King Tendulkar Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 I am sick to death of the moaning and the BS that we got out played. WE HAD 10 men. ZK got injured and could not bowl. I REPEAT WE HAD 10 men and only 3 BOWLERS! For godsake when ZK got injured we were all over them. We would have bowled them out for under 250 if he hadnt. In 2nd innings all over them again but as only had 3 bowlers it lapsed again. Christ what do you expect when Dhoni and Raina have to bowl in tandemn for long spells. I repeat we had 10 men and england took full advantage. But until England beat an 11 man India , i am not giving them any credit. I tell you if Anderson had broke down and they would have to bowl Trott and KP in long spell we would have racked up 800! We gonna pummel them in text match with 11 men and wipe the smiles of their smug faces. We gonna beat them form behind and stick their number 1 aspirations up their backsides. England have more chance of droping to 4th in world then number 1 after this series! Big backlash coming at Trent Bridge. England you have been warned!
nballa Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 im sorry i missed the passage of play when we were all over them. when was this? the praveen kumar, RD partnership which took us above and beyond the follow on score?
wobblydoggy Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 :hysterical: I think the thread starter watched a different game to the rest of us
Sid Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 My post from the other thread :winky: With the number of misfortunes which happened with our side in this test match,I am not gutted,I am just praying we dont have to face up with these kinds of "misfortunes" again in the next test .
yoda Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 Agree with the OP. Losing Zak was a major blow. We still fought beyond tea even after SRT being practically useless and Gambhir being a no show.
wobblydoggy Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 I am sick to death of the moaning and the BS that we got out played. WE HAD 10 men. ZK got injured and could not bowl. I REPEAT WE HAD 10 men and only 3 BOWLERS! For godsake when ZK got injured we were all over them. We would have bowled them out for under 250 if he hadnt. In 2nd innings all over them again but as only had 3 bowlers it lapsed again. Christ what do you expect when Dhoni and Raina have to bowl in tandemn for long spells. I repeat we had 10 men and england took full advantage. But until England beat an 11 man India , i am not giving them any credit. I tell you if Anderson had broke down and they would have to bowl Trott and KP in long spell we would have racked up 800! We gonna pummel them in text match with 11 men and wipe the smiles of their smug faces. We gonna beat them form behind and stick their number 1 aspirations up their backsides. England have more chance of droping to 4th in world then number 1 after this series! Big backlash coming at Trent Bridge. England you have been warned![/QUOTE] Oooo we are trembling in our boots. A group of overaged has beens who have been thrashed and are all injured or knackered are going to stuff us. The only way that will happen is if you win the toss in very very favorable conditions
CrazyCric Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 Excuses ,Excuses , Excuses...... Just like Dhoni . Its Batsmen who failed big time .I wonder what ZK would have done about 286 & 261 in both innings . Just be graceful in defeat .
Rajiv Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 KT - England played better cricket man, just accept it and hope for a comeback
King Tendulkar Posted July 25, 2011 Author Posted July 25, 2011 You beat 10 men. Keep boasting. If roles had been reversed and Anderson had gone down. Then you would have bowled trott and kp, it would have been run fest. Until you beat 11 indians you have proved nothing!
wobblydoggy Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 Excuses ,Excuses , Excuses...... Just like Dhoni . Its Batsmen who failed big time .I wonder what ZK would have done about 286 & 261 in both innings . Just be graceful in defeat . Good post. If you dont have anything to bowl at your screwed.
VRV Singh Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 Certainly it had a big impact on the game. And I agree with the sentiment to not overreact as a result. However it is a little churlish not to give any credit, KT. England can't legislate for poor fitness on our side. They certainly bowled well.
wobblydoggy Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 You beat 10 men. Keep boasting. If roles had been reversed and Anderson had gone down. Then you would have bowled trott and kp, it would have been run fest. Until you beat 11 indians you have proved nothing! If the roles had been reversed we would not have declared twice:hysterical:
wobblydoggy Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 Certainly it had a big impact on the game. And I agree with the sentiment to not overreact as a result. However it is a little churlish not to give any credit, KT. England can't legislate for poor fitness. Exactly. The Indian selectors picked the team, live with it. Personally I would not play Khan in the next test either.
CrazyCric Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 When ZK left the attack it was 107/2 .It was not "All over them" by any means .
King Tendulkar Posted July 25, 2011 Author Posted July 25, 2011 KT - England played better cricket man' date=' just accept it and hope for a comeback[/quote'] Well they did thats why they won. But we had 10 men with our best bowler breaking down leaving us with 3 bowlers, so yes it gives them impression of them being better then us. That is a serious mitigating fact only 3 bowlers. In both innings england were in serious probs and a 4th bowler particularly our best bowler would have killed them off and turned match on its head. The injury of ZK ruined the game as a spectacle, akin to watching a football game and oppo going down to 10 men with one of their best players being sent of
wobblydoggy Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 When ZK left the attack it was 107/2 .It was not "All over them" by any means . And the conditions were well in your favour. England got twenty wickets on a slow Lords pitch, that is why we won the test. That and the fact we had a big enough score to play tough cricket
wobblydoggy Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 Well they did thats why they won. But we had 10 men with our best bowler breaking down leaving us with 3 bowlers, so yes it gives them impression of them being better then us. That is a serious mitigating fact only 3 bowlers. In both innings england were in serious probs and a 4th bowler particularly our best bowler would have killed them off and turned match on its head. The injury of ZK ruined the game as a spectacle, akin to watching a football game and oppo going down to 10 men with one of their best players being sent of You got stuffed even with the umpires playing for you Accept it
King Tendulkar Posted July 25, 2011 Author Posted July 25, 2011 When ZK left the attack it was 107/2 .It was not "All over them" by any means . Yeah we would have bowled you out for under 250 form there. And in 2nd innings if ZK was there he would have killed of work Ishant done to bowl you out for 140! The ZK sending off(equivalent to ZK injury) was a game changer. The doom and gloom is pathetic, we were seriously handicapped
Trichromatic Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 You beat 10 men. Keep boasting. If roles had been reversed and Anderson had gone down. Then you would have bowled trott and kp, it would have been run fest. Until you beat 11 indians you have proved nothing! :facepalm: Doesn't change the fact that we didn't bat well.
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