therocky Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 It was the first time I watched India in a world cup final and we were only one match away from lifting the cup but Australia ripped us apart, Do you think India's 2011 world cup team is better than 2003 team? What went wrong in 2003?
Karan114 Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 Have been trying to forget it for these last eight years :((
Ultimate_Game Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 What went wrong was that we won the toss and elected to FIELD!!! Let me put it this way - you never field after winning the toss in a major final. All our major victories have come after batting first and putting up a decent score on board. Batting is our strength and if we bat first without any pressure of chasing a target we generally put up a decent score which has to be chased down by the opponent. As soon as I saw Ganguly winning the toss and electing to field I knew we had blown it and I recalled Azhar's decision to put SL in to bat in the 96 semi-final. The golden rule for India is - "If you win toss bat, if the conditions are good for bowling then you think a little regarding the decision and then bat". I still think that if we had batted first and the kind of form our batsmen were in we would have put up a score around 280-320 and when you have the score on the board anything can happen. Once Aussies put 359 on board the game was pretty much over and our batsmen couldn't afford to get in and play their natural games.
prinzo Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 Today 01:59 AM Ultimate_Game What went wrong was that we won the toss and elected to FIELD!!! Let me put it this way - you never field after winning the toss in a major final. All our major victories have come after batting first and putting up a decent score on board. Batting is our strength and if we bat first without any pressure of chasing a target we generally put up a decent score which has to be chased down by the opponent. As soon as I saw Ganguly winning the toss and electing to field I knew we had blown it and I recalled Azhar's decision to put SL in to bat in the 96 semi-final. The golden rule for India is - "If you win toss bat, if the conditions are good for bowling then you think a little regarding the decision and then bat". I still think that if we had batted first and the kind of form our batsmen were in we would have put up a score around 280-320 and when you have the score on the board anything can happen. Once Aussies put 359 on board the game was pretty much over and our batsmen couldn't afford to get in and play their natural games. If India batted first they would of probably collapsed for 160 all out or so. Australia where unstoppable in that world cup.
b555 Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 If India batted first they would of probably collapsed for 160 all out or so. Australia where unstoppable in that world cup. even india had a damn good performance ont heir cards dude leaving for that one loss against aussies in the group stages it wasnt as if we did not have any chance at all
ganeshran Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 kyon yaad dilate ho yaar.. usse toh mein ek bura sapna samajh ke bhool gaya tha :sniffle:
dnmaru Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 In 2003, the first over from Zaheer made all the difference... Also failure of Sachin getting out cheaply when chasing in the finals
Mariyam Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 The 2003 team was much weaker than the current team, but it didn't have to shoulder the burden of expectations that the current team does.
Sir john Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 i remember punter huge sixes :sniffle: viru fighting innings.:((
Hell Raiser Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 Bowling department was stronger than the one we have, even though the 3 bowlers from that team are still in this squad. But that time they were performing somewhat better.. Batting wise this line up is better than the 2003 team.
bihutoli Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 On form the bowling attack then was much better than what we have today. Nehra was bowling bananas, and Sri and Zak were providing able support. Of course the pitch allowed them to. Our batting this time around seems much stronger, but that too is also because of the conditions imo. Overall our team today as a unit is better, more battle hardened if you would. I have no doubt the 2011 WC final will erase all bad memories we had of the WC 2003 final.:two_thumbs_up:
Sir john Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 Bowling department was stronger than the one we have' date=' even though the [u']3 bowlers from that team are still in this squad. But that time they were performing somewhat better.. Batting wise this line up is better than the 2003 team. who are thy, zak+nehra+_____________
Hell Raiser Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 who are thy, zak+nehra+_____________ Harbhajan singh
NareshK Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 It was a good batting track but there was some bounce in it like a typical South African pitch and Indian batsmen usually struggle in those conditions, especially Ganguly, Yuvraj, Kaif against a quality pace attack like McGrath, Lee etc. Looking back, India had no chance to win the final. They would have won if they had faced Sri Lanka, Pakistan or any other team other than the Aussies or South Africans. The current team is much better equipped to facing pace. Kohli did decently in the ODI series in South Africa, Yusuf Pathan got a century in a match and did well in a couple of others. Sehwag and Sachin play bounce pretty well. So I think this team would have had a better chance. In any case, India should have batted first.
rkt.india Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 Lee was menacing in that WC...I watched his bowling against SL, England, New Zealand..He was bowling consistently quicker than Akhtar and was menacing....that was dream fast bowling by Brett Lee...i still remember his 160 KPH ball to clean bowled Attapattu..who had no idea against Lee...really Menacing and Dada tried to pull his 153 k delivery on a bouncy pitch..became ghantaghar to Brett Lee himself
DomainK Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 Australia was the better team in that match by a long way and they won. Yes, the manner in which they thrashed us was painful, but I think the chances of winning if we had fielded first was also quite slim. But in this world cup, we are clearly the best team. Some would disagree after the match with England, but IMO that was an exception and that match will now ensure that all complacency is gone and the players will now give 100%. We have very good chances of lifting the cup.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now