Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by papad)
    Tendulkar was definately not out,when they appealed, did you see how he raised his bat- that shows that he hit it.
    Pad first mate. I thought he hit it too and he did, but only after brushing the pad. Bit tight in terms of line tho - couldn't say he was definitely in line with the naked eye...

    Sehwag will be back. Just had a bad match like usual. He only ever scores big in the first innings anyway - his second innings average is embarassing for a top batsman. He's not likely to be dropped for the next match but if Jaffer keeps scoring like he is, and Gambhir keeps in good nick, then you never know. case closed on Ganguly however...he ain't comin back. Don't know what to say...bit sad in a way.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Ganguly retired?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    people...check this out man...FUNNIEST THING IVE EVA READ!!! >>>>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4774868.stm
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    US President George W Bush was hit by a ball at the heavily-guarded US embassy in Pakistan
    ...Mite protect you from terrorists....but not a tennis ball hahaha
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by papad)
    Ganguly retired?
    no but the indian selectors have all but made the decision for him
    http://uk.cricinfo.com/india/content...ry/239588.html

    nice bit of hitting at the end of that session tho, not bad considering i never thought they would dream of chasing 368.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    So many **** decisions by alem dar (whos a pakistan supporter) meant india had no chance of winning. But i knew this game would be a draw from the start, just good to see Panesar and Blackwell getting smacked at end showing how overrated they BOTH are.

    Also i can see Ganguly making a come back, maybe in place of Laxman and he can open the innings with Shewag dropping to number 4.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Ganguly coming back would mess up the team because they already have selection problems what with Yuvraj being fit so he'll slot in for Laxman and being in form, he's likely to score a few. Then who are they gonna drop?
    Kaif is handy in the middle order and Dravid will never see Sehwag drop to 4, coz that's Tendulkar's spot for one and he's made a place for himself as a specialist opener in Tests at least. But I can see how he might be more dangerous in the middle order when the ball has lost its shine...
    Oh but Ganguly is pretty much useless against the likes of Harmison (short ball) and Hoggard & S. Jones if fit (big swing) so opening is out of the q and middle order is too tight. Dhoni and Pathan esp. are worth a shot simply coz they score relatively quickly when needed and buckle down as required.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    For the next test, I would drop Laxman, and then open with Jaffer and Dravid, Sehwag at 3, Sachin at 4, Yuvraj at 5, Dhoni at 6, Kaif at 7 (as he can shepherd the tail if need be), Pathan at 8 and then the usual bowlers. For a while after tea it was most definitely gamee-on, and if Sehwag had stayed in a bit longer then there may have been a chance of an unlikely Indian victory. Still, roll on Mohali!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Yeah, but when Dravid opened with Sehwag at Karachi on a bowler friendly pitch (and Mohali is likely to help bowlers first up at least), they collapsed as soon as Dravid got out, so why sacrifice him? Besides, Dravid just isn't an opener, he bats at 3. Just coz he's in good form doesn't mean he should open - it wouldn't be done to Sachin so why to Dravid, who is arguably the best Indian batsman in terms of consistency over the last few years?
    But the rest of your lineup seems pretty much what I imagine it will be like. Sreesanth, Kumble and Munaf Patel would be the three bowlers for me. Harbhajan seems pretty impotent at the mo. Hell, Panesar looks the more dangerous of the turbanators!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    Well, an interesting opening match, and some pros and cons to take away from it:

    + Collingwood seems pretty established in the side, but why didn't they bowl him when the seamers were getting tired and overused?

    + Panesar looks like he can actually SPIN which by English standards is amazing! Maybe he got belted around a little (not that much, but all spinners face that sometimes, he did take some good wickets e.g. Tendulkar and Dravid, nothing to look down on! I think if he keeps this up Giles is in trouble when he comes back and we're only wanting to use one spinner.

    + Cook had an awesome debut, and maybe he should replace Ian Bell who I am finally starting to admit isn't quite what we need. Though that's an opener for a 3rd man, and I don't see Tresco or Strauss budging for him, but Cook may adapt to that position.

    + Hoggie man of the match, though you except well established players in our side to sometimes make a great performance, I'm more excited about the first three things really.

    But then there were many bad aspects that need to be resolved:

    - Flintoff seems to be quite a dubious captain, what was he playing at with the field placements towards the end? Pushing everyone back was a terrible idea, and they kept getting about 8 runs per over because 1's and 2's were so easy with the occasional boundary as well. Then he brings on himself when his pace made boundaries even easier, and then BLACKWELL, who I will get onto now...

    - Blackwell is shameful. He can't field because he's a fatty, and he can't bowl because he's an English spinner and they just can't, unless they're Panesar apparently. His slogging ability doesn't make up for it because both people who may replace him can bat (Udal and Plunkett.) Personally I feel Plunkett would be better, despite the wicets being spinning wickets, but I think they'll choose Udal.

    - Bell has been a disappointment again, he had a poor ashes but that could be excused by inexperience and playing the best team in the world. He showed courage against Pakistan but now he's in danger of losing his place when Vaughney and Tresco return.

    I think that's the main stuff to consider from England's perspective.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Angel Interceptor)
    For the next test, I would drop Laxman, and then open with Jaffer and Dravid, Sehwag at 3, Sachin at 4, Yuvraj at 5, Dhoni at 6, Kaif at 7 (as he can shepherd the tail if need be), Pathan at 8 and then the usual bowlers. For a while after tea it was most definitely gamee-on, and if Sehwag had stayed in a bit longer then there may have been a chance of an unlikely Indian victory. Still, roll on Mohali!
    India need one extra bowler. There bowling is weak as we saw England played the spinners quite easily. They need one extra pace man if they want to win!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    (Original post by 123Sub-Zero)
    India need one extra bowler. There bowling is weak as we saw England played the spinners quite easily. They need one extra pace man if they want to win!
    I think the next wicket may turn more though...

    It's not like India got a big total despite havig that extra batsman, so maybe they need it to be safe.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tis_me_lord)
    I think the next wicket may turn more though...

    It's not like India got a big total despite havig that extra batsman, so maybe they need it to be safe.
    The extra batsman saved them from collapsing in the first innings!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    They'v still got Pathan, Sreesanth, Harbajan and Kumble as main bowlers, and then uv got Shewag, Tendulkar and Yuvraj who are all useful bowlers (and Ganguly if he plays later on), so theres no need to have an extra bowler. Also if Munaf Patel plays instead of Sreesanth it will stengthen their bowling as hes a mega fast bowler.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Hate to stick to the stereotype of Indian batsman, but it looks as if they have more trouble playing pace. Unless you have another quality spinner to play there is no point in playing two. Plunkett is a good option, he can reverse it, but maybe a spidding bowler like Anderson could provide England with even more differentiation in the pace department.

    Plunkett or Anderson for Blackwell?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by XavierTroy)
    Hate to stick to the stereotype of Indian batsman, but it looks as if they have more trouble playing pace. Unless you have another quality spinner to play there is no point in playing two. Plunkett is a good option, he can reverse it, but maybe a spidding bowler like Anderson could provide England with even more differentiation in the pace department.

    Plunkett or Anderson for Blackwell?
    Trouble playing pace? Which is why the current batsmen have in recent times destroyed australian and pakistans pace attacks. Also Harbajan and Kumble have won many many games over the yrs especially on indian pitches, so you obviously dont know much about cricket.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by john williams)
    Trouble playing pace? Which is why the current batsmen have in recent times destroyed australian and pakistans pace attacks. Also Harbajan and Kumble have won many many games over the yrs especially on indian pitches, so you obviously dont know much about cricket.
    Obviously that is the issue, yes. You must learn to to read things quite so literally, or atleast not be so aggressive in your statement. What I'm saying is, it seems England's pace attack is more potent against India as in comparrison, they are talented at playing spin.

    Of course they can play pace, anyone who choses to infer that from my comment 'looks as if they have more trouble playing pace' has a serious issue regarding interpretation. Did the majority of wickets fall to pace bowlers on a relative unresposive wicket? Yes.

    My argument is, the Indian's are having more trouble playing pace rather than spin; who would deny that? If you really think I'd come here and dribble out some nonsense about the Indian batting not being talented you are incredibly judgemental and niave. Take comments in context next time... and try answering the question 'Anderson or Plunkett?'
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by XavierTroy)
    Obviously that is the issue, yes. You must learn to to read things quite so literally, or atleast not be so aggressive in your statement. What I'm saying is, it seems England's pace attack is more potent against India as in comparrison, they are talented at playing spin.

    Of course they can play pace, anyone who choses to infer that from my comment 'looks as if they have more trouble playing pace' has a serious issue regarding interpretation. Did the majority of wickets fall to pace bowlers on a relative unresposive wicket? Yes.

    My argument is, the Indian's are having more trouble playing pace rather than spin; who would deny that? If you really think I'd come here and dribble out some nonsense about the Indian batting not being talented you are incredibly judgemental and niave. Take comments in context next time... and try answering the question 'Anderson or Plunkett?'
    There was nothing aggressive in my response, i was just saying they are probably as good against pace as spin, on the whole, as shown by fact they were on top of Flintoff and Harmission, tho not Hoggard. Plus England dont have any decent spin bowlers so yes i agree it may be better to get rid of blackwell and bring in a pace bowler, who...couldnt care less as both arent the best, with Plunkett unproven.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    I think the Indians, like most others, have more problems against swing rather than pace. Hence Hoggard getting 7.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by john williams)
    So many **** decisions by alem dar (whos a pakistan supporter) meant india had no chance of winning.
    Both India and England had their fair share of bad decisions. Stop whinging and get on with it.
 
 
 
Poll
Black Friday: Yay or Nay?
Useful resources

Quick link:

Unanswered sport threads

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.