Its all about strategy. As the underdog you need to do unconventional things to win.
Those who are familiar with basketball maybe know about the full court press which a lot of weaker teams employ to defeat the stronger sides. Check this excellent article by Malcolm Gladwell on
David Beats Goliath. This is unconventional, and not something you will get in the coaching books, or see other teams do
In cricket you also get such strategies. For example: How Sri Lanka won the WC in 1996 by changing the nature of game (First 15 overs bashing). NZ used to bowl off spinner Deepak Patel from 2nd over-a trend we see a lot of teams following these days.
Thats what he have to keep in mind. Sometimes the conventional strategies wont work for a weaker team like us. So if it means playing 2 spinners or 3 spinners or even 4 spinners-whatever makes us distinct and hard to play and what results in a win-thats the important thing. We tend to think 3 SLA's will make our attack one dimensional. But would you rather have 3 SLA's who only give 120 runs in ODI's in 30 overs or 2 SLA's and a pacer who will give 140 runs in 30 overs (Sometimes the pacers dont even fill their quota, and part timers have to fill in). These extra 20 runs often make a big difference.
Anyway great debate. Whatever lineup, combination as long as we win i am happy. Thanks all again for your feedback. Appreciated. Go tigers!