Print

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

[Cernunnos]

actually it was nothing of the sort. SG tried to make room to slash through the offside, but Chucky followed him with a bouncer. SG had to cancel the shot he had selected and evade the ball, resulting in the tumble.
as i told ruchir, he should try and watch the match before labelling SG with this and that. it's fun to say SG sucks over and over again, but then when you pit this 'evidence' against people who actually watch the match you will look rather foolish.

DD, et all --

http://www.cricketflicker.com/videos/Match_Hightlights/_India_VS_Pakistan_2007/Morning_Session_5th_Day_2nd_Test_Ind_v_Pak_Kolkata?PHPSESSID=b4ae0631e670b2cd43cfc99e0a8e8fc0

Watch this video. Watch from timestamp of '-1.47'. Tell me how you think SG actually canceled his shot?

1. SG's bat didn't even come down from his initial stance.
2. SG moved to his right only half a step. Watch his legs closely. Watch it 5 time, if necessary. SG took a very small step out toward his right side.

So, if SG had pre-decided that he was going to slash the ball, he would have taken a bigger step toward his right side, like he did for Kaneria. I was watching the game too. There is no way we could have known what SG was trying to do with that ball. If he was trying to slash it, it was all wrong because he had not given himself enough room. It he was trying to slash, his reaction did not look pre-conceived because his bat never came down.

Please, don't insinuate that I tell lies to support my point of view. I was watching the same game that you were watching. What we may have is different interpretation of what we saw.

SG took half a step outside. You thought he was making room, I thought he was undecided (specially for a slash shot).
SG's bat went up but never came down. You thought he checked his shot to adjust to bouncer, I thought he didn't know what to do because he was undecided from the beginning as to what he wanted to do.

This un-decidedness resulted in him taking his eyes off the ball and falling down in order to save himself. This goes back to my original point. He was practicing facing bouncers from Akhtar. Evidently, he did not practice right. He took his eyes off the ball, and that is not how you face a bouncer.

sorry man your purported theory of "un-decidedness" holds no water. i have, and everyone has seen SG make that initial movement 100s of times, and he always goes for one patented shot of his. it is up to you to "interpret". if you have the patience, pause and play from that timestamp a number of times and you will see his trigger movement is BEFORE the ball is released, and in this case his first movement is AWAY from the stumps. normally his initial movement is towards it (obviously)

your theory has no explanation for why SG would move away.

furthermore you are comparing his movements for a spinner with how he moves to a fast chucker. it has to be a different technique with a different sense of timing and movement altogether.

now either chucky saw SG and bowled it at his body, or he was planning to bowl at his body in any case (the latter is more probable from the replay). if the ball had been pitched so SG could have freed his arms, SG would have moved his right (front) leg out and played the shot. obviously he saw the missile coming at him and changed his mind. you dont need to be in the process of physically playing a shot (ie with the bat moving towards the ball) in order for it to qualify as "cancelling the shot".

given the time and situation of the match, given the initial movement of SG , it is clear to me what he was trying to do. if that is how you think he normally plays the short ball then i cant help you.

You can take a horse to the water, but, you can't make it drink..

[Jai]

So it's quite obvious that RJo closely observes every fall of SG, be it in W03 or more recently at Eden !! Although he's not from the City of Joy (and not Jai, mind you), but his joy knew no bound when GC was at the helm of team India. He prayed and hoped that it was the deadliest bouncer SG has ever faced. But the Chandiputra still manages to rise after every fall, much to the disappointment of RJo, CP, Finey.....and those so called 'I am neutral' types.   

Seriously, I am disheartened by this comment. You are implying that I actually want SG to get hurt!! That is unfortunate.

I don't know whether you actually want SG to get hurt, but as I said, it's quite obvious that you follow his 'falls' pretty closely. You are eveready to discuss those moments with a few smilies thrown in between. Even the picture you have chosen for your profile shows SG in similar fashion with a caption to boost that says 'SG in pain...' So you tell me what message are you conveying?

The picture in my thumbnail is from Cricinfo, and the text is taken from there too, nothing is added by me.

Yes, I discuss SG's failures more than his success, but that should not be a surprise to you!. I am a self-confessed, self-announced SG-disliker. Mind you, not a hater; but a disliker. In a chat session, I said so to Pitamah too, that I dislike SG, not hate him.

So, it should not surprise you that I post pictures of SG. Matter of fact, I have posted pictures of many Indian players in many different poses. Does it mean that I wish ill for them too? I make fun of Srinath, Inzy etc. Does it mean I don't respect them in any way?

I guess, you are too taken up by my persona on this DG and feel that I hate SG so much that I actually want him to get hurt. All I can say is, I applaud SG when I feel like applauding him. I speak in favor of SG when I feel like it. I speak against him when I feel like it.

Immediately after posting this photo, I went to another thread and defended SG when CP said SG wasted time in waiting for King, when he got hurt. In the same comment, I spoke well of SG by saying that SG did good today by diving and running singles. I guess you must have missed that comment from me. As I said, you are took taken up by your pre-conceived notion of me, and your opinions are probably already cast in iron, about what I feel about SG, and there is nothing I can do about that except of repeat again that your opinion of me is wrong.

Well, I am not saying that your dislike for SG came as a surprise to me. We both have been around for a long time. Have you ever seen me question you on this? Nope. I was pointing out that it seems you have a special liking for SG's fall. I know that you didn't take the picture of your thumbnail, you must have got it from somewhere. But then there would be similar pictures available for almost every player. Yet you chose to pick the one with SG in it and that too for your thumbnail. Then the picture on this thread. You must have posted some other similar pics of SG also. Hence I made that comment. It has nothing to do with your personal dislike for SG. I am least bothered about that (not that I am bothered about these pics, just pointing out your preferences, that's it). Btw, your explanation reminded me of something straight out of PP's book.  Just kidding.

[ruchir]

actually it was nothing of the sort. SG tried to make room to slash through the offside, but Chucky followed him with a bouncer. SG had to cancel the shot he had selected and evade the ball, resulting in the tumble.
as i told ruchir, he should try and watch the match before labelling SG with this and that. it's fun to say SG sucks over and over again, but then when you pit this 'evidence' against people who actually watch the match you will look rather foolish.

DD, et all --

http://www.cricketflicker.com/videos/Match_Hightlights/_India_VS_Pakistan_2007/Morning_Session_5th_Day_2nd_Test_Ind_v_Pak_Kolkata?PHPSESSID=b4ae0631e670b2cd43cfc99e0a8e8fc0

Watch this video. Watch from timestamp of '-1.47'. Tell me how you think SG actually canceled his shot?

1. SG's bat didn't even come down from his initial stance.
2. SG moved to his right only half a step. Watch his legs closely. Watch it 5 time, if necessary. SG took a very small step out toward his right side.

So, if SG had pre-decided that he was going to slash the ball, he would have taken a bigger step toward his right side, like he did for Kaneria. I was watching the game too. There is no way we could have known what SG was trying to do with that ball. If he was trying to slash it, it was all wrong because he had not given himself enough room. It he was trying to slash, his reaction did not look pre-conceived because his bat never came down.

Please, don't insinuate that I tell lies to support my point of view. I was watching the same game that you were watching. What we may have is different interpretation of what we saw.

SG took half a step outside. You thought he was making room, I thought he was undecided (specially for a slash shot).
SG's bat went up but never came down. You thought he checked his shot to adjust to bouncer, I thought he didn't know what to do because he was undecided from the beginning as to what he wanted to do.

This un-decidedness resulted in him taking his eyes off the ball and falling down in order to save himself. This goes back to my original point. He was practicing facing bouncers from Akhtar. Evidently, he did not practice right. He took his eyes off the ball, and that is not how you face a bouncer.

sorry man your purported theory of "un-decidedness" holds no water. i have, and everyone has seen SG make that initial movement 100s of times, and he always goes for one patented shot of his. it is up to you to "interpret". if you have the patience, pause and play from that timestamp a number of times and you will see his trigger movement is BEFORE the ball is released, and in this case his first movement is AWAY from the stumps. normally his initial movement is towards it (obviously)

your theory has no explanation for why SG would move away.

furthermore you are comparing his movements for a spinner with how he moves to a fast chucker. it has to be a different technique with a different sense of timing and movement altogether.

now either chucky saw SG and bowled it at his body, or he was planning to bowl at his body in any case (the latter is more probable from the replay). if the ball had been pitched so SG could have freed his arms, SG would have moved his right (front) leg out and played the shot. obviously he saw the missile coming at him and changed his mind. you dont need to be in the process of physically playing a shot (ie with the bat moving towards the ball) in order for it to qualify as "cancelling the shot".

given the time and situation of the match, given the initial movement of SG , it is clear to me what he was trying to do. if that is how you think he normally plays the short ball then i cant help you.

1. I don't think that is how he normally plays the short ball. Matter of fact, that was the main reason why I posted this photo. To show how inadequate SG's tennis ball practice was, to counter Akhtar's bouncers.

2. The whole idea of my creating this thread was not to dissect what kind of shot SG was trying to play. It was to say that SG did not play the bouncer properly. In normal cricket, you are not prepared to playing bouncer every ball. You don't know which ball will be a bouncer. You react to whatever is bowled at you. If it is a bouncer, you react accordingly. If it is a yorker, you react accordingly.

3. You say SG was trying to slash the ball to offside. how exactly would he have played that shot, keeping in mind where he was standing when the ball was delivered? He had taken only a baby step to his right. For him to be able to slash to offside from that position, the ball had to be just outside off stump. Was SG expecting Akhtar to bowl there? When batsmen think of playing a pre-meditated shot, they make firm movement to play that shot. If SG was pre-meditating to play a slash shot, his movement would have been a bigger step to his right so that he has enough free space in front of him to slash the ball that is anywhere from leg stump to outside off stump.

4. As I said, if SG was really trying to slash that particular delivery, he would have taken a bigger step to his right. This would have given him more space to hit. That is exactly what he did with Kaneria. Now you will say slashing Kaneria is different than slashing Akhtar. Well, not entirely. When you want to play a slash shot to a pacer like Akhtar (as you think SG was), you need to make your movement early than you would against a spinner. Why? Because, facing a spinner you will have enough time to move out and slash, but facing a pacer, the ball will reach you within half a second and you will not be far out enough to play the slash shot. So, what was SG's movement? He took just half a step toward his right. Let us say Akhtar would have bowled on the stumps, would SG be in the right place to play the slash shot?

5. In fact, the next ball, on which SG got out, vindicates what I am saying about taking a bigger step toward right. In the same video, watch the next ball. This time SG was expecting the ball to be on stumps because the previous ball had been on the body. This time, if you watch the video, SG took a bigger step to his right, probably 3 times bigger than the previous delivery. The shot he played was not exactly a slash to offside, but that may be because the ball was bang on the leg stump.

What I am saying is that that particular delivery, the bouncer on which SG fell, you can not say with a 100% guarantee that SG was trying to slash that delivery to offside. His body movements did not give that impression in anyway, unless you think that just because SG took a baby step to right means that he is trying to slash that delivery. To counter that I am saying watch the difference in feet movements of that delivery and the next one.

[dhruvdeepak]

actually it was nothing of the sort. SG tried to make room to slash through the offside, but Chucky followed him with a bouncer. SG had to cancel the shot he had selected and evade the ball, resulting in the tumble.
as i told ruchir, he should try and watch the match before labelling SG with this and that. it's fun to say SG sucks over and over again, but then when you pit this 'evidence' against people who actually watch the match you will look rather foolish.

DD, et all --

http://www.cricketflicker.com/videos/Match_Hightlights/_India_VS_Pakistan_2007/Morning_Session_5th_Day_2nd_Test_Ind_v_Pak_Kolkata?PHPSESSID=b4ae0631e670b2cd43cfc99e0a8e8fc0

Watch this video. Watch from timestamp of '-1.47'. Tell me how you think SG actually canceled his shot?

1. SG's bat didn't even come down from his initial stance.
2. SG moved to his right only half a step. Watch his legs closely. Watch it 5 time, if necessary. SG took a very small step out toward his right side.

So, if SG had pre-decided that he was going to slash the ball, he would have taken a bigger step toward his right side, like he did for Kaneria. I was watching the game too. There is no way we could have known what SG was trying to do with that ball. If he was trying to slash it, it was all wrong because he had not given himself enough room. It he was trying to slash, his reaction did not look pre-conceived because his bat never came down.

Please, don't insinuate that I tell lies to support my point of view. I was watching the same game that you were watching. What we may have is different interpretation of what we saw.

SG took half a step outside. You thought he was making room, I thought he was undecided (specially for a slash shot).
SG's bat went up but never came down. You thought he checked his shot to adjust to bouncer, I thought he didn't know what to do because he was undecided from the beginning as to what he wanted to do.

This un-decidedness resulted in him taking his eyes off the ball and falling down in order to save himself. This goes back to my original point. He was practicing facing bouncers from Akhtar. Evidently, he did not practice right. He took his eyes off the ball, and that is not how you face a bouncer.

sorry man your purported theory of "un-decidedness" holds no water. i have, and everyone has seen SG make that initial movement 100s of times, and he always goes for one patented shot of his. it is up to you to "interpret". if you have the patience, pause and play from that timestamp a number of times and you will see his trigger movement is BEFORE the ball is released, and in this case his first movement is AWAY from the stumps. normally his initial movement is towards it (obviously)

your theory has no explanation for why SG would move away.

furthermore you are comparing his movements for a spinner with how he moves to a fast chucker. it has to be a different technique with a different sense of timing and movement altogether.

now either chucky saw SG and bowled it at his body, or he was planning to bowl at his body in any case (the latter is more probable from the replay). if the ball had been pitched so SG could have freed his arms, SG would have moved his right (front) leg out and played the shot. obviously he saw the missile coming at him and changed his mind. you dont need to be in the process of physically playing a shot (ie with the bat moving towards the ball) in order for it to qualify as "cancelling the shot".

given the time and situation of the match, given the initial movement of SG , it is clear to me what he was trying to do. if that is how you think he normally plays the short ball then i cant help you.

1. I don't think that is how he normally plays the short ball. Matter of fact, that was the main reason why I posted this photo. To show how inadequate SG's tennis ball practice was, to counter Akhtar's bouncers.

2. The whole idea of my creating this thread was not to dissect what kind of shot SG was trying to play. It was to say that SG did not play the bouncer properly. In normal cricket, you are not prepared to playing bouncer every ball. You don't know which ball will be a bouncer. You react to whatever is bowled at you. If it is a bouncer, you react accordingly. If it is a yorker, you react accordingly.

3. You say SG was trying to slash the ball to offside. how exactly would he have played that shot, keeping in mind where he was standing when the ball was delivered? He had taken only a baby step to his right. For him to be able to slash to offside from that position, the ball had to be just outside off stump. Was SG expecting Akhtar to bowl there? When batsmen think of playing a pre-meditated shot, they make firm movement to play that shot. If SG was pre-meditating to play a slash shot, his movement would have been a bigger step to his right so that he has enough free space in front of him to slash the ball that is anywhere from leg stump to outside off stump.

4. As I said, if SG was really trying to slash that particular delivery, he would have taken a bigger step to his right. This would have given him more space to hit. That is exactly what he did with Kaneria. Now you will say slashing Kaneria is different than slashing Akhtar. Well, not entirely. When you want to play a slash shot to a pacer like Akhtar (as you think SG was), you need to make your movement early than you would against a spinner. Why? Because, facing a spinner you will have enough time to move out and slash, but facing a pacer, the ball will reach you within half a second and you will not be far out enough to play the slash shot. So, what was SG's movement? He took just half a step toward his right. Let us say Akhtar would have bowled on the stumps, would SG be in the right place to play the slash shot?

5. In fact, the next ball, on which SG got out, vindicates what I am saying about taking a bigger step toward right. In the same video, watch the next ball. This time SG was expecting the ball to be on stumps because the previous ball had been on the body. This time, if you watch the video, SG took a bigger step to his right, probably 3 times bigger than the previous delivery. The shot he played was not exactly a slash to offside, but that may be because the ball was bang on the leg stump.

What I am saying is that that particular delivery, the bouncer on which SG fell, you can not say with a 100% guarantee that SG was trying to slash that delivery to offside. His body movements did not give that impression in anyway, unless you think that just because SG took a baby step to right means that he is trying to slash that delivery. To counter that I am saying watch the difference in feet movements of that delivery and the next one.

i think you have been caught at silly point and dont know how to answer a single one of my questions.

1) obviously that is not how he plays the short ball. he is moving away to play an improvised shot! he doesnt know whether it will be a short ball or a full ball. if it is full i have still seen him scoop it over cover/extra cover once he has moved away.

2) no kidding he didnt play it properly. he fell on his @$$. but he was not attempting a normal shot, which is decisively proved by the fact that he was moving away. never mind you are ignoring this fact and refusing to answer it. he was pre-meditating and got beaten by a ball which he could obviously not play from the position he had set himself in. NOTE he SET HIMSELF IN THAT POSITION TO PLAY A PARTICULAR SHOT before he knew what type of ball it was.

3) yes he was obviously expecting a ball outside offstump, hell even a ball on his stumps would have done. i dont know what your confusion is. have you never seen him play this shot?
here is the sequence from the clip:
-left foot moves away
-ball is released and right foot begins to move away to make room to open up the shot (oh dont pretend you cant see it)
-he realizes its a bouncer thats screaming towards his head, his front foot is already moving away so hes in an awkward position
-hence when he ducks he falls.

4) when you are moving against a spinner, you have time to readjust and reposition yourself when the ball is in the air. watch a replay to suit yourself. when positioning yourself against akhtar, there is not that much time. if he makes a big movement away with his left foot, his reach outside the offstump is compromised (on the other hand, kaneria is spinning the ball INTO him so he can move away more). WRT a straighter ball, that is why he opens up by moving his front foot away - it gives him scope to even hit the ball over midoff. so really, the move with his back foot is just right for playing this particular shot(s). it is a risky shot by definition, and he is a master at it.

5) you have got your sequence all wrong. i guess people just see what they want to see. here is the sequence for his dismissal delivery and i hope someone else will back me up on this, because this is getting ridiculous.
-again, same initial SMALL movement away with the backfoot before the ball leaves the hand, because he wants to play that shot. (how come you cant see this now?) this time it is more of a shift in weight
-the ball is released, he begins to move his front foot away, same as before
-he gauges the ball is coming full on his legstump, so pulls his back leg far away so he can bring his bat down in a more vertical arc

it is the exact same sequence, but unfortunately both balls didnt allow him to execute his shot. it is a tell-tale sequence of movements. if you cant see that, then you are free to watch any replays of it in odis (this is where he plays the shot) and you will recognize his movements.
i cant 100% guarantee what SG was doing, but i have seen him play the same shot enough times to make my case. that he made the exact same movement the next ball (and how you saw something different i will never know. obviously once the ball is halfway there and he realizes he cant play the shot, his sequence of motions will be different. but till then he is shaping up to do the same thing) should be enough.

you on the other hand have no idea why SG would move away, and do not care to offer any suggestions as to why a batsmen would make an improvised movement opposite to his normal sequence, before a threatening bouncer (which he is so infamous for being poor against) has left the bowler's hand.

[kban1]

DD:

1) obviously that is not how he plays the short ball. he is moving away to play an improvised shot! he doesnt know whether it will be a short ball or a full ball. if it is full i have still seen him scoop it over cover/extra cover once he has moved away.

2) no kidding he didnt play it properly. he fell on his @$$. but he was not attempting a normal shot, which is decisively proved by the fact that he was moving away. never mind you are ignoring this fact and refusing to answer it. he was pre-meditating and got beaten by a ball which he could obviously not play from the position he had set himself in. NOTE he SET HIMSELF IN THAT POSITION TO PLAY A PARTICULAR SHOT before he knew what type of ball it was.

3) yes he was obviously expecting a ball outside offstump, hell even a ball on his stumps would have done. i dont know what your confusion is. have you never seen him play this shot?
here is the sequence from the clip:
-left foot moves away
-ball is released and right foot begins to move away to make room to open up the shot (oh dont pretend you cant see it)
-he realizes its a bouncer thats screaming towards his head, his front foot is already moving away so hes in an awkward position
-hence when he ducks he falls.

4) when you are moving against a spinner, you have time to readjust and reposition yourself when the ball is in the air. watch a replay to suit yourself. when positioning yourself against akhtar, there is not that much time. if he makes a big movement away with his left foot, his reach outside the offstump is compromised (on the other hand, kaneria is spinning the ball INTO him so he can move away more). WRT a straighter ball, that is why he opens up by moving his front foot away - it gives him scope to even hit the ball over midoff. so really, the move with his back foot is just right for playing this particular shot(s). it is a risky shot by definition, and he is a master at it.

5) you have got your sequence all wrong. i guess people just see what they want to see. here is the sequence for his dismissal delivery and i hope someone else will back me up on this, because this is getting ridiculous.
-again, same initial SMALL movement away with the backfoot before the ball leaves the hand, because he wants to play that shot. (how come you cant see this now?) this time it is more of a shift in weight
-the ball is released, he begins to move his front foot away, same as before
-he gauges the ball is coming full on his legstump, so pulls his back leg far away so he can bring his bat down in a more vertical arc

it is the exact same sequence, but unfortunately both balls didnt allow him to execute his shot. it is a tell-tale sequence of movements. if you cant see that, then you are free to watch any replays of it in odis (this is where he plays the shot) and you will recognize his movements.
i cant 100% guarantee what SG was doing, but i have seen him play the same shot enough times to make my case. that he made the exact same movement the next ball (and how you saw something different i will never know. obviously once the ball is halfway there and he realizes he cant play the shot, his sequence of motions will be different. but till then he is shaping up to do the same thing) should be enough.

you on the other hand have no idea why SG would move away, and do not care to offer any suggestions as to why a batsmen would make an improvised movement opposite to his normal sequence, before a threatening bouncer (which he is so infamous for being poor against) has left the bowler's hand.

Excellent breakdown and analysis   

The only thing I would add for the bouncer ball is that Shoaib changed the ball after he saw Sg move -- if you see, Sg's movement prompted Shoib to follow SG with the bouncer -- it was directed at SG outside leg stump (where Sg had moved to), and people do not bowl bouncers way outside leg stump.

[Shukla]

ruchir, if you are trying to establish that sg's training with the tennis ball was faulty and did not help him, giving example of this ONE ball is in extremely poor taste.

This one ball will not give you any evidence either in favor of or against the training regimen. If the training was good, did you expect SG to not show ANY weakness against the short ball ever?

If you want to look for the evidence, look at his scores, zoom in on runs scored against Akhtar if you want. but showing this picture hardly proves any point, except for showing you in poor light.

[ramshorns]

Thanks Ruchir for posting the link.  I am reading through the exchanges between you and DD.  I wanted to look at it again more closely before I comment.  Looked at the video 4 times.

Here is how I would it break it down.

First of all I want to establish a basis for the case

1) Based on the situation of the game and the stage of the Indian innings wickets are least of the concern.  Right through the day's play the objective was to look for quick runs and declare.  So SG's intentions were pretty clear.  Do whatever to score runs even if it means losing the wicket in the process.  Against that back drop let us fast forward to this delivery under debate.

2) SG before the point of Akthar delivering the ball just started to ease his body and started to take a movement towards leg in an effort to give him maximum leverage to get a footing or plant it after the ball has been delivered and clobber it in an arc between point and midoff with the resultant edge flying past slips and inner edge to the fineleg - longleg area.  We all know those edges result in boundaries 99% of the times.  We have seen that type of slogging a million times by various players.

I think I have established an intent of SG in point 2.

3) Against that intent Akthar sensed SG's movement and in the last moment decided to bowl a short pitched ball or a bouncer at SG's body thus denying him a chance to cream it to the intended region(Techincally hard to hit stuff bowled at your body than away from it).  In an effort to evade it the action caused him to stumble and fall on his butt.

I understand SG's supposed inherent weakness against the short pitched stuff gives an impression that he might have technically flawed at playing this delivery but as I see it that is not the case here.  It was a case of Shoaib denying SG the scoring opportunity more than anything else.

Now one may question how I can be sure of that.  I admit I cannot be or for that matter anyone else but given the amount of cricket I watched that is the conclusion I can safely draw.

[feverpitch]

Well said Rams.

[CLR James]

Poor taste on FP's part, but Ruchir was being a bit, as the Brits would say, mulish. Very good analyses from Rams and Dhruv. I would add one more thing to that. While playing a premeditated shot, a batsman, from the technical point of view, exposes himself to risk not because he has suddenly lost his arms and legs or has become squiteyed, but because of two reasons:

1. He has shifted away from a position of minimum risk in relation to the three stumps. That is, is he has moved away, he has exposed his wicket to the delivery (a yorker or a full pitched delivery). This is exactly what happened when he was bowled in the second innings:

42.4     Shoaib Akhtar to Ganguly, OUT, Again he backs away, Shoaib fires in a full pitched delivery on the leg stump, Ganguly misses to connect with his heave and the leg stump is pegged back. Kumble has declared.

It is thus a do or die thing. the batsman makes his intentions clear. The bowler thinks "If you miss, I hit". On that ocassion, SG missed and Akhtar hit. If the batsman moves across the stumps, once again, it is just his bat that can save him, from being LBW this time (or bowled around his legs), because he has overcompensated, without seeing the trajectory, pitch, and movement of the ball, in covering his wicket. We have seen this a million times before.

2. But here is a more important reason. The greatest danger is posed by the fact that in either of the two cases stated above, the bastman has flouted one of the most cardinal rules of technically correct batsmanship -- keeping the body balanced and the head still. Now balance is a relative thing. If the ball was in a particular slot, SG would be in a perfect position to hit it out of the ground. But the point is that he gambled on his relative position to the ball and the gamble did not pay off. That he fell off balance is because he was out of balance.

Now what has this pre-determined agricultural shot have to do with conventional practice with short pitched tennis balls?

[keep-it-cool]

In any case, one can take a call on SG's (or any other Indian batsman's) CURRENT ability to play the short ball only after they tour Australia.

In India, on one hand bowlers cannot do much damage with the short ball due to the lack of hardness in the pitch .. on the other hand, it is often difficult for batsmen to play the short ball because of the variable bounce involved, thus making it very difficult to gauge how much a bouncer will rise .. and therefore ending up in all kinds of awkward positions.

Let us take a call after the Aussie series.

[ruchir]

I give up in...

Y'all are deciding what SG wanted to do on the first shot, based on what he did on the second shot. I mean, y'all think that because SG pre-meditated his second shot in a particular way, he was going for the same shot in his first try too, because y'all have seen him pre-meditate his shots many times before.

Well, I have seen SG undecided on how to play a ball, same number of time, so no matter what you guys say I am not ready to buy your theory that because he pre-meditated his second shot a particular way, he was doing the same on his first shot.

You know what? One thing came to my mind. According to y'all, following things were happening:

1. SG was told that declaration was coming and he should complete his 50 ASAP.
2. SG was pre-meditating his shots.
3. SG was trying to score the remaining 2 runs ASAP.

Now come to the delivery on which he fell. What did SG do on that delivery (inspite of all the dissection done on it)?

A) Raised his bat in high backlift.
B) Took a baby step to his leg side.
C) Didn't do anything else other than falling down. Didn't even bring his bat down.


Q. What was SG trying to do?

A. Score remaining 2 runs ASAP (per y'all).


Q. How could he have done that?

A. Easiest way was to put bat to ball and run. After all, getting out was as good as Kumble declaring while SG was still on 48.


Q. What could SG have done on that ball, on which he fell, to score 2 runs?

A. Per y'all, SG pre-meditated to hit a slash/shot/tonk/whatever on offside. To do that he took a baby step to his leg side. Then he realized that Akhtar was aiming a bouncer at him and he ducked and fell.

Look at his backlift at the start of the shot. It was high. Look at his supposed intention on that shot. To score 2 runs. Look at how soon he realized Akhtar was bowling a bouncer. Pretty soon (per y'all). So what else could he have done other than falling down? He could have played a hook shot, put bat to ball and run. At best, he could have been caught out or run out. That was not a problem for him. Hook shot was the best option for him at that time, because his bat was already in a high backlift and the ball was in the perfect place - on his body. All he had to do, after realizing it was a bouncer, was to swap it in front of his face and make connection with the ball.

Instead of doing that, he ducked and fell down. Does this act show that he was trying to score his runs in double time? Maybe, maybe not. But the truth (IMO) is that if he was really trying to score those 2 runs quickly, he should have kept an open mind and gone for the hook shot when he realized it was a bouncer. He didn't do that. Why?

IMO because he was undecided on what to do on that delivery, baby step on leg, and his 'slashing' history notwithstanding. But, I'm sure none of you will agree with me, so I give up in.

[OldPal]

An interesting thread to read .

[LosingNow]

An interesting thread to read .

My thoughts exactly. "Baal ki khoi khaal nikale to aise".

[broadbat]

This shot I think has now officially made it to No1 as the 'most dissected' (non)stroke in Test cricket history edging past Bradman's last innings dismissal.

[kban1]

This shot I think has now officially made it to No1 as the 'most dissected' (non)stroke in Test cricket history edging past Bradman's last innings dismissal.

Only fitting since this DG would not have existed without you know who   


This is my prime grouse against WN and his newrathi rants -- what will happen to this DG when this maharathi retires ?   

Extremely shortsighted thinking, WN 

[Libran]

When it comes to disecting SG's game, no stone is left unturned to sensationalize ( negative spin ) 



Two boys are playing hockey on a pond in suburban Chicago when one is attacked by a rabid rottweiler.

Thinking quickly, the other boy takes his stick and wedges it down the dog's collar and twists, breaking the dog's neck.

A reporter who is strolling by sees the incident and rushes over to the boy.

"Young White Sox Fan Saves Friend from Vicious Animal," he starts writing in his notebook.

"But I'm not a Sox fan," the little hero replied.

"Sorry, since we are in Chicago, I just assumed you were," said the reporter, and he began writing again.

"Cubs Fan Rescues Friend from Horrific Attack," he continued writing in his notebook.
"I'm not a Cubs fan either," the boy said.

"I assumed everyone in Chicago was either for the Cubs or the Sox.
What team do you root for?" inquired the reporter.
"I'm a Yankees fan," the child responded.

The reporter turned the page in his notebook and wrote

"Little Brat from New York Kills Beloved Family Pet."

[ruchir]

An interesting thread to read .

My thoughts exactly. "Baal ki khoi khaal nikale to aise".

Mian, hum to woh hain, jo baal ki khaal nikaal kar uspe poora khanaa paros dete hain aur fir baal ki kursi banaa kar khanaa khate hain... 

[Blwe_torch]

An interesting thread to read .

My thoughts exactly. "Baal ki khoi khaal nikale to aise".

Mian, hum to woh hain, jo baal ki khaal nikaal kar uspe poora khanaa paros dete hain aur fir baal ki kursi banaa kar khanaa khate hain... 

Aage bhi extend karoon, ya rehne dun!

[ruchir]

An interesting thread to read .

My thoughts exactly. "Baal ki khoi khaal nikale to aise".

Mian, hum to woh hain, jo baal ki khaal nikaal kar uspe poora khanaa paros dete hain aur fir baal ki kursi banaa kar khanaa khate hain... 

Aage bhi extend karoon, ya rehne dun!

Ab extend kar bhi do yaar....

[Blwe_torch]

An interesting thread to read .

My thoughts exactly. "Baal ki khoi khaal nikale to aise".

Mian, hum to woh hain, jo baal ki khaal nikaal kar uspe poora khanaa paros dete hain aur fir baal ki kursi banaa kar khanaa khate hain... 

Aage bhi extend karoon, ya rehne dun!

Ab extend kar bhi do yaar....

DG bandh karani hai kya!

[Blwe_torch]

An interesting thread to read .

My thoughts exactly. "Baal ki khoi khaal nikale to aise".

Mian, hum to woh hain, jo baal ki khaal nikaal kar uspe poora khanaa paros dete hain aur fir baal ki kursi banaa kar khanaa khate hain... 

Aage bhi extend karoon, ya rehne dun!

Ab extend kar bhi do yaar....

DG bandh karani hai kya!

Arre tumhare Sexist, racist comments ne nahin kiya .. to yeh kya karega .,... ab kar bhi do extend (Ya viagra chahiye?)

Kyon, stock mein rakkha hua hai kya?

[ruchir]

Okay...

CP says 'Ya viagra chahiye?', as if he is ready to provide some.

BLWE says 'Kyon, stock mein rakkha hua hai kya?', as if he really needs some.

So, one needs it and the other has it to give it. I sense both of them are Viagra users. Say what?

[Blwe_torch]

 

[ruchir]

Okay...

CP says 'Ya viagra chahiye?', as if he is ready to provide some.

BLWE says 'Kyon, stock mein rakkha hua hai kya?', as if he really needs some.

So, one needs it and the other has it to give it. I sense both of them are Viagra users. Say what?

I am into public service. Junta ki sewa ke liye tayyar rehte hain. Blwe jaise logon ke liye hum Pharmacy jaane ke liye humesha tayyar hain.

You see inke liye agar main inka brain nahin bada kar sakta .... maybe yeh dawai hi kuch aur ..... never mind

Sir ji, aap ek baat bhool gaye....

Viagra is given by prescription only, so I have heard. So, in order for you to buy Viagra for BLEW, you would need a prescription from the doctor, where you would have to prove to the doctor that you are... errm, how to say it... you can't have your periscope up. Then and only then the doctor will give your the prescription, using which you will buy Viagra for BLWE.

Now, the thing is, how will you prove to the doctor that your periscope is malfunctioning, that your joystick has stopped vibrating, that your jackhammer has stopped hammering, that your pump has stopped pumping.... to cut it short, how will you prove to the doctor that you can't have KLPD anymore because you don't even reach the K?

[ruchir]

Satya vachan, prabhu.

[LosingNow]

An interesting thread to read .

My thoughts exactly. "Baal ki khoi khaal nikale to aise".

Mian, hum to woh hain, jo baal ki khaal nikaal kar uspe poora khanaa paros dete hain aur fir baal ki kursi banaa kar khanaa khate hain... 

Main sar ke baal ki baat kar raha tha

[ruchir]

An interesting thread to read .

My thoughts exactly. "Baal ki khoi khaal nikale to aise".

Mian, hum to woh hain, jo baal ki khaal nikaal kar uspe poora khanaa paros dete hain aur fir baal ki kursi banaa kar khanaa khate hain... 

Main sar ke baal ki baat kar raha tha

Main bhi...

[feverpitch]

Poor taste on FP's part, but Ruchir was being a bit, as the Brits would say, mulish.

Well... when the purveyor of taste on this DG happens to bear a big burden on his shoulders, his status needs to be made clear to him, isn't it?