Sehwag, an all-time Indian great?

[Sir Alex]

He is a middle-order batsman. Reality is concerned only with what has happened; thus reality says merely what Sehwag has done - which is mostly opened a Test and ODI level (couldn't care less about Twenty20). It says nothing about what is.

Tendulkar like Sehwag is a middle-order batsman who has been manufactured, with great success, into a ODI opener. Several of the best-ever ODI openers were manufactured and never batted there in Tests - Ganguly, Mark Waugh, Gilchrist to name three.

Why is it that being manufactured seems to be regarded by some as an affront?

What's nonsense is considering changing sports as the same as changing roles within one sport.

Tendulkar started out as a medium pace bowler before he was advised by Dennis Lilee to concentrate on batting.

 

[Sir Alex]

Really? First I'd heard of that. AFAIK, Tendulkar was (somewhat ridiculously) into international cricket before he'd even turned 17.

That is irrelevant because if Sehwag is a middle order batsman (is being the key word here), Tendulkar is a medium pace bowler...

 

[Sir Alex]

Both of these are far from the truth and in reality are a vast over-simplification. Pietersen and Sobers were always high-class batsmen and were always likely to end-up such a thing at the top level. Pietersen was erroneously selected with spin rather than batting in mind and never got a fair chance and had to emigrate to do so; see SJS's post on Sobers (I can't find it and CBA trying really hard) for the truth there. His intial Test selection may have come with spin bowling in mind but he had already shown his skill with the bat and would do so at the Test level before very long.

please substitute Sir gary with sehwag; batting with opening batting and spin bowling with middle order batting...

 

[SJS]

My all time batting lineup would now be:

1. Merchant
2. Gavaskar
3. Dravid
4. Tendulkar
5. Sehwag
6. Hazare
7. Dev
8. Kirmani

Replaced Vishy with Sehwag. Merchant has to stay IMO.

Thats a damn good side although I feel Hazare is wasted at number six. You might consider replacing him with Mankad at six. For that place in the order Mankad is more than good enough and it would give a great addition to the attack. Then you could add a fast bowler (say Nissar or Srinath if thats your preference) and two spinners and its a side for all conditions.

 

[silentstriker]

Thats a damn good side although I feel Hazare is wasted at number six. You might consider replacing him with Mankad at six. For that place in the order Mankad is more than good enough and it would give a great addition to the attack. Then you could add a fast bowler (say Nissar or Srinath if thats your preference) and two spinners and its a side for all conditions.

Yea, Mankad would be close to the side, but I think Hazare has to be there, and maybe he can move up the order if he is wasted at such a low point. I'd rather shuffle the batting around than not include him, at least the way I'm thinking now. However, I would not be averse to playing Mankad on a flat deck as I'd trust the top five to deliver quite handsomly there, so maybe we can swap Mankad for Hazare on home pitches.

I'd say my pace attack might consist of Amar Singh, Mohammad Nissar and Kapil Dev, with one spinner (say Gupte) when playing overseas (Gupte might have been our best overseas spinner I feel), and Kapil Dev, Nissar plus two spinners (say, Bedi and maybe Kumble) in home conditions. At home, Bedi must play, but overseas, I'd still want to go with a 3-1 pace-spin ratio unless we are playing elsewhere in the subcontinent or at a venue where we know spin will play at least a decent role.

 

[Pratters]

You are thinking correctly when going for 3-1 away from the subcontinent.

 

[SJS]

Yea, Mankad would be close to the side, but I think Hazare has to be there, and maybe he can move up the order if he is wasted at such a low point. I'd rather shuffle the batting around than not include him, at least the way I'm thinking now. However, I would not be averse to playing Mankad on a flat deck as I'd trust the top five to deliver quite handsomly there, so maybe we can swap Mankad for Hazare on home pitches.

I'd say my pace attack might consist of Amar Singh, Mohammad Nissar and Kapil Dev, with one spinner (say Gupte) when playing overseas (Gupte might have been our best overseas spinner I feel), and Kapil Dev, Nissar plus two spinners (say, Bedi and maybe Kumble) in home conditions. At home, Bedi must play, but overseas, I'd still want to go with a 3-1 pace-spin ratio unless we are playing elsewhere in the subcontinent or at a venue where we know spin will play at least a decent role.

I like this side. . .

1. Merchant
2. Gavaskar
3. Dravid
4. Tendulkar
5. Sehwag
6. Mankad
7. Kapil Dev
8. Kirmani
9. Amar Singh
10. Nissar
11. Gupte

It bats deep with batsman at number six has a test double hundred and all batsmen till number eight have test centuries. Amar Singh at number nine has five first class hundreds.

Adding Mankad to the side allows me to have five front line bowlers with two spinners (one left arm and one wrist spinner) and three pacers (one really fast, one a swinging fast medium bowler and a third a sharp mover off the pitch) it has a varied attack. The side has attacking batsmen in Tendulkar, Sehwag and Kapil and great technicians in Merchant, Gavaskar and Dravid. Kirmani is as close to being India's best ever keeper as to make any argument about it being very marginal.

If I have an issue with the side it is that their is no great leader in the eleven. I am tempted to ask Sehwag to lead because I think he has the most flair of the lot and is most unruffled and is actually a thinking cricketer.

 

[G.I.Joe]

What sort of batsman was Mankad, SJS? If he was anything like Sehwag or Kapil, that team with them at 5,6,7 would provide us with either some spectacular evening sessions, or equally spectacular implosions.

 

[aussie]

Cant see how Nissar & Amar (he was a poor man's Bedser from the videos i saw of him), deserve to be ahead of Khan of (2006-2009) & Srinath in the pecking order in the Indian ATXI.

 

[Sanz]

Cant see how Nissar & Amar (he was a poor man's Bedser from the videos i saw of him), deserve to be ahead of Khan of (2006-2009) & Srinath in the pecking order in the Indian ATXI.

You have seen Videos of Amar Singh Bowling ?

Poverty rate in India was very high during Amra's career, so you do have a point.

 

[Pratters]

Cant see how Nissar & Amar (he was a poor man's Bedser from the videos i saw of him), deserve to be ahead of Khan of (2006-2009) & Srinath in the pecking order in the Indian ATXI.

It is perfectly acceptable where I am concerned.

 

[aussie]

You have seen Videos of Amar Singh Bowling ?

Poverty rate in India was very high during Amra's career, so you do have a point.

Great Moments of Indian Cricket: From 1932-1986. See here. Got some highlights of Singh bowling, none of Nissar unfortunately. But no way would i have Singh over Khan or Srinath based on what i saw there.

 

[Pratters]

Buy Now for: £28.18 delivered

Much cheaper on cricketvideo tbh if it still carries the dvd. Will buy it when I go on a cricket dvd buying spree at the end of next year.

EDIT - Yep, available for $16.95

 

[SJS]

People dont realise how good were Nissar and Amar Singh. You have to read the accounts of those who saw them or played against them to undewrstand tyhat in them India had two world class new ball bowlers at the same time for the only occasion ever (till date) in our cricketing history. Nissar was truly fast and Amar Singh bowled at fast medium. As Hutton famously said, "he came off the wicket like the crack of doom".

They did not play many Tests because India did not play many. They were at their peak when India first played in 1932. But that was a single Test series. After that the Tests were few and far between. Their were tours by English and Australian sides which were not official Test matches but the teams, particularly the Tennyson led English sides of 1936-37 were much stronger than the official Test match sides that England chose to send to West Indies and South Africa for many years in those countries early years in international cricket.

It is interesting to see how these bowlers performed against all international opposition irrespective of Test status.

Have a look at Amar Singh's figures.

[B]Opponent	Matches	Balls	Mdns	Runs	Wkts	Ave	5wI	10wM[/B]
Australians	6	1174	32	552	32	17.3	4	1
England     	7	2182	95	858	28	30.6	2	0
MCC         	6	1567	65	593	33	18.0	3	0
Tennyson's XI	7	2127	86	804	47	17.1	5	2
								
[B]Aggregate	26	7050	278	2807	140	20.1	14	3[/B]

140 wickets in 26 games at just 20.1. These are fabulous figures. 14 five fers and 3 10 fers in 26 games in a large number of which the opponents played a small or no second innings at all.

I was looking at the wickets Amar Singh took in these games and it is amazing to see the proportion of top order batsmen in his tally.

I will post Nissar's figures another day.

 

[Pratters]

People dont realise how good were Nissar and Amar Singh. You have to read the accounts of those who saw them or played against them to undewrstand tyhat in them India had two world class new ball bowlers at the same time for the only occasion ever (till date) in our cricketing history.

Spot on. The people who actually faced Nissar and Amar Singh rated them highly. Best new ball attack India has ever had as you say.

 

[Richard]

Tendulkar started out as a medium pace bowler before he was advised by Dennis Lilee to concentrate on batting.

That is irrelevant because if Sehwag is a middle order batsman (is being the key word here), Tendulkar is a medium pace bowler...

please substitute Sir gary with sehwag; batting with opening batting and spin bowling with middle order batting...

Understand what you are reading before trying to criticise it.

 

[Richard]

gary did start off as a spin bowler and graduated into a leading batsman.

He didn't. Sobers may have been picked for his Test debut as a spinner but that's very, very different to "starting off" as such.