From: pvr@owlnet.rice.edu (PVR Narasimha Rao)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket
Subject: Re: (none)
Date: 11 Nov 1992 18:37:36 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

In article <1992Nov10.222056.7091@m.cs.uiuc.edu>, bharat@cs.uiuc.edu (R. Bharat Rao) writes:

|> pvr@argo.rice.edu (PVR Narasimha Rao) writes:


|> >We must decide between Raman and Jadeja and play _only one_ of them. If we
|> >are indecisive and play both (with one of them coming in the middle order),
|> >it doesn't look convincing.
|> 
|> Why?  Why do we bother how it looks?  One of the big concerns seems to


May be I didn't put it well, but by "it doesn't look convincing", I just meant that it was a silly
thing to do, it wasn't a convincing decision. I think you just took the word "look" too literally.


|> tour I had thought Amre would play, Jadeja has definitely come shown
|> some ability and is good nice (if you don;t play him now, when will


Let me just make it clear that I have nothing against Jadeja and I in fact like him. I wrote
after the world cup that he had showed in his ODI innings that he had the temperament
needed for playing in tests and I said he should to be tried in tests in near future (and, I said
the same thing about Amre too).

If you don't play him now (this is assuming you want to give Raman another chance and
persist wiht him for this test), you can still play him in future tests. I would personally
prefer to let Jadeja and Amre make their debuts in this test and drop Raman (but play him in
the tour matches until he comes good).


|> you -- a good way to destroy the young guys confidence).  I disagree


If you play Jadeja at #6 as suggested by several people so far, that can also be "a good way
to destroy the young guys confidence". He is good enough to get a chance as an opener and
he _will_. No point being in a hurry and taking a risk with the young guy's confidecne.


|> with PVR that playing all 3 openers is bad -- besides I suspect Raman
|> is a number 6 bat, masquarading as an opener (also, didn't Chappel say


Actually, Raman got most of his good scores in domestics at #3,4. He did play at #5,6 too,
but that was at the beginning of his career.

I don't say that "playing all 3 openers is bad" - if you think Raman would be a better #6 than
Amre (or whoever is available), fine, I have no problem, play Raman at #6. But, I do not
think that's the case. All I say is don't change the batting positions _just_ to play the guys
you want to play.

I think your suggestion of playing Raman at #6 and opening with Jadeja is much saner than
the one suggesting Jadeja should bat at #6. Personally I feel Amre is a better bet for #6
(though I think the ideal position for him would be #4 - but, SRT fits it better) than Raman
or Jadeja.  


|> Another possibility is to bat Shastri, Jadeja, Raman at the top of the
|> lineup -- but with Manjrekar back in form (boy, is he ever, this is a
|> bad move).


SVM, SRT and Azza fit very very well in #3,4 and 5 respectively. I see no reason for playing
with those positions.


|> While I think Kumble is the better bowler, I suspect that (given 4
|> bowlers) they may well (gasp) go with Raju.  I don;t think they will,
|> but it is not an impossibility.  However, I am reasonably confident


At the beginning of the tour, Kumble was considered to be the main spinner. When Azhar was
asked about the bowlers by India Today, he had something to say about Kaps, Manoj,
Srinath, Chetan and Kumble. But he didn't say a thing about Raju and Banerjee. On the
bouncy SA pitches, Kumble can be expected to be dangerous. Even the tour management
seems to have realized it.

What did Kumble do to be dropped? He was OK in the test with Zim - he got 3 wkts in the
1st inn as opposed to Raju's 0. Though he got only 3, he was supposed to have bowled well
(much better than Raju). Moreover, it was Kumble's 2nd test. You can't expect expect the
guy to become a Chandra in his first few tests itself. You've got to give him some chacnes.

I don't think all these are just my views - even the tour management seems to think that
way. Remember, they played only Raju in the match against Board president's XI. Kumble
(along with Kapil) was rested. I think it means that Raju is in the situation in which Hirwani
was on the tour of Oz. He will replace Kumble only if he does well in the tour matches and
Kumble does badly. And, Raju didn't do very well in the match against Board president's XI.

If they want to play both spinners (as SA is supposed to be weak against spin), then they
may play Raju, but I don't think he will replace Kumble. Shastri's recent exploits make the
situation only worse for Raju.


|> Bharat

PVR
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket