Follow on or Bat?

[The Outsider]

Hussain seems to be the only sane voice out there, "Dravid's job is to win the series". Forget romanticism, talk about professionalism guys.

[King]

Naseer and Shwetabh have similar approach. Naseer backs not enforcing follow on and he reckons Rahul has done "THE" right thing. Naseer's thinking is that lest the series is now won even if it is only 1-0. I think it could be faintest of chances but England still have a chance. I don't reckon England don't have a chance at all. India chased over 400 runs against WI in WI once so I fail to understand how it is impossible for England to even the series. I know the chances are minimal but they have a chance.

[Cricketics]

i m mighty pissed damn it.. they shou ld have gone for the follow on

[King]

Hussain seems to be the only sane voice out there, "Dravid's job is to win the series". Forget romanticism, talk about professionalism guys.

I would say what Botham says, this is not my type of cricket :regular_smile: I will never really reckon we can lose if we have over 300 runs lead and when England has only once scored over 300 runs. I would rather back my bowlers than England's batters. :regular_smile:

[The Outsider]

I think it could be faintest of chances but England still have a chance. I don't reckon England don't have a chance at all. India chased over 400 runs against WI in WI once so I fail to understand how it is impossible for England to even the series. I know the chances are minimal but they have a chance.

There is no chance for England, Ravi. No chance at all. The least India can survive here is 60 overs which will mean close to 500 for them to win which closes them out of the game.

[Donny]

Donny' date=' dont you remmeber Australia never enforcing follow ons after drubbing that got in Eden Gardens...I would love to see you comment on those decisions...The one I remember is in Perth, 300+ lead and still chose to bat against Pakistan[/quote'] Well, actually, the lead was just over 200 and Ponting had McGrath & Warne. He didn't need Warne as Pigeon took 8/24. :regular_smile: Entirely different scenario, kabira. Both first innings were finished in two days. Ponting had a lot more time to play with. The Aussies won on the 4th. morning - by 491 runs.

[ludhianvi]

You get 2.3 bucks for every buck you put in so make 1.3. So I'm richer by $266.67.:D

shwetab, is that for an Indian win?:D

[King]

There is no chance for England' date=' Ravi. No chance at all. The least India can survive here is 60 overs which will mean close to 500 for them to win which closes them out of the game.[/quote'] As I said it is going to pinch hard this decision if India cannot bowl England out second time. If England end up drawing the game with just about 2-3 wickets remaining I will squarely blame this decision not to enforce follow on.

[The Outsider]

shwetab' date=' is that for an Indian win?:D[/quote'] Yeah, though the rain is making me a tiny bit jittery.:D

[The Outsider]

As I said it is going to pinch hard this decision if India cannot bowl England out second time. If England end up drawing the game with just about 2-3 wickets remaining I will squarely blame this decision not to enforce follow on.

Not really, Ravi. If we win this match it's a bonus but Dravid's "job", as Hussain aptly put it, is to win the series. Most of us play sports as pastimes and are very passionate about it but we have to get think about how professionals would take decisions at times.

[ludhianvi]

Yeah' date=' though the rain is making me a tiny bit jittery.:D[/quote'] perhaps, we should have a bet365.com thread for analsys:D

[kabira]

>Well, actually, the lead was just over 200 and Ponting had McGrath & Warne. so, you had best chance to win by innings and close the game on day 3 itself...Bowlers had only bowled 75 odd overs....not too tired..It took Aussies only 31 over to bowl them out.. so i m not sure why they did not enforce follow on..I must say, poor decision.

[The Outsider]

Donny since you are criticizing Dravid and supporting Ponting, what about the 1st Ashes test last year when Australia had a 450 run lead and the match ended up well in the 5th day. Moreover, the series was still open at that time not sealed like here. In fact, I can't recall a single time when Australia have imposed a follow on after Calcutta '01 despite having numerous opportunities to do so, except once against WI

[King]

Not really' date=' Ravi. If we win this match it's a bonus but Dravid's "job", as Hussain aptly put it, is to win the series. Most of us play sports as pastimes and are very passionate about it but we have to get think about how professionals would take decisions at times.[/quote'] I don't think so Shwetabh. At every level decisions are made and every game is important in its own right. For me the games that I play during the summer is as important for me to win as it is for Rahul to win a test match. Decision making across different levels of cricket is important in its own right. A loss whether at premier club level or domestic level or at international level, they all hurt. The decision making is usually influenced by the character of the men that take the decision. I wasn't least surprised Rahul decided to not enforce follow on. Test series is important but so is a test match. Remember how an individual test match (1st test of this series) was so much important in influencing the test series. Every test match is important and an overseas one more so because it is not easy to win an overseas test match. A test match played over 5 days takes a lot out of players and a draw is never really a great result for the effort. If you ask Anil Kumble he would rather remember his 100 in a winning test match than a dour draw. Similarly England will treat a draw in this test match as almost a win simply because they were down and out this morning.

[Dhondy]

Really don't know about this one. India sent down a 103 overs in England's first innings. Would it have stretched them physically to bowl another 100 or 125? I think so. Imagine England at 200 for 1. It's not hard to imagine jitters going down some Indian spines, is it? Dravid made the safe decision by his team, keeping India's poor 4th innings record in mind, and to maximize the Kumble advantage. We'll never know if India would have bowled England out cheaply, but following on does funny things to people. Some people can't stand the pressure, while others revel in the situation because they feel there's nothing to lose. Right now though, eyeing the swing that the English bowlers are getting under the cloud cover, Dravid will be having second thoughts about his decision. It would have been hard for him to resist the natural macho instinct that sportsmen have to make the opposition grovel. He would also have been aware that the English are desperate to draw any sort of moral victory from this. Rest assured that if England bowl India out for a 100, even if they go on to lose the match, the English press would hail Anderson and co as the second coming of Christ. And if they draw the match, India's 1-0 would be written off as a slice of luck down to the Lords weather and the toss at Trent Bridge. The English are masters at that kind of thing. The only way to shut them up is to beat them comprehensively, as India well should in this match. A draw would be taken as an English victory, rest assured, and it would leave us in the ridiculous position of 4th behind Sri Lanka on the Test table despite being level on points, while a victory would leave us on 109, tied with England, but placed 3rd on decimals. Dravid would have been aware of all this, so it was a difficult decision, but I'll have no sympathy for him if England get out of this with an honourable draw.

[Donny]

Donny since you are criticizing Dravid and supporting Ponting, what about the 1st Ashes test last year when Australia had a 450 run lead and the match ended up well in the 5th day. Moreover, the series was still open at that time not sealed like here. In fact, I can't recall a single time when Australia have imposed a follow on after Calcutta '01 despite having numerous opportunities to do so.

Why are you asking me ??? I'm not Ricky Ponting. Anyway, I was NOT supporting him. I simply gave my thoughts.

[Gaurav]

Minimum overs remaining today around 60. India lead by 354 runs with 7 wickets remaining. When should India declare? What say you? I say as soon as we hit 450 :D

[The Outsider]

Why are you asking me ??? I'm not Ricky Ponting. Anyway, I was NOT supporting him. I simply gave my thoughts.

I simply asked for your thoughts on that decision.

[Gaurav]

Rest assured that if England bowl India out for a 100' date=' even if they go on to lose the match, the English press would hail Anderson and co as the second coming of Christ. And if they draw the match, India's 1-0 would be written off as a slice of luck down to the Lords weather and the toss at Trent Bridge. [b']The English are masters at that kind of thing.

I can see that you have been in UK long enough :hysterical: I agree with you.

[The Outsider]

At every level decisions are made and every game is important in its own right.

Every game is important but with varying importance to the result. Let's face it, it's not important for India to win this test match because the greater goal of a series win will be accomplished even with a draw. If a win comes, it's a bonus.