PDA

View Full Version : Use of 8 batsman in ODI and 5th bowler issue.


M.H.Rubel
July 17, 2010, 04:23 AM
During the 90s due to lack of all rounder some of the teams start to play with 4 bowler in ODI and the rest 10 overs were shared by part timers.Tendulkar and Ganguly did it for India,even A D Silva and Ranatunga did it for Srilanka.As i do not follow that much international cricket so it will be tough for me what the teams are doing now a days.
During DW era DW used 5 bowlers in 07 world cup(2 pacers +3 SLA).Now a days bangladesh frequently play with 4 bowlers.But my observation is due to lack of 1 bowler the constant pressure from the bowlers are eased up in those 10 overs.
JS is never ever interested to play with 7 batsman but he need to rid of from his staborn decision of playing with 8 batsman.But i think,
1.In a bouncy and pacy condition we should play with 3 pacers plus 2 SLA backed by part timmer.
2.In a spin friendly condition they can try with 2 quality part timmer.None of Naeem and Riyad looked good as a bowler in that case we should try to find some one new like Nasir or Mahmudul Hasan.
3.If we fail to find some one new in that case we ll have to rely on Riyad,Naeem and Faisal and the better bowlers should get the nod.In the last 2 years against G8 Naeem took 19 wickets from 22 matches avg 39 and batting average is 30.5 on the other hand Riyad took only 7 wickets from 24 matches avg 76.14 and batting average 32.68 so Riyad do not full fill the criteria of even a part timer!! So whats wrong with trying Naeem + Faisal combination as SLS's always get some natural benefit.
Any way all those can be done if Staborn JS dont want to play with 1 less batsman.But still its not clear why he wants to play with 8 batsman.Is it worthy?If we can figure out contribution of no 8 batsman in ODI in that case its possible to guess why Siddons like to play with 8 batsman or its just an eye wash about batting progress?
<br />Posted via BC Mobile Edition UA

rahat90
July 17, 2010, 06:06 AM
Good thread.
I think that there are two main and simple reasons why Siddons (or shakib, now mash) like to adopt the 8 batsman approach with only 4 fulltime bowlers (as shakib counts as batsman and full time bowler).
Firstly, batting collapse. We do not have the luxury like the bigger teams of more or less guaranting that our top order will score us runs, so they need to add 'insurance' in that extra batsman. But i dont agree with this, because if 7 batsman cant help you, then an 8th wont save you more often than not.
Secondly, team management are reluctant to play 3 pacers, especially in subcontinent. When they have played 3 pacers, 7 batsman have been played eg 2nd ODI in Bristol. Spin is our strength, so team management pick 2 spinners. If all 3 pacers aren't gonna use up their bowling quota, or even half of it, what is the point in selecting them? So one may say why not pick 3 spinners? This has been tried, with shuvo taking the #8 spot in the lineup.
So this approach has been tried and tested, with not much success. So i think bd play 8 batsman due to insurance, or due to a lack of quality 5th bowler.
But i do not agree with this. This almost seems to be a 'safe' method, and bd need to pick a more attacking team and trust the top order to get us runs. The balance of the team in bristol was perfect imo, thats how bd should go on...

al-Sagar
July 17, 2010, 08:25 AM
playing the 8th batsman and dropping a 5th bowler is to set the team up for a so called SHOMMANJONOK PORAJOY.

its like playing a back 11 in football when u know u dont have enough attacking ability and u just defend with all bodies to keep the score minimum.

with shakib playing...... we have one pure allrounder. we should then pick 3 pacers+1 spinner or a 2 spinner + 2 pacer who will bat from 8-11. that will give a perfectly balanced side. plus the part time spinners like riadh, naeem, faisal can cover if one bowler gets a bad day. but these part timers should not be our 5th bowlers who has to complete a quota of 10.

finally when we play three spinners looks like the best three spinners at the moment are 3 SLA. which sometimes becomes too predictable for opponents. so i feel instead of shuvo we may try mahmudul hasan or nasir hossain the RH off spiners or Nur hossain or Shabbir Rahman the RH LS. though Nur and Shabbir may need some more time before coming to national scene.

nasir and nur can be handy batsman at no 8 . nasir has the capabilty to play even at no 6,7 in future. similarly shabbir and mahmudul can actually bat more high. shabbir at 3-6, and mahmudul at 5,6,7. but start of career wont be a bad idea to play them at no 8.

shuvo should be given some chances still.... perhaps he can be a better bowler than rajjak someday and eventually replace rajjak.

M.H.Rubel
July 17, 2010, 11:38 PM
Good thread.
I think that there are two main and simple reasons why Siddons (or shakib, now mash) like to adopt the 8 batsman approach with only 4 fulltime bowlers (as shakib counts as batsman and full time bowler).
Firstly, batting collapse. We do not have the luxury like the bigger teams of more or less guaranting that our top order will score us runs, so they need to add 'insurance' in that extra batsman. But i dont agree with this, because if 7 batsman cant help you, then an 8th wont save you more often than not.
Secondly, team management are reluctant to play 3 pacers, especially in subcontinent. When they have played 3 pacers, 7 batsman have been played eg 2nd ODI in Bristol. Spin is our strength, so team management pick 2 spinners. If all 3 pacers aren't gonna use up their bowling quota, or even half of it, what is the point in selecting them? So one may say why not pick 3 spinners? This has been tried, with shuvo taking the #8 spot in the lineup.
So this approach has been tried and tested, with not much success. So i think bd play 8 batsman due to insurance, or due to a lack of quality 5th bowler.
But i do not agree with this. This almost seems to be a 'safe' method, and bd need to pick a more attacking team and trust the top order to get us runs. The balance of the team in bristol was perfect imo, thats how bd should go on...

Thats true in 2nd ODI against england our bowling attack was perfect in that condition and they were able to restrict England within a small target of 236.I always think that in pace friendly condition we should play with 3 pacers+2 SLA+1 part time offi.
<br />Posted via BC Mobile Edition

M.H.Rubel
July 17, 2010, 11:44 PM
playing the 8th batsman and dropping a 5th bowler is to set the team up for a so called SHOMMANJONOK PORAJOY.

its like playing a back 11 in football when u know u dont have enough attacking ability and u just defend with all bodies to keep the score minimum.

with shakib playing...... we have one pure allrounder. we should then pick 3 pacers+1 spinner or a 2 spinner + 2 pacer who will bat from 8-11. that will give a perfectly balanced side. plus the part time spinners like riadh, naeem, faisal can cover if one bowler gets a bad day. but these part timers should not be our 5th bowlers who has to complete a quota of 10.

finally when we play three spinners looks like the best three spinners at the moment are 3 SLA. which sometimes becomes too predictable for opponents. so i feel instead of shuvo we may try mahmudul hasan or nasir hossain the RH off spiners or Nur hossain or Shabbir Rahman the RH LS. though Nur and Shabbir may need some more time before coming to national scene.

nasir and nur can be handy batsman at no 8 . nasir has the capabilty to play even at no 6,7 in future. similarly shabbir and mahmudul can actually bat more high. shabbir at 3-6, and mahmudul at 5,6,7. but start of career wont be a bad idea to play them at no 8.

shuvo should be given some chances still.... perhaps he can be a better bowler than rajjak someday and eventually replace rajjak.

I think management is also thinking about uselessness of 8 batsman so they tried Suhrawardy as 5th bowler come 8th batsman.And i think if Suhrawardy was fit there in that case we may not have this thread.Failure of Suhrawardy is giving fuel to use 8 batsman.IMO management still should try with Suhrawardy in this position for few more occasion.But they can think of Nasir as well.
<br />Posted via BC Mobile Edition

max410
July 18, 2010, 03:02 AM
everything is alright we just need to replace Ashraful

BanCricFan
July 18, 2010, 07:24 AM
Excellent thread.

The fact that they choose to go batting heavy and sacrifice a bowler in bowling friendly conditions AND against an associate team exposes their disgraceful negative frame of mind. Siddons seems to be a reactionary and opportunist Head Coach devoid of any longterm vision or plan. And all his bad mouthing of Dav Whatmore seems to be so funny now.

We see time and again the coach (and captain) is going with eight batsmen in the hunt for a respectable score. Well, this clearly sends a wrong signal to the batters, therefore, each leaving the job for the other thinking the long batting lineup will be good enough for the team target of 240. On the otherside, it could also reinforce the batsmen's lack of confidence or self-belief seeing the coach is going with an extra bat having no confidence in their abilities.

I have said it many times before, if the seven batsmen can't deliver the goods the eighth or the ninth won't either. So, why again and again they are destroying the balance and sacrificing a bowler? This is nothing but a cheap effort to hide the crack on the wall. This policy is so similar to our batsmen's attitude or modus operandi: Jodi Laigga Jai!

I would rather lose a match happily than go with an unbalanced side. You got to do the right thing.

PS: their attitude or policy to Power Play is ,simply, disgraceful.

Eshen
July 18, 2010, 10:04 AM
^^ Well said BCF

M.H.Rubel
July 18, 2010, 11:15 AM
For a long time i was trying to understand the strategy of team selection.So far my observations and comments are:
1.Some times in a pace friendly condition he tries to play with 2 pacers it totally hinder the progress of grooming of our pace attack.I hate this type of idea.
2.Failure of Suhrawardy Shuvo as a bowler broke the team combination a lot.
3.Always i try to read the psychology of JS,as a person he does not look to be a bad person to me but when he fail to make the right combination of the team then he just follow one theory and that is play with an extra batsman.This theory is totally wrong as well stated by BCF.
<br />Posted via BC Mobile Edition

Imteaz
July 19, 2010, 01:20 AM
Our batters are not responsible & skilled enough, that’s why playing with 8 batters is justified. Usually international practice is to take 5 specialist batters + 1/2 all rounder + 1 wicketkeeper who can bat well in any position + 4 specialist bowler.
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comhttp://www.banglacricket.com/alochona/ /><o:p></o:p></FONT></FONT></P><P><FONT color=black><FONT face=In our case our those 5 specialist are always running out of form or score ones in a blue moon. That’s why we always need to concentrate for 2-3 extra batters. Recently Tamim, Junaid & Imrul are scoring consistently but Junaid & Imrul needs to be judged more.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
If our 5 specialist batters + 1 allrounder + 1 wicketkeeper can be skilled enough to score consistently than we can think about playing with less than 8 batters. Otherwise it is better to play with 8 batters.

shakibrulz
July 19, 2010, 03:48 AM
Tamim, Junaed, Imrul, Jahurul makes a decent top order, followed by Shakib the bowling allrounder. Mushy too can be accomodated as a big hitter at the death overs. Can easily play a fifth bowler in the spot of Riyadh as he's not doing any good with either bat or ball.

Baundule
July 19, 2010, 04:51 AM
It depends on what you want from the team. As offstump has said, it sets the team for shommanjonok porajoy. We can score 200+ while chasing 350+ and can summarize the positives in the press conference.

yaseer
July 19, 2010, 06:35 AM
Good thread.
Siddons has nothing to do with the team and result. He wants his students (read batsmen) to be out there and score some runs. If possible I think Siddons would have played 11 batsmen.

To a serious note, I am always with playing 4 specialist bowlers. If part-timers are not good enough to bowl 10 overs, then do not take chance, play 5 bowlers. For Bangladesh perspective, I want to see 7 batsmen+4 bowlers. 7 batsmen includes Sakib, that means 4 specialist bowlers excluding Sakib.

BANFAN
July 19, 2010, 09:55 AM
Sidons fixing his career by increasing the chance of more individual performance, rathar than looking after team interest. He has a reason to shrug off poor bowling.

lamisa
July 19, 2010, 10:56 AM
i don't think that our playerrs have that sort of mentality where they would want to shoulder the burden of putting up a decent total with a shorter batting lineup

Tiger Manc
July 19, 2010, 11:12 AM
4 out of the last 5 wins against the top 8 have been where we use 5 bowlers. The problem is we don't actually have 5 quality bowlers. When the likes Rubel and even Rasel, who is supposed to be economical go for more than 6 an over then you might as well bowl a part timer who will go for the same amount of runs but at least contribute with the bat. That's why we have 4 recognised bowlers and 2 part-timers. In the world cup, with the conditions being spin-friendly I would have either Shuvo or Nazmul Hossain. Nazmul Hossain did well against Zimbabwe in 2009 and is unlucky to have played only 1 game this year. My preferred choice is Shuvo. He will be better than Mohammad Rafique in the future with both bat and ball. He has a good economy rate and he has the advantage of Rubel, Nazmul, Rasel and Saqlain because he can contribute with the bat as well. Also he's a phenomenal athlete in the circle, I've seen him make some dives to stop certain fours. So imo the fifth bowler should be Shuvo.