What has gone right so far ? What could go wrong from now on ?

[Ram]

Wanted to make a list of things which has helped be in a position we are in , 1-0 up in the series and what might happen to make the score 1-1 Things gone right

• Some unbelievably lucky weather that washed off 3 hours of play on the last day at Lords. 3-4 more overs and we would have lost in all probability
• Got lucky with the toss in Trent Bridge.
• Some good opening partnerships
• Anil Kumble being able to mop the tail

Things that could go wrong.

• Bad luck with Toss/weather at the Oval
• Batting line-up collapse.
• One of the english bowlers hitting the straps.

Add on as you like.....

[fineleg]

In test2: Sidebottom was unlucky - he bowled well really well. ZK was unlucky - he could have gotten Vaughan out early too. In things that could go wrong, Sriram you should add: Our Indian pacers ZK and RPS becoming like erratic Sreesanth!!! :-)

[Chandan]

For the first two test we've got sporting tracks and our bowlers succeeded. The moment it'd be a flat track, our bowlers would become ineffective. If the weather is sunny, leading to the Oval test and stays sunny, the chances of swing will go out of the window and then you'd see how ordinary our bowlers are. If it is a flat track, England wins the toss and bats, piles on a huge total, our batters will be under pressure and a collapse on card. Monty will be a handful in the last inning and we might lose the test.

[Hawkeye]

For the first two test we've got sporting tracks and our bowlers succeeded. The moment it'd be a flat track, our bowlers would become ineffective. If the weather is sunny, leading to the Oval test and stays sunny, the chances of swing will go out of the window and then you'd see how ordinary our bowlers are. If it is a flat track, England wins the toss and bats, piles on a huge total, our batters will be under pressure and a collapse on card. Monty will be a handful in the last inning and we might lose the test.

Negative thoughts but unfortunately pretty much spot on. RP and Zaheer are used to "making" the ball swing and seam in the flat track blazing conditions back home so really they should be able to get something out of the pitch. The oval pitch should crack up on day 3/4 bringing Kumble into play but I susepct that he won't be as effective as high 5 Monty.

[Predator_05]

England's batsmen have underachieved in this series. I can't see them collapsing time and time again - their's is a very good batting lineup and it's only a matter of time before they click. I expect some big runs from guys like Bell and Collingwood.

[King Tendulkar]

Sorry MM your opening post sounds like atherton or nasser did it. You have been brainwashed. Luck with weather, luck with toss.....luck,luck,luck. I have heard enough of these words from sky team. We have outplayed them and are deservedly 1-0 up. Day 1 and day 2 were very similar conditions. We just batted better and bowled bettter. Simple. Then on day 4 blew them away and bowled their whole batting out in 1 day. Brilliant by India

[King Tendulkar]

England's batsmen have underachieved in this series. I can't see them collapsing time and time again - their's is a very good batting lineup and it's only a matter of time before they click. I expect some big runs from guys like Bell and Collingwood.

Bell is cr#p. Collingwood cant play swing and will edge ball on to stumps. Cook has lbw prob and strauss is poor. Prior is unproven and has had poor series. They have very long tail. Not sure why you think they have good batting line up! They are ok but not good

[Ram]

Sorry MM your opening post sounds like atherton or nasser did it. You have been brainwashed. Luck with weather, luck with toss.....luck,luck,luck. I have heard enough of these words from sky team. We have outplayed them and are deservedly 1-0 up. Day 1 and day 2 were very similar conditions. We just batted better and bowled bettter. Simple. Then on day 4 blew them away and bowled their whole batting out in 1 day. Brilliant by India

Dsr , you fail to see a fundamental difference between me and the english commmies. They were whinging about umpiring decisions that went in our favor , edges that didnt carry etc etc. They were calling that luck, while in actuality , its part of cricket. But you would be denying the obvious if you say we got a little lucky with the weather in Lords or a bit fortunate with the toss in T'Bridge. And its no disgrace to say that , since every cricket game an element of luck that decides which team emerges victorious.

[King Tendulkar]

Why were we lucky with toss. Day 1 and Day 2 pitch conditions were very similar. If you dont believe go and look back at highlights. They make out ball was going bannas on day 1 and then day 2 it was not moving at all. Conditions were VERY similar! We live in era of brilliant covered pitches. No matter how much rain pitch is nearl always very good. Look at day 4 were we bowled again. Suddenly ball in indians hand and it is doing sh#t loads again. You have been brain washed in to thinking it was luck and all about toss. In fact we were unlucky in the game as so many umpiring decisions went against us, yet we still won

[Ram]

I dunno what to say beyond this. Fresh pitch , lots of rain the previous day , delayed start in the morning , captain wins toss , elects to bowl and reduces opposition for 150 odd for 7. If you are going to deny that there wasnt even a small component of luck in this , then i cant do much about it. I have said this before and i say it again. The english commies were pointing out how our edges didnt carry and how Widebottom bowled well without wickets and all that blah blah. I dont agree with them. That is part of cricket.

[Chandan]

But you also have to admit that it was England who were lucky at Lords with toss and conditions and they couldn't finish the job.

[MundaPakistani]

Things that could go wrong. India to lose the 3rd test match.

[Chandan]

Anyone knows who are the match officials for the next test?

[Ram]

Think it will be Bucknor And Ian Howell. Taufel has already 2. All the officials will get 2 matches each.

[observer1]

Sriram: you are deluding yourself. Remember England had excellent batting conditions on Day 4, and failed to make use of them. Remember, everyone, including Mr Moores knew the weather was closing in on that Monday at Lords, and they still bowled at a profligate over-rate. You are merely speculating as to whether India would have batted as badly as England did in the first inning - if I were to argue that the English batting on T2D1 was merely representative of their general incompetence in playing good swing bowling, what do you have to counter?

[Ram]

Obs.. You are absolutely right when you say "English batting on T2D1 was merely representative of their general incompetence in playing good swing bowling". Only , the luck component i am referring to is that - They batted first and we didnt. Most batting line-ups are vulnerable to good swing bowling. And surely i wouldnt buy the argument that England's slow over-rate was a reason for the failure to close the lords test. Remember , we lost 50 overs of play. Test cricket has only fleeting instances where a partnership for the 10th wicket has batted so long to save a test. And , the argument that england's over rate cost them the match would have sounded more stronger , If we had been 6 or 7 wickets down. We were 9 wickets down , and just a delivery away from defeat. And in all probability , Bucknor's kind-heartedness is what saved us.

[observer1]

Obs.. Only , the luck component i am referring to is that - They batted first and we didnt. Most batting line-ups are vulnerable to good swing bowling. And surely i wouldnt buy the argument that England's slow over-rate was a reason for the failure to close the lords test. Remember , we lost 50 overs of play. Test cricket has only fleeting instances where a partnership for the 10th wicket has batted so long to save a test. And , the argument that england's over rate cost them the match would have sounded more stronger , If we had been 6 or 7 wickets down. We were 9 wickets down , and just a delivery away from defeat. And in all probability , Bucknor's kind-heartedness is what saved us.

Sriram: Most batting line-ups are susceptible to GOOD swing bowling - the English batting exemplified that in T2. The Indian batting was either better or the English bowling was worse - take your pick - remember conditions were equal on Days 3 and 4. And, your second para: The fact that we lost 50 overs due to poor weather, and were likely to lose more surely should have sparked a sense of urgency, shouldnt it? Test cricket does only have rare instances of 10th wicket partnerships saving a test - does that mean you can afford to be complacent? I beg to differ on the importance of over-rates - surely, if the opposing team is 7 down, you estimate you need about 10 overs extra, and you could argue that you cannot make up 10 overs by bowling more. With 9 wickets down, you would give yourself 2-3 more overs to get the last, and that is feasible, innit? And, please dont be apologetic about Bucknor's kind-heartedness. He doesnt have a heart, and there are many who would argue about him lacking parts of his retina, and perhaps signifcant parts of his cerebrum too... I could potentially turn the argument around and say that England would have been facing defeat if Taufel had not been 'kind-hearted' to them in getting rid of Dravid and Ganguly.

[Ram]

Obs , How would you counter my point If i say it was England's slow over-rate which gave bowlers proper time to rest and the captain enough time to set good fields that helped Eng take 7 wickets on the last day ? None of us would have been talking about over-rates had England won , and they could have won so easily. And you quite cannot compare Taufel giving Dravid out and Bucknor giving Sree not out. Even If Dravid had not been given out , his contribution to the rest of the innings is subject to pure speculation. However, If Sree had been given out , england would have won the match. That is a FACT.