England in India 2024-25 : The Pataudi Trophy

[prasen9]

SH: here is the link to Dravid’s comments. Not exactly forced:

https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/ind- ... rs-1424216

Agree, not exactly forced. But, "pushed and challenged". So, basically Agarkar and the selectors told them to pick new players. They still did not until they had to due to injuries. I am thinking that Agarkar and the selectors had their final say in the 15 or 16 member team and the team management had the final say on the day of the match. So, the only thing that Agarkar and the selectors could have done would be to say no to requests for Pujara and/or Rahane. There is basically nobody else who could have been wanted by Dravid and pushed and challenged by Agarkar. The rest of the seniors were injured or out: Kohli, Shami, Rahul, and even Ishan ...

[prasen9]

I think the selectors did a good job in introducing in-form and young players such as Jurel, Sarfaraz, Akash Deep and Paddikal. However they also took a few missteps along the way in the form of Patidar and Mukesh Kumar. Another player I was hoping to be selected is Ricky Bhui. Saurabh Kumar should also be finally given some chances. He will just have to hope for both of Jadeja and Axar to be injured to get his turn. Our fast bowling cupboard is still completely bare.
Overall our batting is looking quite good with Jasiwal and Gill looking like superstars of tomorrow, and quite a lot of new talent waiting in the wings; however bowling (especially pace) still remains an area of concern. So we are continuing our past tradition in this regard.

With respect to fast bowling, we have Akash Deep, Mukesh, and Avesh, who are about ready. If properly coached, PK can also turn it around.

I do not disagree with you but I have seen nothing from Jaiswal or Gill to think that they will be able to play well in SENA. Maybe Australian pitches are batting pitches to an extent and they can handle bounce.

In essence, I think the problem is more stark. We do not have players who can succeed in SENA. Someone needs to grow to become the next Kohli and Pant. We have no clue as to who that can be. I would even take a Rahane abroad at this stage, although he was very mediocre. Currently, we have seen Yashasvi and Gill play very badly when the ball swings. Actually, Mukesh has looked good in those conditions. If we are talking about winning in SENA, we need a whole set of match-winners. I hope Pant returns back to his old form. We should not choose him in the team if he does not gain his form in the domestics, IPL, A-team tours, etc.

Here is my list of SENA players: Bumrah, Shami, Siraj, Mukesh, Akash Deep.

Among the oldies: Kohli, Pant.

That is it. We need a wholesale new batting lineup of people who can bat.

[prasen9]

Luckily, we control the ICC to a large extent. If it was like hockey, they would ban spinning pitches, create some regulation that pitches need to have x-cm of grass, etc. and ruled us out of being a top team. Is there a chance we can use our market to also take over hockey and recreate a grass hockey league, fair set of umpires, etc.?

[Sin Hombre]

India’s win loss-ratio in Tests
After first 24 Tests: 0 (1952)
After 100 Tests: 0.25 (1967)
After 200 Tests: 0.48 (1982)
After 300 Tests: 0.57 (1996)
After 400 Tests: 0.68 (2006)
After 500 Tests: 0.82 (2016)
After 579 Tests: 1 (2024)

India’s win-loss ratio in Tests
1932-1951: 0 (23 Tests)
1952-2000: 0.623 (313 Tests)
2001 - 2014: 1.340 (150 Tests)
2015 - present: 2.545 (93 Tests)
India has the best win-loss ratio in Tests since 2015, the next best in this period is Australia’s 1.888


This is India's glorious test period and as I have said before, most of India's all time test xi should come from the past 2 decades.

[prasen9]

Gavaskar, Sehwag, Dravid, Tendulkar, Kohli, Pant, Jadeja, Kapil, Ashwin, Shami, Bumrah.

Of the first four, whom would you kick out and with whom? Last 15 years, we have 6 in my team.

Third spinner: Kumble replaces Shami in India. I'd take Kapil's batting and fielding.

[Sanjay]

Gavaskar, Sehwag, Dravid, Tendulkar, Kohli, Pant, Jadeja, Kapil, Ashwin, Shami, Bumrah.

Of the first four, whom would you kick out and with whom? Last 15 years, we have 6 in my team.

Third spinner: Kumble replaces Shami in India. I'd take Kapil's batting and fielding.

Replace Shami/Bumrah with Srinath

[rajitghosh]

Pant before Dhoni?

[Atithee]

Replace Shami/Bumrah with Srinath

Is this a joke?

[Sanjay]

Replace Shami/Bumrah with Srinath

Is this a joke?

No.

[prasen9]

Pant before Dhoni?

Absolutely. Pant scored centuries in SENA. Dhoni was not that great a bat in swinging conditions. We will win in India with this team even with Pant's keeping being a tad below. We need match winners abroad. Look at their averages also. I give up a bit on the keeping side and gain a lot on the batting side. Pant has centuries in England, RSA and Australia at least. Oval, Sydney, Birmingham, Cape Town. Dhoni does not. All his centuries are in Asia. Easy decision. Pant won us matches and series abroad. Dhoni did not, largely. Dhoni won us a bunch in India. Pant can do that too given the chances, assuming he recovers fully.

Srinath was very good. But, Shami and Bumrah have done it time and again moving the ball in and out. Srinath was primarily an inswing bowler. And, Shami and Bumrah have been more consistent, imho. Yes, different eras, bowling in pairs helps, etc. etc. But, Shami and Bumrah have shown more.

[Raju Bhai]

Gavaskar, Sehwag, Dravid, Tendulkar, Kohli, Pant, Jadeja, Kapil, Ashwin, Shami, Bumrah.

Jadeja out V Mankad in. Dravid out GR Viswanath in

[prasen9]

Imho, Mankad was both a worse bat and a worse bowler than Jadeja. He looks good because he was surrounded by players who were pretty bad in a weak Indian team. He was before my times. So, don't have a first-hand recollection though.

[rajitghosh]

Mankad played in an era when Indians couldn't field. So he got far fewer wickets than he should have as catches would be dropped. He batted without protective equipment and on uncovered pitches.

[prasen9]

Batting without helmets and on uncovered pitches but with padding up in front of the wicket allowed and all sorts of doubts going in favor of the batsmen. Not getting runout when you are marginally runout, etc. Those excuses don't cut when you see the average number of runs scored/wicket changing marginally over decades. Batting then was not harder then now wrt scoring runs. Wrt getting hurt, of course, it was harder. But, Mankad did not score enough runs, excuses notwithstanding - compared to his peers if you want a normalization. Jadeja did more with the bat.

Now the fielding is certainly better. That I can understand. And, world fielding was also not as good as today with lots more fielding lapses. So, Mankad, the batsman's averages are that much worse because he must have gotten very many more lives with people dropping his catches, not diving as much to save runs, etc.

Bowlers had it harder then perhaps with fielding being worse. Batters had some disadvantages and some advantages and that side is a wash, imho.

Jadeja averages 24 with the ball and Mankad 32. If we are saying dropped catches was the culprit, then Indian fielders must have dropped about 1 in four catches more than what they have now to make this much discrepancy. Don't know if this is true.

[prasen9]

Vinoo Mankad played from 1946 to 1959. During this time, the average was 30.61. This means compared to his peers, who took wickets at 30.61, he took wickets at 32.32, which means he was a marginally worse than average bowler. The only reason to adjust this conclusion is to say that Indian fielding was much worse than average fielding then. Maybe that is true.

Compared to his peers, the average amongst whom scored 30.61 runs (including the tailenders), he scored at 31.47, which is marginally better. If we consider only players who batted from opener to #6, the average was 36.47. Average #6 batted at 28.14. During his time. So, he was a marginally better batter than his peers all of whom batted without helmets on uncovered pitches and padded the heck out of lots of balls and did not get marginally runout or stumped and had more catches dropped off their batting and more lives.

During Jadeja's time because we don't allow batters to pad up with immunity, etc. the average is 30.07, which balances out the helmet/pitch advantage and is very close to what it was during Mankad's time. Batting despite all the helmets, etc. is not that much better wrt scoring runs/wicket. It is actually slightly harder now. Note that I am not talking about injuries. That is orthogonal and batting is much safer now.

In comparison to Jadeja's peers, Jadeja is a much better batter at 36.14. That is about 20% more than the average batter during his times. Not marginally. The top six in this era averages 36.65. Note how similar it is to Vinoo's era. But, a #6 today bats at 34.59 average. So, Jadeja comfortably is a top 6 batter. The interesting difference is that the #6 batter today makes more runs. If the average is the same, what gives? My conjecture is that the maybe opening is harder these days?

In the WTC era, people do not prepare draw pitches. Despite the pitches being not covered, we don't see that many more runs being scored by the top 6. Either we have the whole world forgetting how to produce batters these days or batting is about the same difficult.

Top 3 in the Jadeja era averages 35.48. In the Vinoo era, it was 37.03. So, top-order batting has become a bit harder and teams have covered for that by requiring their #6s to be better bats these days. In other words, it seems like Vinoo would not have been a very good candidate to bat in the top 6 in this era.