Team-BHP (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/)

-   Shifting gears (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/shifting-gears/)

-   -   The Cricket Thread (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/shifting-gears/8603-cricket-thread-589.html)

My predictions for the playing 11: Vijay Dhawan Pujara Kohli Rahane Saha Ashwin Mishra Sharma Shami Yadav.

Anything less than a 3-0 sweep (in favour of India, weather permitting) is a shame.

Shikhar Dhawan
Vijay
Pujara
Kohli
Rahane
Saha
Jadeja
Ashwin
Ishant
Shami
Yadav / Mishra

@landcruiser - with dead pitches, rain and our bowling, it would actually be a surprise if we pull off a 3-0

Weather permitting, I don't think pulling off a 3-0 series victory is tough. Winning against Bangladesh can be a tougher challenge for India. But both teams are not going to win tests against India anytime soon.

The batsmen with a reputation are: Darren Bravo, Marlon Samuels.

This batting lineup reminds me of the previous Sri Lankan batting lineup. Only Dilshan, Sangakkara, Jayawardene and Samaraweera scored the runs. If they failed, the whole team collapsed. Mathews provided much needed stability in the middle order a few years later.

India win toss and will bat. Line up: 1 Vijay, 2 Dhawan, 3 Pujara, 4 Kohli, 5 Rahane, 6 Saha (wk), 7 R Ashwin, 8 Mishra, 9 Umesh, 10 Ishant, 11 Shami.

Can't believe they picked Dhawan over Rahul.

I was expecting it. This team has the habit of picking players on the basis of favoritism rather than form. And I am sure Dhawan will make some runs and consider himself as a great batsman when in reality he is extremely average.

Dhawan did struggle in the 1st session, but played well in the second. The lacklusture WI bowling and the dead pitch will be to his liking.

My favourite batsman will come out to play now. :)

Guys honestly, if we win 2-0, I would be happy. The pitches in WI become so abysmal by the end that literally anyone who uses their head won't get out.

Weather permitting, I think winning 3-0 is a minimum. If our bowlers can't pick 20 WI wickets, we should be ranked below Bangladesh.

Not sure how Dhawan is still there in test squad. Only thing going for him is the dead pitch. They will eventually drop Pujara for Rahul.

Good win for us.

Ishant can really be frustrating sometimes. I did not see him bowl in this match. Was he good without getting wickets or his usual self ?

Due to the timezone differences, I mostly watched Kohli's batting during India's first innings.
It was Shami & Yadav's bowling that brought the Windies down in their first innings and an Ashwin bowling show all the way in the second innings - but Ishant did manage a wicket though (that of Kraigg Brathwaite) in the second innings! :D

I do not understand the teams which do not enforce follow on even when they have a chance to.
The recent two matches ENG Vs PAK and NZ Vs ZIM being the latest examples.

The main contention in not enforcing a follow-on is that the bowlers can take some rest.
This argument of rest to the bowlers IMO holds good when they have bowled very long spells. But in modern day tests, that's rare
In both cases, opposition were bowled out very soon. Pakistan were bowled out in 60 overs and Zimbabwe were bowled out in 50 overs

And when bowlers are bowling well and taking wickets, they feel less tired don't they?
Isn't it better to enforce follow on, finish off the opposition who will be already feeling inferior of following on and finish the test match a day earlier and take rest than prolonging it?
In both cases if we see, the losing teams two scores put together is less than the winning team's first innings score.

Also even if they surpass the score, it won't be by a huge margin and they can bat it out and win.
Its only once in many years that a Dravid-Laxman like partnership can happen.
So isn't it a chance worth to take?

OR

Is this entire thing depends on the nature of the captain (and the coach)?
Kohli is naturally aggressive and he wants everyone to play hard and to push hard. He enforced a follow on.
Cook and Williamson are not as aggressive as Kohli and they chose not to enforce follow on

The "bowlers can take rest.." is BS in most cases. If you're in a position to enforce a follow-on, it means that you've bowled out the opposition quickly. I consider long spells as 3 (in hot Asian conditions) or 4 sessions.

If your team bowls 4 sessions, you might have scores of 6xx in the 1st innings and around 380 +/-10 runs in the second innings. In this particular case, it might be better to maximize the lead.

I don't know about Williamson, but Cook's captaincy has always been criticized.

It's a tactical/strategical decision and there could be many reasons. Steve Waugh, Andrew Strauss, Michael Clarke, Ricky Ponting were some of the captains who would usually not enforce a follow-on and they had their reasons :) Sometimes though, it can be a defensive decision as well to avoid losing a game, though that's quite rare.
You can read some more here

*Also, remember the 2001 Kolkata Test when Australia enforced the follow on and India went on to win the test after heroic innings from VVS Laxman and Rahul Dravid ? No captain wants to end up losing a game like that!

Steve Waugh enforced the follow-on each and every time his team had a chance to.