Temujin Khaghan Posted June 9, 2011 Posted June 9, 2011 Mishra took 4/31 but Kohli gets the man of the match award for his 81. i would have had mishra given the award even if kohli made a century. even contextually, mishra's two wickets in his last over meant that windies werent going to score atleast 20 runs more than what they should have.
yoda Posted June 9, 2011 Posted June 9, 2011 well Munaf (I think) got 3, so Mishra's 4 wasn't as distinguishing as the 81. Close call, IMO.
Temujin Khaghan Posted June 9, 2011 Author Posted June 9, 2011 well Munaf (I think) got 3' date=' so Mishra's 4 wasn't as distinguishing as the 81. Close call, IMO.[/quote'] what logic is this? i'll tell you what mishra would have got the award if his name was steyn.
yoda Posted June 9, 2011 Posted June 9, 2011 what logic is this? i'll tell you what mishra would have got the award if his name was steyn. Well, you get 4 wickets, another guy gets 3, it isn't as great as for example getting 4 when the next guy only got 1.
gaurav92 Posted June 9, 2011 Posted June 9, 2011 Absolutely, The total which was looking like 270-280 was jolted down to 240 because of Mishra's heroics in the end. And I agree that he deserved it more than anyone else. But just for a start, I think the track was assisting spin and therefore it was tailor made for a leg spinner, some side spin, extra bit of bounce, but still you got to take wickets and he did that. Bhajji looked toothless in the game, so in my honest opinion, Mishra was the deserving candidate.
gaurav92 Posted June 9, 2011 Posted June 9, 2011 well Munaf (I think) got 3' date=' so Mishra's 4 wasn't as distinguishing as the 81. Close call, IMO.[/quote'] Don't just see the wicket column, see how and whom did he get. Mishra earned his dismissals by some very good bowling, on the other hand Munaf got his wickets by fluke as the batsman pressed on the accelerate and mistimed some strokes. Munaf got 2 tailenders while Mishra got all good batsmen. And therefore your comparison is not valid at all.
yoda Posted June 9, 2011 Posted June 9, 2011 Don't just see the wicket column' date=' see how and whom did he get. Mishra earned his dismissals by some very good bowling, on the other hand Munaf got his wickets by fluke as the batsman pressed on the accelerate and mistimed some strokes. Munaf got 2 tailenders while Mishra got all good batsmen. And therefore your comparison is not valid at all.[/quote'] I am not talking about who took more valuable wickets, talking about whether one guy distinguished himself more than the others when compared to a batsman, in this case Kohli. My vote would have gone for Mishra too, but I can see why someone would go for Kohli.
Zelig Posted June 9, 2011 Posted June 9, 2011 We're talking about West Indian adjudicators here :hehe:
gaurav92 Posted June 9, 2011 Posted June 9, 2011 I am not talking about who took more valuable wickets' date=' talking about whether one guy distinguished himself more than the others when compared to a batsman, in this case Kohli. My vote would have gone for Mishra too, but I can see why someone would go for Kohli.[/quote'] Even Parthiv got a 56, and a couple of sharp stumpings to go with it. Anyways Kohli did play well and earned his MoM performance.
Fontaine Posted June 9, 2011 Posted June 9, 2011 What more should bowlers do? Learn how to bat. Unless you get a five wicket haul batsmen usually get the nod.
Sachinism Posted June 9, 2011 Posted June 9, 2011 Bowlers? hahaha They're just there to run in and lob a ball at the batsman to smash
phaedrus Posted June 9, 2011 Posted June 9, 2011 Mishra did deserve it more. bowled really welll. second spinner for the test series?
Midfielder Posted June 9, 2011 Posted June 9, 2011 Mishra took 4/31 but Kohli gets the man of the match award for his 81. i would have had mishra given the award even if kohli made a century. even contextually' date=' mishra's two wickets in his last over meant that windies werent going to score atleast 20 runs more than what they should have.[/quote'] I agree with you on this one. At least it should have been split.
gaurav92 Posted June 9, 2011 Posted June 9, 2011 Mishra did deserve it more. bowled really welll. second spinner for the test series? First Spinner is Mishra, the second is not yet decided for me. :D
Sidhoni Posted June 9, 2011 Posted June 9, 2011 I remember sometimes there were joint MoM awards being given, why doesn't it happen now? It has not happened in the past 2-3 yrs.This was one such situation where you feel like giving 2 of them, well IMHO, Mishra deserved it more
achilles Posted June 9, 2011 Posted June 9, 2011 This is like playing those damn PC cricket games. Even if you take 7 wickets in an innings, they'll give the MOM to a dork who scored 70-80 runs.
Temujin Khaghan Posted June 9, 2011 Author Posted June 9, 2011 the last time i remember bowlers were getting mom awards was yuvi with some 30 - 50 extra runs he earned with batting too. so it was more like for an allround effort.
vvvslaxman Posted June 9, 2011 Posted June 9, 2011 It is hard to be a bowler. Just tell me how many bowlers got 1.7 million dollar in IPL. If you ask who was more useful to his team. RP singh or Saurab Tiwary? Answer is obvious. Yet Tiwary was getting significantly more money.
CoverDrive Posted June 9, 2011 Posted June 9, 2011 bowler can influence only 1/5th of the innings (10 over in a match) and to be effective he has to really take 4+ wickets which are significant. even if he takes 3 wickets there will be others who would have taken 2 wickets or so (like here people are saying Munaf also took 3 wickets). In contrast a batsman can potentially bat 40+ overs and outscore other batsmen by a long margin.
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