers who bowl when the heat is on.

 

[Arjun]

I can't comment on Hafeez, but I feel India are at least a player light when Jadeja is in the XI. Mishra is a comprehensively better spinner (and I'd expect Mishra to ace Jadeja in every series where they play a full role together), while Yuvraj is a far better batsman, and both Ashwin and Bucky are better bowling all-rounders. You get much more by opting for one of these in the side.

While Umesh Yadav, a player relevant to India's performances and essential for taking ten wickets a game, is often criticised for leaking a lot of runs, he bowls when the heat is on. That's good for the team- who, on the other hand, have to be re-jigged so that Jadeja stays safe. I don't feel good about that, as an India supporter.

 

[CricAddict]

Let's just call this a flash in the pan, much like India's 2007 World T20 victory. There's not much a bowler can do if he needs so much protection. Steyn, Morkel, Ajmal, Umar Gul, Malinga, Starc and Pattinson have done well without those layers of protection that a couple of top-10 ICC ODI bowlers have.

Put them in the initial overs. Ring them into the final fifteen, only. Have them facing two batsmen who have clobbered the opening bowlers for plenty and are set. Let's see how they play on a flat pitch with nothing in it for bowlers. That will separate them from the real table-topping bowlers.

Thats exactly when Dhoni brings Jadeja from what I have seen and he invariably returns the favour with a crucial wicket.

 

[CricAddict]

I can't comment on Hafeez, but I feel India are at least a player light when Jadeja is in the XI. Mishra is a comprehensively better spinner (and I'd expect Mishra to ace Jadeja in every series where they play a full role together), while Yuvraj is a far better batsman, and both Ashwin and Bucky are better bowling all-rounders. You get much more by opting for one of these in the side.

While Umesh Yadav, a player relevant to India's performances and essential for taking ten wickets a game, is often criticised for leaking a lot of runs, he bowls when the heat is on. That's good for the team- who, on the other hand, have to be re-jigged so that Jadeja stays safe. I don't feel good about that, as an India supporter.

What about an avatar bet that Jadeja will take more wickets than Mishra in the next series that they play together? Mishra's googlies can be read by any team other than Zimbabwe.

 

[wellAlbidarned]

Mishra's googlies can be read by any team other than Zimbabwe.

pretty sure there's this country called nz