From: sbasu@spock (BASU)
Subject: Re: Ravi Shastri (Indian team for 1st test)
Organization: New Mexico State University
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 14:35:13 GMT

In article <C19Iyn.3B0@cs.uiuc.edu> bharat@cs.uiuc.edu (R. Bharat Rao)  
writes:
> 
> I am by no means a great Ravi Shastri fan, but the team
> selection for the first Test shows how valuable he is for
> a TEST team.  COnsider a possible line-up now..
> 
> In the absence of Shastri you have to eiter weaken the batting 
> and go with 5 bowlers and 5 bats plus More (why not Yadav???),
> and use Prabhakar to open the batting!!  Thats just great -- we
> ask the most consistent bowler overthe last two series to
> opne both the batting and bowling -- a good way to burn him out...

How does he then get his highest Test AND one day scores when he opens the  
batting - 
100 vs Pakistan '87(Imran & Akram) (odi)
40 vs NZ '90(Hadlee & Morrison) (test)
64 vs SA '92(Donald & Pringle) (test )

In case you haven't noticed, he is generally a flop anywhere else in the  
batting lineup.

> 
> or go in with only 4 bowlers..  Just whhat we need -- have Kapil
> bowl another 30-40 overs/inning and blow his career to pieces..
> 
> There is another problem -- whichever lineup you choose,
> 
> Sidhu,Raman/Prabhakar,Azhar,Tendulkar,Amre,Kambli,Kapil there
> is only ONE grafter in the first 7 bats -- Amre -- in fact only
> one person capable of putting his head down and building an innings
> in the entire side.  Everyone else is a strokeplayer -- dazzling
> when he comes off, but as Shamim said "a surefire recipe for disaster
> in the Tests".

Pick Manjrekar, who deserves to walk into any Indian TEST side, & that  
problem is solved. Besides, Manjrekar has more gears than Shastri - not  
just 1st & top.

> 
> Now look how Shastri's addition (when he is fit and available) 
> helps stabilize the side.  First he is an opener, allowing
> Prabhakar to concentrate on his bowling, which we sorely need.
> 
> Second, if told in no uncertain terms that he (Shastri) MUST bowl,
> he allows us to have 6 batsmen and 5 bowlers with a wickie, rather
> than 5-5 or 6-4 -- Shastri can be a perfectly capable 5th bowler.
> In fact Shastri enable you to play an extra batsmen in place of
> a bowler -- giving much needed stability tto the fragile batting.  
> Most of all, we have a grafter at the top of our lineup -- an
> essential counterpoint to the Sidhus et al...

Prabhakar has shown himself to do a better job of opening then Shastri.

Scrooge

> 
> Finally, since I believe we must have 5 bowlers, it allows much more
> stability to the lower order -- if we choose 5 bowlers for the 1st
> Test -- we will have a tail of Srinath, Kambli, and Raju -- 
> reminiscent of the Pras,Bedi,Chandra tail where 8 down = all out
> most often -- with the instability of the Indian top order, this
> does not bode well....
> 
> Essentailly, Shastri would play in place of Raju, providing a 
> significantly less able bowler, but a much better bat and a grafter...
> 
> No question in my mind.  We need Ravi Shastri to open the Test team, 
> and we need him badly!
> 
> Bharat
> -- 
> R. Bharat Rao                         E-mail: bharat@cs.uiuc.edu
> AI Group, Beckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology
> 405 N. Mathews, Urbana, IL 61801   (217)-333-5978 (O), 337-6498(H)
> Electrical & Computer Engineering, University of Illinois, Urbana
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket