Print

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

[WicketView]

Well, you always have the SS option in tests, provided the conditions are supportive. Some of his bowling, I guess, would amount to negative bowling, albeit unintentionally. As DD suggests, in a different situation, where the opposition were already in a strong position or wanted runs quickly, they would have taken him on. And since he was not able to control it, this could not have been prevented by setting negative fields.

The most worrying aspect of the bowling (like our batting) remains that each one is inconsistent. Look at ZK, SS, and RPS. During the first two tess, each one has enjoyed brilliant streaks; equally in patches each bowler has been pathetic. In conditions not as favourable for bowling, the pacer bowling badly will be taken to the cleaners by the oppposition getting
quick runs. You can't not hand the ball to the third pacer, as the others will be getting tired. This is roughly what happened during the third test in SAF, (Munaf was the culprit). Unlike that time, or the 3rd test in Pak, this time RD made good use of SG. And while a strike bowler bowling well would be a better option if available, choking runs and putting pressure on the batsmen is the second option.

Due to the inconsistency of bowlers, no clear heirarchy is emerging. On the one hand, this is a good thing. But it leads to the kind of problems we are having with batting. Most of us know that the batting is not doing well; we have an extra middle order batsman in the squad (YS). But it is far less clear whom he should replace, and whether indeed he should replace the player. Suggestions for the player to be replaced include WJ (even though an opener), SRT,SG, VVS, MSD. (I am sure someone would have suggested RD as well, if he had not been the captain). But if you think about YS's  peformance in Ireland, it is not even clear that he is doing much better in these conditions. Neither our batsmen no our bowlers can play well throughout a match. And even with bowlers, it is neither clear that bringing in a fifth bowler and weakening the batting is worthwhile (because the 5th bowler may also turn out to be useless), nor is it clear which bowler should be replaced.

[LosingNow]

Bright, sunny... 100 overs today!!

Foul weather tomorrow.

Get them out fast and score 300 today??

[fineleg]

The most worrying aspect of the bowling (like our batting) remains that each one is inconsistent. Look at ZK, SS, and RPS. During the first two tess, each one has enjoyed brilliant streaks; equally in patches each bowler has been pathetic. In conditions not as favourable for bowling, the pacer bowling badly will be taken to the cleaners by the oppposition getting
quick runs.

WV,
As Azhar once supposedly said, WeGottaBowlWellBatWellandFieldWell

But we are inconsistent in ALL 3 (incl. wicketkeeping)
AA should be made as the emblem of Indian cricket team since he epitomizes inconsistency and the rest follow the same thing. One day they do real good and then the next day they plummet. Bangladesh is the same.

[feverpitch]

sofasogood... we're 199/2, maharathi no 1 & 2 chugging along just fine... which means, a new thread on 'how they got it cheap because of the weather playing truant' is awaited.

[cricinfo]

what does some people think of the axcellent inning by one maharathi of 30 odd of 95 deliveries  ...but i know for sure what the most respected cricket site thinks 'HE JUST WENT INTO HIS SHELL(YES HE  CAN PLAY AND BLOCK AT HIS WILL...IN THIS CASE HE WAS JUST BLOCKING IT)' ..but i am sure some other guy playing the same inning would have been branded as 'SOMEONE CLEARLY STRUGGLING IN ENGLISH CONDITIONS AND NOT EVEN ABLE TO PLAY SPIN AND PROBABLY UNDER THE PRESSURE OF CAPTAINSHIP'...

[feverpitch]

what does some people think of the axcellent inning by one maharathi of 30 odd of 95 deliveries  ...but i know for sure what the most respected cricket site thinks 'HE JUST WENT INTO HIS SHELL(YES HE  CAN PLAY AND BLOCK AT HIS WILL...IN THIS CASE HE WAS JUST BLOCKING IT)' ..but i am sure some other guy playing the same inning would have been branded as 'SOMEONE CLEARLY STRUGGLING IN ENGLISH CONDITIONS AND NOT EVEN ABLE TO PLAY SPIN AND PROBABLY UNDER THE PRESSURE OF CAPTAINSHIP'...

actually, this is how it would have read:
Rahul Dravid decided to shut shop so that the soft underbelly of Indian batting was not exposed in the faltering light, and was unlucky to fall to a great catch.

and now the version that would have been reserved for the politician:
The failings of the prince were painfully exposed in front of our eyes when once again he threw his wicket away at a time when India needed him to stay.

[schumi]

what does some people think of the axcellent inning by one maharathi of 30 odd of 95 deliveries  ...but i know for sure what the most respected cricket site thinks 'HE JUST WENT INTO HIS SHELL(YES HE  CAN PLAY AND BLOCK AT HIS WILL...IN THIS CASE HE WAS JUST BLOCKING IT)' ..but i am sure some other guy playing the same inning would have been branded as 'SOMEONE CLEARLY STRUGGLING IN ENGLISH CONDITIONS AND NOT EVEN ABLE TO PLAY SPIN AND PROBABLY UNDER THE PRESSURE OF CAPTAINSHIP'...

Well, he lost his concentration and got out. But he clearly was not struggling and looked to be in good touch. He was getting into the routine partnership mode with Tendulkar (where he used to hold up one end and the other batsman scores). It would have been the 15th 100 partnership between SRT and RD. I hope this is not the beginning of the end of our greatest middle order batsman. As I said the other day, if it means giving up the captaincy to get back to form so be it.

[fineleg]

As I said the other day, if it means giving up the captaincy to get back to form so be it.

yes, if it is better for rd to relinquish captaincy, he should relinquish it.
he is the best of the 4 bats, and he should continue his great batting.

[Prafulla]

Well - all 4 batsmen applied very well. Pitch was nbot easy to bat, and all four show great display.

Geting out is part of the game, but all those partnerships were vital. KKD and WJ gave a solid start and RD / SRT consolidated on that. They ensured that - after two quick wickets, we do not collapse. Let us hoipe - if the weather is bad then we atleast get 150 runs more and make best use of bad weather again.

Indian players were start today at 0 / 3 - so if it is predicted to be rainy day - then another 150 runs and making use of the day will be great for India.

[toney]

SRT padded up to PC, given out bu Taufel. Replays showed the ball was clearly going outside offsump. It didnt come in enough (if at all it came in).
Unlucky to miss out especially after playing a first session where he saw out Sidebottom. Hope at least SG gets his 100 and MSD gets a few quick runs.

Rarely enough for SRT, he glared back at Taufel for a really long time. If looks could kill....

[feverpitch]

as a team supporter... i am only looking out for a big lead for the team...

[toney]

as a team supporter... i am only looking out for a big lead for the team...

Hope it doesn't hurt if the big lead is brought about by SG scoring a big one?!

[cricinfo]

as a team supporter... i am only looking out for a big lead for the team...

Hope it doesn't hurt if the big lead is brought about by SG scoring a big one?!

trust me ...it might hurt some  ...specially after some pretty ordinary performance by one maharathi

[toney]

well, FP< you must be a very happy maan now. SG was given out, yet again a poor decision by Taufel. Looks like the only way the Fab 4 could get out today is if Taufel wants them to.

[prfsr]

Come on, let's give Taufel credit for making the match interesting single-handedly.

I guess the problem is when one has a bad day one tends to make more than one mistake. That is the most charitable explanation I can think of. After trying hard

-P

[dave_dj]

How can you give two consecutive bad decisions - he needs to be reported.  We had a good chance of not having to bat in the last innings and now we have to possibly do it.  How did SG react to it?

[toney]

Come on, let's give Taufel credit for making the match interesting single-handedly.

I guess the problem is when one has a bad day one tends to make more than one mistake. That is the most charitable explanation I can think of. After trying hard

-P

I am not botheirng to try hard. I know Taufel is a really good umpire but this is jus BS. I was really hoping to see a repeat of Leeds 2002 when SRT and SG just bludgeoned Eng to death.

[toney]

...How did SG react to it?

Lets just say he made it obvious that the deicsion was pathetic.

[Vick]

How can you give two consecutive bad decisions - he needs to be reported.  We had a good chance of not having to bat in the last innings and now we have to possibly do it.  How did SG react to it?

Wouldnt be surprised if he is fined half his match fees.

[feverpitch]

taufel is just awful
awful-taufel...

[kban1]

guys, drop in the chat room

[Prafulla]

well, FP< you must be a very happy maan now. SG was given out, yet again a poor decision by Taufel. Looks like the only way the Fab 4 could get out today is if Taufel wants them to.

Both SRT and SG got out to poor umpiring and they both played a very significant inning. They made sure that India does not lose the control from the game.

[Prafulla]

As I said the other day, if it means giving up the captaincy to get back to form so be it.

yes, if it is better for rd to relinquish captaincy, he should relinquish it.
he is the best of the 4 bats, and he should continue his great batting.

Yes it can be good idea and will help him in focussing at his batting.

[indcric]

We got lot of umpiring decisions in our favour yesterday. I think it balances out. No point living over the bad decisions. How much foolish can SRT be? Why is he still using pad, even after getting out so many times the same way, padding up to a delivery? Why can't he just use the bat?

[sgusa]

Anyone else feel like tying up dhoni to a chair and making him watch KKD's inns over and over again ?

[fineleg]

Anyone else feel like tying up dhoni to a chair and making him watch KKD's inns over and over again ?

Dont talk like that abt Adam Gilchrist 

[justforkix]

SRT padded up to PC, given out bu Taufel. Replays showed the ball was clearly going outside offsump. It didnt come in enough (if at all it came in).
Unlucky to miss out especially after playing a first session where he saw out Sidebottom. Hope at least SG gets his 100 and MSD gets a few quick runs.

Rarely enough for SRT, he glared back at Taufel for a really long time. If looks could kill....

Well he did not offer a shot and increased the chances of a close decision going against him. batsman loses the benefit of doubt option by not offering to play a shot.

[justforkix]

How can you give two consecutive bad decisions - he needs to be reported.  We had a good chance of not having to bat in the last innings and now we have to possibly do it.  How did SG react to it?

It should suffice to say that SG's reaction will be Rated R or MA 

[justforkix]

Anyone else feel like tying up dhoni to a chair and making him watch KKD's inns over and over again ?

Dhoni's S/R of 83 pales in comparison to KaKaDi's S/R of 57

[WicketView]

SRT padded up to PC, given out bu Taufel. Replays showed the ball was clearly going outside offsump. It didnt come in enough (if at all it came in).
Unlucky to miss out especially after playing a first session where he saw out Sidebottom. Hope at least SG gets his 100 and MSD gets a few quick runs.

Rarely enough for SRT, he glared back at Taufel for a really long time. If looks could kill....

Well he did not offer a shot and increased the chances of a close decision going against him. batsman loses the benefit of doubt option by not offering to play a shot.

Not exactly true. There are no provisos to the commandment of 'benefit of doubt'.

What is true is the distinction of when a batsman is LBW: If the batsman was struck outside off, and he was offering a shot, he is not LBW, no matter what. If he was not offering a shot he is out LBW, if the ball was going to hit the wicket. That is the distinction between 'offering nd not offering a shot'. However, in all cases, whenever the umpire is unable to remove doubts (after possible consultation with other umpires), the benefit of doubt rule stipulates that the decision is not out.

How can you give two consecutive bad decisions - he needs to be reported.  We had a good chance of not having to bat in the last innings and now we have to possibly do it.  How did SG react to it?

It should suffice to say that SG's reaction will be Rated R or MA 

I think the maharathis have planned a different route to giving opportunities to the young 'uns, and taking care of the forthcoming hectic schedule. They will get sentences for showing dissent, and will travel as extra members, using the banned period for rest, and checking out the kids, without having been dropped!

[justforkix]

Not exactly true. There are no provisos to the commandment of 'benefit of doubt'.

What is true is the distinction of when a batsman is LBW: If the batsman was struck outside off, and he was offering a shot, he is not LBW, no matter what. If he was not offering a shot he is out LBW, if the ball was going to hit the wicket. That is the distinction between 'offering nd not offering a shot'. However, in all cases, whenever the umpire is unable to remove doubts (after possible consultation with other umpires), the benefit of doubt rule stipulates that the decision is not out.

Yes. Umpire just gets one look at LBWs. Many decisions look out in fast motion adn at the 1st look, but with replays may look not out. By padding up and not offering a shot, a batsman looks more out than when he does offer a shot. When this factors into many of the viewers who watch the LBW ball in real-time, I suspect it will also play in the umpire's mind while making a decision.

While Taufel's decision was poor, IMO, SRT also contributed to it by unnecessarily padding up.

I think the maharathis have planned a different route to giving opportunities to the young 'uns, and taking care of the forthcoming hectic schedule. They will get sentences for showing dissent, and will travel as extra members, using the banned period for rest, and checking out the kids, without having been dropped!

HEHE. Another trick from the sponsors

[kban1]

While Taufel's decision was poor, IMO, SRT also contributed to it by unnecessarily padding up.

Agree, but even on first glance and in normal speed it did not look out.

Taufel hesitated, then got swayed by Colly's second appeal. The fact is he screwed up.

While SRT could have done enough to remove any question of doubt, the fact is it was a horrible decision, so lets call it for what it was.

[fineleg]

While Taufel's decision was poor, IMO, SRT also contributed to it by unnecessarily padding up.

Agree, but even on first glance and in normal speed it did not look out.

Taufel hesitated, then got swayed by Colly's second appeal. The fact is he screwed up.

While SRT could have done enough to remove any question of doubt, the fact is it was a horrible decision, so lets call it for what it was.

Agree with kban. I wish SRT had not poked his foot out - he should be able to play Colly (at his pace) with the bat more easily.

But shocking and extremely poor deczn by Taufel. If Taufel is like this (one of the best umpires!!!) - then it is really scary what Blind Bat and Doctroves are gonna do later in other matches/series.

Well Taufel may be the best amongst the worst that is the "Elite Panel".

We need technology for decisions.

[inoc]

While Taufel's decision was poor, IMO, SRT also contributed to it by unnecessarily padding up.

Agree, but even on first glance and in normal speed it did not look out.

Taufel hesitated, then got swayed by Colly's second appeal. The fact is he screwed up.

While SRT could have done enough to remove any question of doubt, the fact is it was a horrible decision, so lets call it for what it was.

Agree with kban. I wish SRT had not poked his foot out - he should be able to play Colly (at his pace) with the bat more easily.

But shocking and extremely poor deczn by Taufel. If Taufel is like this (one of the best umpires!!!) - then it is really scary what Blind Bat and Doctroves are gonna do later in other matches/series.

Well Taufel may be the best amongst the worst that is the "Elite Panel".

We need technology for decisions.

fineleg

this is a good discussion except that the technology offered so far is only 100% true on line calls.

if you are considering applying a non hundred percent technology for the other decisions then you are mistaken by its apparent infallibilty. there have been reports of the hawkeye pictures not only of not being accurate but being manipulated by the broadcasters. simple way of them doing so is to manipulate the strip they show as being wicket to wicket. so ambiguity will persist, specially when the technology is not perfect.

even if there is no nuisance factor the trajectory is only around 95% correct (i believe). the reason why it is not being used in clay court tournaments in tennis because you can see the actual mark of the ball.

technology is great but human input is good too. two bad decisions against england two bad ones against india - tends to equal out, other than the fact that it makes me mad.

[LosingNow]

A lot rests on ZK, RPS and AK's shoulders.

SS is having a bad test and despite all the charms/theatrics is just not bowling well. Hope VP calms him down and gets him back to basics - line and length

[fineleg]

While Taufel's decision was poor, IMO, SRT also contributed to it by unnecessarily padding up.

Agree, but even on first glance and in normal speed it did not look out.

Taufel hesitated, then got swayed by Colly's second appeal. The fact is he screwed up.

While SRT could have done enough to remove any question of doubt, the fact is it was a horrible decision, so lets call it for what it was.

Agree with kban. I wish SRT had not poked his foot out - he should be able to play Colly (at his pace) with the bat more easily.

But shocking and extremely poor deczn by Taufel. If Taufel is like this (one of the best umpires!!!) - then it is really scary what Blind Bat and Doctroves are gonna do later in other matches/series.

Well Taufel may be the best amongst the worst that is the "Elite Panel".

We need technology for decisions.

fineleg

this is a good discussion except that the technology offered so far is only 100% true on line calls.

if you are considering applying a non hundred percent technology for the other decisions then you are mistaken by its apparent infallibilty. there have been reports of the hawkeye pictures not only of not being accurate but being manipulated by the broadcasters. simple way of them doing so is to manipulate the strip they show as being wicket to wicket. so ambiguity will persist, specially when the technology is not perfect.

even if there is no nuisance factor the trajectory is only around 95% correct (i believe). the reason why it is not being used in clay court tournaments in tennis because you can see the actual mark of the ball.

technology is great but human input is good too. two bad decisions against england two bad ones against india - tends to equal out, other than the fact that it makes me mad.

Inoc,
I'm not saying the accuracy of the tech is where it needs to be. But it is still better than not using it at all.

For example - such simple things like SRT's yesterday (if there was an appeal system to TV umpire) could have been referred. The TV umpire can take a look and if he thinks it is conclusive can overrule the field umpire. If it is not conclusive then he can give the benefit of doubt to field umpire and sustain the field umpire's verdict.

In yesterday's case ANY t.v. umpire worth his name would have ruled SRT not out. It was so obvious. Taufel screwed up big time, and there was no law or appeal system to correct the blatant mistake.

[inoc]

fineleg

you are basing your arguments on the fact that hawkeye is correct.

the technology (hawkeye) itself says that it is not a hundred percent correct. the purveyors of the tech refused to use it in the french open/clay court tournaments where the accuracy could be judged against a mark on the court.

So if you want to base your judgement on a flawed tech you are welcome. others rightfully dont and will argue against you till the tech is flawless. till then......

[fineleg]

fineleg

you are basing your arguments on the fact that hawkeye is correct.

the technology (hawkeye) itself says that it is not a hundred percent correct. the purveyors of the tech refused to use it in the french open/clay court tournaments where the accuracy could be judged against a mark on the court.

So if you want to base your judgement on a flawed tech you are welcome. others rightfully dont and will argue against you till the tech is flawless. till then......

Inoc,
I'm not asking for marginal decisions to be overturned. But there are blatant ones.
For SRT's decision it is quite clear. Hawkeye flaws do not cause an issue here. Correct?

[atticus]

The fact that French Open does not use Hawkeye has not even deterred the rest of the tennis world  (all of the other 3 grandslams + various other tournaments) from adapting it. So why should it stop cricket from using it. Not that I'm for using the technology because others use it. Only that I don't understand this "French open don't use it, so we should not use it also". Wouldn't the better question be - why are the other tennis tournaments using it when the french don't?

If the error rate of hawkeye is the same or better than human umpires, wouldn't it be prudent to use it because we are also assured of impartiality whereas one can never be sure about that in case of the umpires? Why wait for absolute flawlessness (which is impossible)?

[inoc]

fineleg

please explain how hawkeye is not involved here.

to remind you - SRT played no stroke to a ball outside the off stump and the ball hit him outside the off stump. he can only be out if the ball goes on to hit the wicket.

hawkeye showed that the ball marginally missed the off stump. in the absense of hawkeye the judgement would be marginal. may/maynot have hit he stumps. umpires decision.

if you take hawkeye into the picture then SRT/ SG (MAY BE) would have been adjudged NO but so would KP and cook. evened out in this match atleast?