Ram Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 No' date=' you can check the length and lines in cricinfo hawk eye and i am sure you will find that. Our bowlers gave more four balls than theirs which released the pressure, even Ashwin bowled lot of short balls.[/quote'] Is that why we could only manage being 214-2 with 5 mins to go for stumps on day 2?
rkt.india Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 Is that why we could only manage being 214-2 with 5 mins to go for stumps on day 2? yes that is why we could only manage 282 from 214/2. It shows how good they bowled and came back while we lost from good position at 214/2 and 27/4. Their side was more depleted than ours. We had a full strength side. They missed their 2 first choice pacers and 1 first choice opener. One of their fast bowler was playing his 3rd test and one was coming back after one year and was not even selected if others were fit and the same bowler takes 5-fer. It shows the kind of depth they still have. After 27/4, they should not have scored more than 150, while we let them scored 240.
vamos_rafa Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 yes that is why we could only manage 282 from 214/2. It shows how good they bowled and came back while we lost from good position at 214/2 and 27/4. Their side was more depleted than ours. We had a full strength side. They missed their 2 first choice pacers and 1 first choice opener. One of their fast bowler was playing his 3rd test and one was coming back after one year and was not even selected if others were fit and the same bowler takes 5-fer. It shows the kind of depth they still have. After 27/4, they should not have scored more than 150, while we let them scored 240. The way I would like to put it is, we did not seize the vital moments of the match. It was even-steven always, but the difference was that when we were on top, we let the advantage fritter away, while they clinged onto the clutch moments.
Ram Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 yes that is why we could only manage 282 from 214/2. It shows how good they bowled and came back while we lost from good position at 214/2 and 27/4. Their side was more depleted than ours. We had a full strength side. They missed their 2 first choice pacers and 1 first choice opener. One of their fast bowler was playing his 3rd test and one was coming back after one year and was not even selected if others were fit and the same bowler takes 5-fer. It shows the kind of depth they still have. After 27/4, they should not have scored more than 150, while we let them scored 240. We can play this stats game all night, but I am not quite sure how you can possibly point at numbers to prove their bowling attack was better than ours, especially when we had them at 165-8 in the 2nd innings.
rkt.india Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 The way I would like to put it is' date=' we did not seize the vital moments of the match. It was even-steven always, but the difference was that when we were on top, we let the advantage fritter away, while they clinged onto the clutch moments.[/quote'] Agree.
rkt.india Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 We can play this stats game all night' date=' but I am not quite sure how you can possibly point at numbers to prove their bowling attack was better than ours, especially when we had them at 165-8 in the 2nd innings.[/quote'] But we still let them score runs, which they did not that was the difference. After 27/4, on that pitch, they should not have gone over 150 in first place. Zaheer was seriously disappointed and always did too little too late in both the innings with old ball, nothing with new ball or when he had to come to the party. He bowled very poorly with the new ball according to me. No effort, was just releasing the ball in the hope to swing it, no pace too, had to put a bit more effort and pace with the new ball, was economical and beat the bat, but was not straight enough and bowled wide outside of stump.
saneindian Posted December 30, 2011 Author Posted December 30, 2011 The way I would like to put it is' date=' we did not seize the vital moments of the match. It was even-steven always, but the difference was that when we were on top, we let the advantage fritter away, while they clinged onto the clutch moments.[/quote'] Some asinine field settings and obviously lethargic fielding was the difference between the two bowling sides.
peterparker Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 But we still let them score runs' date=' which they did not that was the difference. After 27/4, on that pitch, they should not have gone over 150 in first place. Zaheer was seriously disappointed and always did too little too late in both the innings with old ball, nothing with new ball or when he had to come to the party. He bowled very poorly with the new ball according to me. No effort, was just releasing the ball in the hope to swing it, no pace too, had to put a bit more effort and pace with the new ball, was economical and beat the bat, but was not straight enough and bowled wide outside of stump.[/quote'] true..from 26-3 ishant took one more wicket and i thought that now they will run through the sides..but allowed them to score 240..this is the critical moment..in south africa..australia were in same position and got bowled for 40 odd runs
achilles Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 This is the worst possible news we could've got. We can't seem to handle this second-rate attack despite our maharathi's. [Troll mode = ON] Lets hope Dhoni fails in this match as well. The murmurs, which have already started, will get the much needed boost. [/off]
peterparker Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 This is the worst possible news we could've got. We can't seem to handle this second-rate attack despite our maharathi's. [Troll mode = ON] Lets hope Dhoni fails in this match as well. The murmurs, which have already started, will get the much needed boost. [/off] it takes only one ball to dislogde a batsman..test cricket is a bowlers game not batsman...though indian fans are only obsessed by batting
Malcolm Merlyn Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 We may actually win this.see what happwned in hobart,durban,wanderers etc. Sent from my GT-I9103 using Tapatalk
peterparker Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 Thats good batting from Hussey and Ponting not to blame our bowlers.It always happens in Australia when the ball loses its shine and stops swinging. We were 210 for 2 with just 110 runs behind.Yet conceded 50 runs lead.Thats were we lost the match.Not taking the lead despite getting the best batting conditions of the match. the lengths of indian bowlers became shot so it means that they were allowed to settle..they should have kept on bowling fullish only..as still seam movement was there..
peterparker Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 its gone now for india..pakistan were able to bowl out australia on 127 on this same grassy track..but our bowlers lack this penetration..
wobblydoggy Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 Indian bowlers will have fun on this. The bowling departments are very good for both teams. Batting is the concern for India. How do you teach a bunch of India to play good pace attack? Where is the coach? You dont rely on turning pitches to win your games for you You keep saying we cannot play spin, it works both ways guys. I think Sydney is your best chance myself
deathmonger Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 You dont rely on turning pitches to win your games for you You keep saying we cannot play spin, it works both ways guys. I think Sydney is your best chance myself adelaide too.
kabira Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 Their batting is even worse than ours in terms of form and experience. We need to bat well, no question about it, if don't bat well, we are not winning anything..bowling will do their job.
kabira Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 You dont rely on turning pitches to win your games for you You keep saying we cannot play spin, it works both ways guys. I think Sydney is your best chance myself Huh?? so Durban, Perth etc were spinning tracks?? I think England rely too much on seaming wickets...thats what even one of your expert columinist suggested.
rkt.india Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 Their batting is even worse than ours in terms of form and experience. We need to bat well, no question about it, if don't bat well, we are not winning anything..bowling will do their job. But they are always better batsmen of b=genuine fast bowling playing on fast and bouncy surfaces than Indians who play on low and slow pitches in India.
peterparker Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 But they are always better batsmen of b=genuine fast bowling playing on fast and bouncy surfaces than Indians who play on low and slow pitches in India. but there batsman struggle against moving ball..our bowlers must focus on this only..n all teams have achieved the results..
deathmonger Posted December 30, 2011 Posted December 30, 2011 but there batsman struggle against moving ball..our bowlers must focus on this only..n all teams have achieved the results.. yes. bowlers bowled too short. zaheer was also not at best in first day. also ishant should pitch it up.
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