Septimius Severus Posted August 12, 2011 Posted August 12, 2011 Idiots ITT who think it will happen. Lemme break it down for you guys who ride the short bus to school. With rain predicted, Levi knows that he can't bat too deep into day 3, as he may end up having ind 8 or 9 down on d5 because he allowed Eng to bat on and on on d3 or even into d4. He will look for 250runs as quick as possible and the declare.
Rahul Dravid Posted August 12, 2011 Posted August 12, 2011 Go get a STD test done. Its probably herpes. :haha:
Rahul Dravid Posted August 12, 2011 Posted August 12, 2011 Yep' date=' 8/12, Friday is the day when this tour will take a complete U-Turn, we will come back to win this and the next test and square the series. The ODIs will be a walk in the park. I can feel it in my b@lls[/quote'] i will believe you if you tell me HOW ?
Desi Cartman Posted August 12, 2011 Posted August 12, 2011 This is reverse of khooshi ke ansoo (tears of joy) yeh dukh ki hansi hai
Desi Cartman Posted August 12, 2011 Posted August 12, 2011 well said...I like it.. I also love the other thread where these guys are blaming indian players hair cut for their perform....hmmmmmmmm nice going my friends.. oh btw i'm on my way out to our weekly cricket practice session and would love to see my indian friends..some of them who claim that this eng bowling line up can not get india out twice..:):):):) And why are you so proud of what England has done :dontknow:
tapish Posted August 12, 2011 Posted August 12, 2011 This is reverse of khooshi ke ansoo (tears of joy) yeh dukh ki hansi hai :haha: I think they are trying to hide their frustration in between their smiles.
tapish Posted August 12, 2011 Posted August 12, 2011 :hysterical::hysterical::hysterical: Its hilarious how these Lankans and Paks (a team so pathetic that it couldn't even beat the West Indies; even in our current poor state, we still beat WI in WI) come on here to laugh at our team, when even while struggling, we are superior to their sorry teams. England may be slaughtering us on this tour but it still doesn't make Lanka any better than India - hell, this team hasn't even won a single Test since Murali retired. yes i agree. But these pakistani and lankan posters haven't got anything from their team to brag about so they chose to celebrate others' defeat as they don't have their own success to cherish. wow what neighbors we have got :finger:
Temujin Khaghan Posted August 12, 2011 Posted August 12, 2011 Dividing Indian players based on their seriousness towards England tour... Players who prepared for the England tour Gambhir - just a matter of time before this guy gets a century Dravid - best of the lot Laxman - 3 starts so far in 5 innings Sachin - looking good but making mistakes Praveen - done a decent job Players who are unprepared but due to lack of time not laziness Sehwag Dhoni Players who are focused but have issues to clear Raina - this guy has serious issues with short pitch deliveries... a big roadblock on his path to captaincy if this continues Ishanth Mukund Mishra Players who were overconfident or lazy - did not prepare even if they were given time Harbhajan - he is completely out of touch. he is trying to hide a burning inferno with a blanket. but still everyone is seeing it... so he put the blanket over himself and pretending to himself that there is no fire. Zaheer - pure complacency with regards to fitness Sreesanth --- i left yuvraj out of this. 1 innings doesnt prove anything What do you guys think?
Cricket Tragic Posted August 12, 2011 Posted August 12, 2011 Idiots ITT who think it will happen. Lemme break it down for you guys who ride the short bus to school. With rain predicted, Levi knows that he can't bat too deep into day 3, as he may end up having ind 8 or 9 down on d5 because he allowed Eng to bat on and on on d3 or even into d4. He will look for 250runs as quick as possible and the declare. You're the idiot for taking this thread seriously.
Cric_is_Life Posted August 12, 2011 Posted August 12, 2011 After the World cup win our players became complacent and took this series lightly especially the ones who played in the world cup. Praveen, Dravid and laxman are exception. They played brilliantly in the WI and they looked prepared to face the challenge in England. Gambhir, I too think is prepared for this series and he might fire sooner than later. I would put Sachin in the second lot. He is failing because of lack of match practice hence unprepared. He should have played in the WI test series as a preparation for the England series. The difference between both these sides are their attitue to win. England showed more hunger and they prepared very well for this series. They were determined to take the No.1 status from us.
Karan114 Posted August 12, 2011 Posted August 12, 2011 The real issue isn't how the players approached it, but how the BCCI approaches it. Since February, the players had the World Cup, IPL, WI tour and England tour with no break at all. Because of this ridiculous itinerary, some players got injured, others skipped the WI tour (obviously no one is going to skip the IPL, nor will the BCCI allow them) while some like Harbhajan were completely burnt out (and even he got injured, eventually). This doesn't absolve players of responsibility for their fitness in cases like Zak (who got a couple of months to get himself fit but still didn't), of course, but they aren't the chief culprits here. The BCCI is. They are doing exactly the same thing for the Australian tour - it immediately follows the West Indian home series and there is just one practice game. As usual we will get battered in the first Test and it will be an uphill task from there, and though the Aussies are weak, historically we have struggled on Australian pitches. Then when they return, they will play the IPL barely fit, more injuries will follow and Test series skipped etc. Its a vicious circle.
Cricket Tragic Posted August 12, 2011 Posted August 12, 2011 After the World cup win our players became complacent and took this series lightly especially the ones who played in the world cup. Praveen' date= Dravid and laxman are exception. They played brilliantly in the WI and they looked prepared to face the challenge in England. Gambhir, I too think is prepared for this series and he might fire sooner than later. I would put Sachin in the second lot. He is failing because of lack of match practice hence unprepared. He should have played in the WI test series as a preparation for the England series. The difference between both these sides are their attitue to win. England showed more hunger and they prepared very well for this series. They were determined to take the No.1 status from us. Interestingly none of the those 3 were part of the WC winning team. England in the Ashes and this series has been like how India were at the WC. Our biggest dream was to win the WC and England's has been to win the Ashes away and reach the number 1 position.
Cricket Tragic Posted August 12, 2011 Posted August 12, 2011 :hysterical::hysterical::hysterical: Its hilarious how these Lankans and Paks (a team so pathetic that it couldn't even beat the West Indies; even in our current poor state, we still beat WI in WI) come on here to laugh at our team, when even while struggling, we are superior to their sorry teams. England may be slaughtering us on this tour but it still doesn't make Lanka any better than India - hell, this team hasn't even won a single Test since Murali retired. It does if you use Lahori logic. England beat them 1-0 and will beat us 3-0 or 4-0. Hence, Sri Lanka>India.
CG Posted August 12, 2011 Posted August 12, 2011 Mate do you have donkeys? Or love them, or are you at school, grow up, sreesanth bowled well in second test got top batsman out, he is coming back fron tennis elbow and is unfit,his pace is down ,but fact is he runs in every ball and trying to take wickets not being defensive , he has been paluged with injuries for last 5 years and always is making a comeback,he is not wanted by captain who scolds him after taking 5 wickets if he gets a longer run in the team he will be better than most of our bowlers as one thing he will not give up !
Rahul Dravid Posted August 12, 2011 Posted August 12, 2011 for me the most overrated cricketer has always been Andrew Flintoff. Sure he has had ashes success and what not.. but really you expected more. atleast i did.
Sarkar Posted August 12, 2011 Posted August 12, 2011 And why are you so proud of what England has done :dontknow: Because he is a paki troll thats what they do laugh at india,s misery
Cricket Tragic Posted August 12, 2011 Posted August 12, 2011 Good article about Flintoff from Atherton... Andrew Flintoff comes up short in great debate Are we allowed to disagree within the pages of The Times? Oh, very well then. This was our celebrated chief sports writer some weeks ago on one of his favourite topics, Freddie Flintoff: “There are those who will tell you that Andrew Flintoff is not a great cricketer. Have no truck with such people.” Better look away now then, Simon. Flintoff will bow out of Test cricket in the manner of a great cricketer this week, hosannas thrown in his path at every turn, but that is a very different thing from having achieved greatness. The hoopla surrounding his farewell will be a true and honest reflection of the place he occupies in the hearts of the majority of England supporters, and that really is the nature of the debate before us: how far can greatness be based on the fleeting things such as popularity, and how far on an analysis that puts him in context and pits his record and significance against the greats of the past? If it is necessary to define greatness, rather than relying on something intuitive and from the gut, we could turn to Barnes again, who seems to have spent his life in search of it in the sporting arena. Of the nature of sporting greatness he has written: “You look for someone who might achieve great things in sport. Napoleon would ask his generals, 'Have you luck?' I ask of athletes, 'have they Redgrave?' Redgrave is the ability to go beyond yourself. It is the ability to commit, day after day, to the goal of winning.” Although this is a good starting point it is too narrow a definition of greatness, and it doesn't necessarily help those individuals in a team sport, because there can be great players in losing teams. Brian Lara is a recent example. Winning alone takes no account of the extracurricular qualities that Flintoff has in abundance, the ability to entertain, to draw in people and to change the mood of the moment with a single delivery or stroke that sets the crowd So let us draw up a greatness ledger for Flintoff, for and against. Is the manner in which a cricketer plays a prerequisite for greatness? Dennis Lillee would argue not, but most great cricketers have played the game in a certain spirit, not necessarily as set out in the preamble to the laws of the game, but a certain spirit nonetheless. Flintoff, without question, has done that. He has played with a smile, with respect for his opponents uppermost in his mind and with a permanent sense of adventure. The moment when he bent down to commiserate with Brett Lee after the Edgbaston Test match in 2005 was the iconic moment of the series and will be used down the ages when erroneous stories are told about how the modern game is a degenerate version of the past. Certainly, Flintoff is the most popular English cricketer of the modern age - you could make a case for saying he is the most popular English cricketer since Denis Compton - and he is certainly the most popular sportsman in England today. After his drink-related episode on the Western Front at the start of the summer, he was cheered to the rafters the next time he walked out to bat. People identify with his bloke-next-door image, even though this is largely the product of spin, and they forgive him his foibles. More than that, they love him for them. Good old Fred! He has a generosity of spirit equal to that of Sir Ian Botham, without the edge and bitterness that characterised Botham's great years. Flintoff comes across as warmer, and although these things are difficult to quantify, I reckon his popularity is more widespread than Botham's. Mothers across the land wouldn't mind Flintoff as a son-in-law; they'd be petrified of the thought of Botham taking their dearest up the aisle. Flintoff's popularity has drawn countless youngsters to the game. We are a country forever in search of heroes, and Flintoff has provided us with one. Nor can it be doubted that Flintoff is capable of great moments, great series and a great period even. His spell at Lord's this summer, which prompted Barnes's eulogy, was a spell of genuinely great fast bowling, during which he communicated with the crowd better than any England cricketer since Botham. He was a great cricketer in the Ashes series of 2005, when he bent a great team to his will, and between 2004 and 2005 his record is that of a great all-round cricketer: taking his wickets and scoring his runs at a rate and averages of which specialist batsmen and bowlers would be proud. There is a but coming, though. Rather a few buts, actually. The biggest - and our chief sports writer will stop reading now if he hasn't already - is his record. Those damn statistics. Without exception in the modern game, greatness has been conferred on those with outstanding records in international cricket. The conferring of greatness must adhere to these strict guidelines out of respect for past heroes. Flintoff has a very good record, but not a great one. His bowling average is marginally higher than his batting average, and three five-wicket hauls and five Test hundreds speak of a cricketer whose performances have fallen short of the very highest standards that great all-rounders should aim for. It is almost as if, like Prufrock, Flintoff saw the moment of his greatness flicker and was afraid. He had a chance to embrace greatness after 2005, but instead the latter half of his Test career has been characterised by injury, drunken escapades and a disastrous tilt at the captaincy. For him, 2005 was the beginning of the end, rather than the start of something special, as it could have been. Until this summer, he had neither taken a five-for nor scored a hundred in any first-class game since that 2005 series. Instead, he has been content to embrace celebrity: chat shows, fly-by-night friends, a charitable foundation and at times an embarrassing exploitation of his position. He was given an opportunity to alter perceptions of himself and his team but he retreated into something more comfortable, more forgiving. How significant a cricketer was he, then, for England? Not as significant as Nasser Hussain or Michael Vaughan, it could be argued. Has he helped to change the culture of the team? Has he helped to transform them into world beaters? Clearly not. England were a workaday outfit when he first appeared, winning occasional big series as in Flintoff's debut summer against South Africa. They are still a mid-ranking team (fifth in the world) winning important series only occasionally. If Flintoff had played every Test match since debut, he would have played 142 Tests, rather than the 79 with which he will finish. In a little more than a decade, then, he has played in marginally over half the Test matches that England have played, mostly because of injury, just occasionally because of form. To describe him as a marginal cricketer would be ridiculous, but he has, at times, been a marginal presence. If the 2009 Ashes series has become Flintoff's Ashes then it is not because, like Botham's Ashes of '81, of performance but because of a decision to announce his retirement before the Lord's Test ensured that would be so: demanding the spotlight without the deeds to back it up. There have been a lot of column inches about a player who has scored one half-century and taken seven wickets at 48.57. Flintoff is an industry now, with his own PR machine, as much as a cricketer. Perhaps this series is more of a reflection of his career as a whole than those who would shower him with greatness would care to admit. A drink-related incident to begin with, the circus surrounding his retirement, the great spell at Lord's, injured since but still hogging the headlines. During this summer, he has touched greatness and been occasionally inspirational; it has been so throughout his career. It is no disgrace to fall short when measured against the very best that the game has to offer. But to be the very best you have to give more than he has been prepared to give. He never really set out to achieve greatness, doesn't yearn for it in the same way as Kevin Pietersen. Flintoff plays for enjoyment, the company of mates, the baubles that success brings and for days like today.
Cricket Tragic Posted August 12, 2011 Posted August 12, 2011 This is what Flintoff himself said... “I have never achieved greatness and I don’t profess to,” he said. “I was asked, 'Have you been a great cricketer?' and the obvious answer is 'no'. “That’s the Bothams, the Sobers, the Imran Khans, the Tendulkars, the Ricky Pontings who achieved greatness over a long period of time, playing Test after Test after Test. “I have performed at times and I am proud to have done that. For the bulk of my career I have played through pain and with injury so to be out on the field was an achievement in some ways - but as for greatness? Nah.
Recommended Posts