As the other sports forums seem to have taken old to some respect, well here is a cricket forum. NOTE: This forum will be heavily moderated and can be revoked at any time is discussions go out of hand.
rajitghosh wrote: ↑Sun May 09, 2021 7:22 am
Waiting for the day for a Sodabottleopenerwalla to play for India. Not sure though that would be the longest surname in cricket.
Rajit, Ilikena Lasarusa Talebulamaineiilikenamainavaleniveivakabulaimainakulalakebalau has the longest surname for any First-Class cricketer. As per cricketcounty site, the surname literally means “returned alive from Nankula Hospital at Lakeba Island in the Lau Group”
At one time, India was captained by a Contractor (Nari) with an Engineer (Farooq) keeping wickets!
But Polly Umrigar was probably the greatest of the Parsi cricketers (and Diana Edulji among women). There were also Rusi Mody (not the Tata executive of the same name) and Rusi Surti.
Farokh's father was a doctor so he was called Doctor Engineer. Another famous Parsi cricketer was Rusi Jeejeebhoy from Calcutta who was the reserve wicketkeeper in the 1971 tour of West Indies but never played test cricket.
Rusi Surti was called poor man's Sobers since he batted left handed and bowled left arm slow medium and spin. He went onto play fist class cricket for Queensland.
The treatment of Hardik and Bhuvi is shameful. Or the treatment of the Indian public is shameful. There should have been clear information put out as to why these folks are not being asked to build up their stamina, etc. for bowling longer overs and play in tests. It is not that we have a lot of swing bowlers. We used to have very good ones. Now, we have ones that are more prone to doing better in Australia than in England using their hit the deck and bowl on the fourth stump line with pace tactics. We are possibly looking at another massacre in England.
It really is asinine not to be taking Bhuvi to England, particularly for the early-season WTC final. In overcast conditions, all you need is 10 overs (in two spells of 5 overs each) from Bhuvi to run through an opposing batting side.
Well, given that Bhuvi cannot be the 3rd pacer, I would rather have Thakur as the 3rd pacer. A tail of Ishant, Shami, and Bumrah is too long. Given that our players are inevitably going to struggle to put runs up especially against the new ball, we need a bit of batting at the end. So, I'd go with Thakur, Ishant, Bumrah.
Because Ishant has been phenomenal in the last two years. 11 tests, 17 runs/wicket. He won us the only test in England the last time if I remember correctly. Ishant has been a tale of two bowlers over his career. In 2018, he got 41 wickets at 21.8, in 2019 25 wickets at 15.6, 2020 5 wickets at 15, 2021 6 wickets at 26.7. This is a very good run. If there is a batsman left over, he also stays on the wicket longer than Shami thereby enabling the Jajdejas to score a lot more with the tail.
In the same period, Shami got 47 wickets at 26.97, 33 at 16.66, 5 at 44.8. Somewhat comparable but distinctly worse. Primarily, because of his form last year when he was bad (albeit small sample size) and this year where he has played no tests. It is a bit risky to bring in someone who has scant match practice despite the fact that he has played 50 tests over his career.
It would be asinine to pick Thakur as a frontline specialist bowler. His batting isn't particularly reliable either. I doubt that Ishant, Shami, Bumrah will be disturbed. The only competition for the 3 is Mohammed Siraj, but I don't think he should be picked for the WTC final (too much of a risk). We need swing bowlers in the early summer. Jadeja and Ashwin will, most probably, both play -- especially later in the summer, at the Oval and Lord's at least. Whether they will both play the WTC final is the only question mark. I would open with Pujara and Rohit in the WTC, and have Gill or Mayank at #3. Then Kohli, Rahane, Pant, Jadeja, Ashwin/Thakur and the 3 pacers.
Too long a tail was my reasoning. And that Thakur is a swing bowler. And, Shami has been bad last year and not played this year. And, because Thakur has performed better both with the bat and the ball than Siraj in the chances they got. Admittedly, both small sample sizes and Thakur entirely out of India. I do not like the tail not being able to bat that much. But, of course, given that the team has preferred Siraj to Thakur, they are possibly going to just go Shami-Ishant-Bumrah. I do not think Thakur is an all-rounder of the calibre of Ashwin yet. Choosing him instead of Ashwin will make a longer tail. That is not the right way to go imho. The person who we should look at to replace Ashwin is Sundar. In essence, we are choosing his bat over Ashwin's.
Interesting that the world test championship final was moved from Lord's, but the first test between England and New Zealand is being played there. How do they make these decisions??
Also, England are playing at Lord's (where spinners often come into play by the 4th and 5th day) without a spinner. New Zealand have a specialist spinner in Santner, who will get to bowl in the 4th innings. Let us which decision proves prescient. (Of course Joe Root can fill in as fifth bowler with his offspin for England).
The Indian test squad has been at Southampton since 3rd June. I presume they can start playing cricket today (in the nets). I wonder whether they will formally start a practice match (inter-squad) within the next day or two. Quite crucial to do so, in my view, especially as NZ is acquiring match practice in proper test matches against England (albeit, bizarrely, not part of the WTC schedule -- either this one or the next one).
New Zealand have won a test series against England, while India will be going into the WTC final with no match-practice whatsoever. This is ludicrously unfair -- and stupid (yet again) of the Indian team management not to have arranged a proper practice match. How can NZ be allowed to play test cricket, while India aren't allowed to play even a first class match?
Yes, this is head-scratchingly stupid on India's part. Maybe they did not bother because they thought IPL would run its full course. But, the moment it got scratched, someone should have tried to revamp the schedule and get good match practice for us. Anyway, the WTC is a lost cause it seems.
