Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ahmed_B
Well..the question is not about 'best bowlers' anymore. its more about our 'bowling strategy' lately. I have been uncomfortable about the 'spinner-based' bowling attack for long now...but lately i'm really getting highly annoyed about this ploy.
We are actually shattering the confidence of our pacers by making them 'side-liners' by default. We've always had ordinary sort of pacers. But never before the last few years..we have put them on secondary roles so very much. As if they are there just to occupy the team. When we put them in that sort of role already...its natural that they wont get their usual deserved spells. They wont be given tough jobs like getting early breakthroughs or containing the opposition in death-overs. This has been happening for 2-3 years now...and already our pacers have lost all moral strength and self-belief that they can actually do those jobs.
This strategy..IMO..is seriously damaging our team-balance and this will hurt the team for years to come. Time to wake up and smell the coffee immediately..or our bowling is on its way to become a serious laughing stock in front of the world pretty soon.
|
Yes, on the strategy of using the bowlers we are not doing well. Like, why you need to open the bowling with Razzak against Pakistan, who are good players of spin. We need some thinking to do here.
But in strategy of picking up the spinner/pacer combination, so far it is not that bad. Like, in NZ, as condition demanded, we had 3 pace bowlers in all the ODIs. Though I always thought we should play one extra bowler (spinner/pacer depending on condition) in ODI and sometimes even in Test.
May 3, 2010, 12:02 PM
Linear Mode
