Print

Please post once and this message will disappear! Introduce yourself, say hello, jump into a discussion...

[Sahir]

dextrous-- no, it was explicitly said that Blackwell was going to be the spin allrounder ahead of Monty; Panesar only got the game because of Jones' absence; of course he changed that now.  Blackwell was initially preferred because he did much better in the practice matches and is a more like for like replacement for Giles with his batting at 8.  Otherwise, Hoggard would be batting at 8-- a very long tail then.

[Blwe_torch]

Captaincy is much more than bowling changes and field placements.
We lack that extra dimension of captaincy here.
I can't imagine any team with the exception of Australia, performing like this in India on a 4th day pitch!

[Sahir]

RD must create an charged up atmosphere.
That is missing.
What  is GC doing?

No doubt that the shoulders drooped too ealry today.

[Teddy]

eng have dominated 3 days in a row!
big changes coming likely
vvsl once again will play for his career
srt can't hold up the pressure
a revealing day ahead

[senthilpeter]

Keep going Cook; end the day on 99 not out

No such luck Cook. The magnanimous Bhajji lost the plot... dropped one nice and short to be cut for four. I'm certain we've seen the end of Bhajji. He's become a joke.

Thank god though that Flintoff dint come out to bat... not that what we have to play now is gettable, but still some solace..

[Sahir]

Good night

[achutank]

England have no intentions of declaring tonight 

I still maintain my prediction from this morning-- they will declare with 5 overs to go.

 

[senthilpeter]

RD must create an charged up atmosphere.
That is missing.
What  is GC doing?

No doubt that the shoulders drooped too ealry today.

Tell me about it. Pathetic body language. Only Kumble seemed fired up at times. And unfortunately, he had no luck at all. I get the feeling we are still infants in the art of playing tough Tests. Yes, it doesnt help to have a pathetic bowling attack, but I think my observation stands regardless. We let things get out of hand too quickly.

And what was RD thinking by giving Sehwag the last over?!!!!  this some kind of a dead test or in early stages or what?!!! runs are still important.. i'm dissappointed with that stupid decision.

Btw, that trigger happy Dar dint give a plumb one before Collingwood had opened account.

[Blwe_torch]

Keep going Cook; end the day on 99 not out

No such luck Cook. The magnanimous Bhajji lost the plot... dropped one nice and short to be cut for four. I'm certain we've seen the end of Bhajji. He's become a joke.

Thank god though that Flintoff dint come out to bat... not that what we have to play now is gettable, but still some solace..

many heads will roll.
a wholesale change is needed.
do we have the app...replacements?

[achutank]

3 dropped catches for Cook!
what a charmed life

well jaffer had 2-3 lives too so that's even

[Teddy]

I1 bowling

  IK Pathan         23    5   92   3   4.00 (7nb)
  S Sreesanth     28.5  6   95   4   3.29 (2nb, 1w)
  Singh              34     5   93   2   2.73 
  A Kumble         40   13   88   1   2.20 (3nb)
  SR Tendulkar     2      0   11   0   5.50


I2 bowling
 O M R W Econ 
  IK Pathan       14  2   48     2  3.42 (2w)
  S Sreesanth    10  2   36    0   3.60 
  A Kumble       32  8   101   1   3.15 (1nb)
  Singh            30   6    79   0 2.63 
  V Sehwag       1   0   14    0 14.00
 
total overs bowled           215 
Total wickets fallen            13
 wickets taken by pacers      9   (70%)
 wickets taken by spinners    4   (30%)
 overs bowled by pacers     76   (35%)
 overs bowled by spinners 139   (65%)

See how is getting wickets and who is bowling !!!
wickets win matches.

Pacers contribute 70% using only 35% available resources.
Spinners contribute 30% and use up 65% !

We have been harping about the need to add to pace bowling dept - needed to play 3
pacers.

But what is India doing?
I fail to comprehend !  what in the world is the team thinking here!
why not get more pacers and make them bowl more!
it is nuts!  everyone struggles against good pace bowling - almost everyone around
the world plays spin well.
the spin strategy does not work - we have been saying this for ages. it might work against SL and BD - but who cares!

[senthilpeter]

3 dropped catches for Cook!
what a charmed life

well jaffer had 2-3 lives too so that's even

did u watch Jaffer's and Cook's innings? Or are you taking some of our respected DGers word for it?

[aggarwald]

good 100  indeed!

against spin kings on D4 indian pitch

i told ya, spin bowling is not good enough
why is santh not bowling

Teddy, I have been telling this for a long time. We are a bowling minnow and our so called spin "greats" who are tigers at home and "bheegi billies" (meek cats) abroad are slowly going to become "bheegi billies" at home as well simply because other teams are getting better. I have already done analysis of our spin "greats" and our Indian victories in the last 20 years and also this current English team. Following are the links:

http://www.votegupta.com/cricketf2orum/index.php?topic=1126.msg12979#msg12979
http://www.votegupta.com/cricketf2orum/index.php?topic=1126.msg13151#msg13151
http://www.votegupta.com/cricketf2orum/index.php?topic=619.msg6394#msg6394
http://web.ics.purdue.edu/~swarup/forum/index.php?topic=1530.msg39826#msg39826
http://web.ics.purdue.edu/~swarup/forum/index.php?topic=473.msg11096#msg11096

[aggarwald]

I1 bowling

  IK Pathan         23    5   92   3   4.00 (7nb)
  S Sreesanth     28.5  6   95   4   3.29 (2nb, 1w)
  Singh              34     5   93   2   2.73 
  A Kumble         40   13   88   1   2.20 (3nb)
  SR Tendulkar     2      0   11   0   5.50


I2 bowling
 O M R W Econ 
  IK Pathan       14  2   48     2  3.42 (2w)
  S Sreesanth    10  2   36    0   3.60 
  A Kumble       32  8   101   1   3.15 (1nb)
  Singh            30   6    79   0 2.63 
  V Sehwag       1   0   14    0 14.00
 
total overs bowled           215 
Total wickets fallen            13
 wickets taken by pacers      9   (70%)
 wickets taken by spinners    4   (30%)
 overs bowled by pacers     76   (35%)
 overs bowled by spinners 139   (65%)

See how is getting wickets and who is bowling !!!
wickets win matches.

Pacers contribute 70% using only 35% available resources.
Spinners contribute 30% and use up 65% !

We have been harping about the need to add to pace bowling dept - needed to play 3
pacers.

But what is India doing?
I fail to comprehend !  what in the world is the team thinking here!
why not get more pacers and make them bowl more!
it is nuts!  everyone struggles against good pace bowling - almost everyone around
the world plays spin well.
the spin strategy does not work - we have been saying this for ages. it might work against SL and BD - but who cares!

We Indians love myths and then we religiously stick by it. Some myths:
- Indians are best players of spin. Doesn't matter if we have lost so many matches playing even average spin bowling. We will always remember one inning here and there and quote that as an example ad nauseum (Sachin bashed Warney in 2001, hence Warne is no good against India. No questions asked. Period.)
- Eng/SA/Aus can't play spin. Examples will be given as to how we have won against them at home without scratching below the surface to look at the truth (see my post   above where I have given links to my analysis).

[aggarwald]

its easy to get rid of players. do we have good replacements?
I doubt.
its not so easy to build a team and make it a winning combo.
its however not too difficult to destroy one.
GC will know soon.

which was exactly the problem with SG too. if you took ZK and An out of the attack who did we have?

you know people can allege whatever they want but the ground realities always reflect in the actions.

SG didn't have such a bad time with the bowlers in a home series.
I mean, do you recall such a pathetic home series bowling in the last 4 or 5 years?

Does it occur to you that others might have become better at handling our mediocre spin bowling? You know, mediocrity can only survive so long.

[achutank]

3 dropped catches for Cook!
what a charmed life

well jaffer had 2-3 lives too so that's even

did u watch Jaffer's and Cook's innings? Or are you taking some of our respected DGers word for it?

why jaffer's was better?

[Teddy]

good 100  indeed!

against spin kings on D4 indian pitch

i told ya, spin bowling is not good enough
why is santh not bowling

Teddy, I have been telling this for a long time. We are a bowling minnow and our so called spin "greats" who are tigers at home and "bheegi billies" (meek cats) abroad are slowly going to become "bheegi billies" at home as well simply because other teams are getting better. I have already done analysis of our spin "greats" and our Indian victories in the last 20 years and also this current English team. Following are the links:

http://www.votegupta.com/cricketf2orum/index.php?topic=1126.msg12979#msg12979
http://www.votegupta.com/cricketf2orum/index.php?topic=1126.msg13151#msg13151
http://www.votegupta.com/cricketf2orum/index.php?topic=619.msg6394#msg6394
http://web.ics.purdue.edu/~swarup/forum/index.php?topic=1530.msg39826#msg39826
http://web.ics.purdue.edu/~swarup/forum/index.php?topic=473.msg11096#msg11096

good call!   you got company in your thinking!

[dextrous]

What do you mean spin bowling is a myth?

Are you forgetting every single win almost in the last 10 years have to do with spin bowling?

Just because our spinners didn't bowl the right length/line properly doesn't mean we don't win matches by spin. SImply jumping the gun.

And no combination of 4 medium fast bowlers in the country looks like it can even take 10 wickets.

[senthilpeter]

3 dropped catches for Cook!
what a charmed life

well jaffer had 2-3 lives too so that's even

did u watch Jaffer's and Cook's innings? Or are you taking some of our respected DGers word for it?

why jaffer's was better?

I dint' say Jaffer's was better. I simply asked if you had watched both innings in saying that Jaffer had 2-3 lives too and equating that to Cook. You haven't answered that. Simply Cook's chances were dollies. Jaffer's much less so...

[justforkix]

I dint' say Jaffer's was better. I simply asked if you had watched both innings in saying that Jaffer had 2-3 lives too and equating that to Cook. You haven't answered that. Simply Cook's chances were dollies. Jaffer's much less so...

Cook's chances were part of a strategy to keep Freddie out in the dressing room....