England in India, February-March 2021

[Atithee]

How do we drop Siraj in favor of Ishant Is beyond me. Please tell me your rationale whoever is proposing that.

This was my team as posted earlier in this thread. This is a critical series for WTC. We cannot take chances with perpetual offenders and inconsistent performers.

Gill, Rahul (Rohit if Rahul not fit), Pujara, Kohli, Rahane, Pant, Sundar, Ashwin, Thakur, Bumrah, Siraj.

Actually, I’d prefer Mayank instead of Rahul. I thought he wasn’t in the squad when I posted my proposed team.

[Atithee]

Rahane needs to be made captain permanently. You can’t go back to Kohli after everything that happened.

That’ll be impossible to execute in this series at least. And, you can’t blame Kohli for what he did not have a chance to lead. Would our results have been different had he led in the remainder of the series? No one can ever tell. I know I think and you do too that it would have been different but there is no proof.

[S_K_S]

How do we drop Siraj in favor of Ishant Is beyond me. Please tell me your rationale whoever is proposing that.

We don't drop anyone. Possession is 9/10th of the law so the team that won needs to take to the field in the 1st test against England.

[prasen9]

How do we drop Siraj in favor of Ishant Is beyond me. Please tell me your rationale whoever is proposing that.

This was my team as posted earlier in this thread. This is a critical series for WTC. We cannot take chances with perpetual offenders and inconsistent performers.

Gill, Rahul (Rohit if Rahul not fit), Pujara, Kohli, Rahane, Pant, Sundar, Ashwin, Thakur, Bumrah, Siraj.

Actually, I’d prefer Mayank instead of Rahul. I thought he wasn’t in the squad when I posted my proposed team.

In the last three years in India, Ishant has played 5 tests, 18 wickets at 16.61 in India, which is phenomenal. I prefer that body of work than Siraj's three tests in Australia in arguably more favorable pitches to get 13 wickets at 29.53.

And, if you prefer performance, I do not see how Rahul comes in to open. Rohit and Mayank have performed better than Rahul in India by miles as openers. And, Rahul has failed comprehensively abroad, miserably so. He has not played the Ranjis and only played one match the last season and did not do well.

We are going in India with three pacers and two spinners. If this is the case, then the groundsman has not done his work. We cannot afford to give pacy pitches to the English. Our advantage is in spin bowling and our batsmen knowing how to play spin in India. Yes, they are not as good as the players of yesteryears but our batsmen are still better than the English in spinning conditions.

We have two pacers of which one, Washi, is a more containing bowler. Both finger spinners spinning the ball the same way. Bad idea against the right-handed batsmen.

And, they are supported by a batsman wicket-keeper who misses about 40% of his chances in India.

Granted there is no easy solution, but your team has serious problems.

The first has to be that we have to recognize that pitches in India are different than those in Australia. Hence, we have to look at a different combination.

I think India will go with the 11 karr listed above except I think they will choose Kuldeep over Washi/Shardul. The rationale is that we do not need a 3rd pacer in India and we don't need a second offie defensive finger-spinner after Ashwin. So, it will be Kuldeep.

[Atithee]

Prasen, numbers are not everything. That’s all I’ll say. Vishnu explained this earlier. You are fixated on numbers and, of course, that’s your prerogative. It’s always easy to make data driven decisions.

[prasen9]

Numbers decide who wins and who loses. I have not found hope and hype based selections work better than fact-based decisions. I agree that numbers are not everything. Vishnu's post has several things I agree with and several flaws. For example, Pant failed in this IPL. But, his body of work before in England and Australia was taken into account. Not IPL. Etc. But, you have to have solid reasoning as to why you are taking decisions. The choice of Rahul is based entirely on hope and hype. We have to resist recency bias and projecting based on one data point is all I am saying. If we were guaranteed that Sundar and Shardul would score 50s everytime they bat, then I'd say get them in. But, we have to look beyond just the last test. We have to look at the conditions and the balance of the team. I fully understand that Mayank and Rohit do not have the numbers (small sample size) in India, but we need to give them a fair run and not go back to the tried and tested and failed Rahul again and again. What sign are we giving to the next gen in Easwaran or Panchal if we say that whatever Rahul does he gets chances again and again but whatever you do, you do not get in? I am against giving chances to veterans who have failed and keep failing. Rahul walks in T20Is and ODIs. But, we should not reward him in tests because of his performance there. Numbers may not be everything but performance has to mean something. Even without numbers, look at videos of Rahul's last 10 tests or so and see how he batted. You will see serious technical flaws. We are to believe magically those are gone?

I still do not understand why you want us to play two spinners in India and both offies, and one a quite defensive offie, for example. Don't get me wrong. I have argued having Washi in the team a few seconds before you argued for him in the Aussie thread before Gabba. But, if we have Ashwin over Washi, then the value of Axar is more even though Washi has succeeded in a test match and Axar has not. I am not using numbers there. Washi has played tests and Axar has not. And, maybe Washi's FC average with the ball is better than Axar's. I am using balance and variety in the bowling attack as my metric.

Kuldeep has not performed very well in the last year or so. He is my selection based on hope and hype. But, my logic is more to include 3 spinners and to include variety. If the pitch has grass, I would prefer Shardul.

[Atithee]

Prasen, I agree with all you say. One or two selections will be a dice roll and based on gut feel always. I’m not arguing for Rahul at all. I’ve replaced him with Mayank. Rohit is the most disappointing player for me. He can do so much more but always leaves us wanting. I understand the two offies situation; I just want their batting. And, I think the English team is replete with lefties, so it’s an asset, right? You want opponents playing against the spin rather than with it, right? I’m not opposed to bringing Axar for Sundar. But, I will not play Ishant. He is unfit and breaks down too often. Plus, he bowls too many no balls and keeps running in to the danger area time after time. And, Siraj is on a high. Keep him in. Numbers be damned. But, since Kohli is the captain, Ishant is an automatic selection. Same old tired ways of sticking to deadwood.

[prasen9]

I could certainly go with Siraj over Ishant. I was very down with Ishant too but he has been remarkably disciplined and effective since the England series. My problem is whether he is match-fit. He and Bhuvi have not played the long version of the game for a while. On these grounds, I will certainly support Siraj especially if Ishant cannot bowl 20 overs in a simulated game in a day at the NCA now. Anyway, we will always differ over a few selections. For all we know, Rahul is *the* most serious prospect in between the Kohli era and before the Gill era. I am very high on his talent. So, I am fine with rehabilitating him especially given his ODI and T20I forms. But, I want him to play the A-team matches. I think we largely agree. Yes, England has several left-handers but what about the right handers? They have several of them too. I think Axar can bat. Let's give him a chance. We will be pleasantly surprised as we did with Washi. Or else, we will go to Washi soon. And, the pitch will determine the 3 pacer/2 spinner or vice-versa for me. The 3rd pacer should be Thakur if we play 3 pacers. So, we largely agree. I want the selectors to handle Rahul right and not junk him. Nor just keep giving him chances. Peace.

The good thing about having people like Ishant, Umesh, Shami, Jadeja, Vihari, and Bhuvi rehabilitate at the NCA is that we should use them against each other and against the juniors. Let us get some of the A-team people there and/or someone like Iyer while they are isolating and let us see Ishant bowl 20 overs in a match against Iyer and Prithvi, etc. If he is fit, he gets to put his hand up. Otherwise, we go with Siraj. Siraj had signs of fatigue in the last part of the Sydney test and the first part of the Brisbane test. It is a tribute to him that he got his act together and found the strength to come back for one last hurrah to get a 5-fer at the Gabba. Such things should certainly not be forgotten and taken into account.

[rajitghosh]

As per reports Sir Jadeja may not be fit for the entire England series. So Kuldeep would get a look in at some time and Axar/ Washi would get to play some more matches. If Ashwin bats at 7, with the kind of improvement Ishant and Bumrah have shown in their batting, if Kuldeep bats at 9, for Indian conditions it may not be a bad batting line up. If they play Shardul instead of Ishant it would be even better. They should look at pacers who are good at reverse swing. One of the reasons Umesh and Shami achieved success in India over the last couple of years was their reverse swing. Now India has to depend a lot on Ashwin to win this series. I am assuming the tracks would be turning tracks. Chennai we can say with certainty but the new Ahmedabad stadium has not hosted much beyond the Namaste Trump event.

[Kumar]

I think we need to have rotation policy in place! Bumrah, Ishant , Ashwin should not play all 4 tests! I may not even play Ishant Andy Bumrah together and risk both of them being injured

Washington’s batting in first innings was impressive! He seemed pretty comfortable against new ball as well! As per cricviz!

Washington Sundar has been rock solid. He's played just 10% false shots in his 35* (80), the same as Marnus Labuschagne, Ajinkya Rahane, and Rohit Sharma in this Test. #AUSvIND

Washington Sundar T20 batting this season was pretty mediocre! Is he a better test batsman than ODI / T20!

[Kumar]

Another article on Pant and his keeping! Saha’s catching rate is like 78% while Pant is 47 against spinners! I think decision may be influenced by pitch, if it is rank turner play Saha!

https://www.cricviz.com/rishabh-pants-keeping

[VReddy]

Numbers decide who wins and who loses. I have not found hope and hype based selections work better than fact-based decisions. I agree that numbers are not everything. Vishnu's post has several things I agree with and several flaws. For example, Pant failed in this IPL. But, his body of work before in England and Australia was taken into account. Not IPL. Etc. But, you have to have solid reasoning as to why you are taking decisions. The choice of Rahul is based entirely on hope and hype. We have to resist recency bias and projecting based on one data point is all I am saying. If we were guaranteed that Sundar and Shardul would score 50s everytime they bat, then I'd say get them in. But, we have to look beyond just the last test. We have to look at the conditions and the balance of the team. I fully understand that Mayank and Rohit do not have the numbers (small sample size) in India, but we need to give them a fair run and not go back to the tried and tested and failed Rahul again and again. What sign are we giving to the next gen in Easwaran or Panchal if we say that whatever Rahul does he gets chances again and again but whatever you do, you do not get in? I am against giving chances to veterans who have failed and keep failing. Rahul walks in T20Is and ODIs. But, we should not reward him in tests because of his performance there. Numbers may not be everything but performance has to mean something. Even without numbers, look at videos of Rahul's last 10 tests or so and see how he batted. You will see serious technical flaws. We are to believe magically those are gone?

I still do not understand why you want us to play two spinners in India and both offies, and one a quite defensive offie, for example. Don't get me wrong. I have argued having Washi in the team a few seconds before you argued for him in the Aussie thread before Gabba. But, if we have Ashwin over Washi, then the value of Axar is more even though Washi has succeeded in a test match and Axar has not. I am not using numbers there. Washi has played tests and Axar has not. And, maybe Washi's FC average with the ball is better than Axar's. I am using balance and variety in the bowling attack as my metric.

Kuldeep has not performed very well in the last year or so. He is my selection based on hope and hype. But, my logic is more to include 3 spinners and to include variety. If the pitch has grass, I would prefer Shardul.

Pant did not fail in IPL. He averaged >30 which is solid for a middle order player in T20. His strike rate was low but how does that matter for ODIs or Test? Another thing we seem to be ignoring is that he is in a transition phase from being all out attack to reaching that middle ground between attack and defence. So that SR during this transition phase is understandable. Given these 2 context points, he was solid in IPL.

What we should consider a failure is say Shaw who had a long long series of single digit scores i think. Failure is not someone like Pant who is consistent in the tourney but has a SR of 114.

Beyond that, we can just agree to disagree. However, if we follow the orthodox methodology to selection, we wouldn't have several players in the team from the Australia series even though it was starkly obvious that they are ready.

[VReddy]

Another article on Pant and his keeping! Saha’s catching rate is like 78% while Pant is 47 against spinners! I think decision may be influenced by pitch, if it is rank turner play Saha!

https://www.cricviz.com/rishabh-pants-keeping

The Indian team is grooming Bharat as the next Saha. They seem to be taking the approach of Pant for SENA and Saha/Bharat for spin-friendly conditions.

I feel for Indian conditions, we should be so dominant that we should still easily win even if there are a few drops and work towards getting Pant into the 70-80% range from the current 47%.

However, given that the amount of cricket is only going to increase vis-a-vis internationals and IPL - it may even workout in terms of managing the workload.

[Kumar]

I feel for Indian conditions, we should be so dominant that we should still easily win even if there are a few drops and work towards getting Pant into the 70-80% range from the current 47%.

However, given that the amount of cricket is only going to increase vis-a-vis internationals and IPL - it may even workout in terms of managing the workload.

Considering that Dhoni was just 66%, I think India will be happy with Pant even at 60%! I agree that we definitely need to balance the workload! I presume IPL will start in April-may as well

[Atithee]

Beyond that, we can just agree to disagree. However, if we follow the orthodox methodology to selection, we wouldn't have several players in the team from the Australia series even though it was starkly obvious that they are ready.

Bingo. Pakistan has just realized this too and, emboldened by Indian success, they have drafted nine uncapped players.