Ami i the only one who thinks Philander played Sensibly?

[zep1706]

So basically we are wimpy as well.

YES!!

Atleast they have chased 414 in perth' date=' saved a test in England, Adelaide now this. [/quote'] How is that relevant? It was one of the best chasing performance until the last 3 overs, no one is denying that.

[youngindia]

.. run a ball would get them. How do you take run a ball against bouncers without taking chances?

they should be taking the chances. they should be taking the risks.that's precisely the point the price was rare and very big..its worth it.

[youngindia]

It's similar to India not trying to get those 85 runs against West Indies in 2011.

I don't agree with this. they made a cricketing decision that raina and Vijay could not time the ball properly on a sluggish wicket to keep the run rate going.that was just "not gambling" yesterday they didn't take some risk,not even high risk.

[vvvslaxman]

YES!! How is that relevant? It was one of the best chasing performance until the last 3 overs, no one is denying that.

Poo pooing them as wimps based on the mindset of two batsmen out in the middle is discredit to them. One was new to crease. One was barely a lower order batsman. With one injured batsman and a hack to come they made the call of not going for it. I respect that. Smith respected that. They are no wimps.

[vvvslaxman]

they should be taking the chances. they should be taking the risks.that's precisely the point the price was rare and very big..its worth it.

How? If they are that good wouldn't they be batting at the top? If you think taking chance means swinging wildly then i would be furious if they get out. I am sorry i would not want my side to lose a test after battling for more than 100 overs. That will be even more heart breaking than not winning. The fact that you guys think teams can take chance at the risk of losing doesn't make any sense.

[Cricketics]

I am glad we weren't in this position. Had our bats scored 440 with 7 and Ashwin and Merchant Sharma would have played dot stuff in the last 3 overs, they would have been the most wanted criminals in India :hysterical:

[zep1706]

I don't agree with this. they made a cricketing decision that raina and Vijay could not time the ball properly on a sluggish wicket to keep the run rate going.that was just "not gambling" .

Except India were only 3 down with Laxman, Dravid still batting and Kohli, Dhoni and the tail including Harbhajan yet to come. You should back yourself to bat out 15 overs in that situation. Just bat out 10-12 overs without taking any risk and see if you can get close. If it doesn't work out then go for a draw but at least give it a try. India were the #1 team at that time ffs. Grow a pair. Can you imagine Steve Waugh's team abandoning a chase like that?

[zep1706]

Poo pooing them as wimps based on the mindset of two batsmen out in the middle is discredit to them. One was new to crease. One was barely a lower order batsman. With one injured batsman and a hack to come they made the call of not going for it. I respect that. Smith respected that. They are no wimps.

I find it very hard to believe that Steyn who was new to the crease was not instructed by the team management how to approach it.

[vvvslaxman]

I find it very hard to believe that Steyn who was new to the crease was not instructed by the team management how to approach it.

INstruction is one thing, executing is another thing. Did you see how Amla got bowled. Just because Fauf and ABDV played with incredible skill it doesn't mean everyone follow them will play with same skill.

[zep1706]

Why would you refuse the singles? There was no risk involved in those. At least get it down to 12 and keep the chase alive till the last two balls. Don't tell me there was extra risk involved in that.

[vvvslaxman]

Why would you refuse the singles? There was no risk involved in those. At least get it down to 12 and keep the chase alive till the last two balls. Don't tell me there was extra risk involved in that.

He didn't trust Steyn vs Zak? Steyn though wanted the single. So you can't call him a wimp. Philander made that call on his own. Branding entire South African as wimps based on the judgemental call of one batsman is pretty poor.

[vvvslaxman]

134.5 Khan to Philander, no run, wide outside off stump and Philander lets it go through to the keeper and now Dhoni brings the field up Basically india also wanted Steyn on strike. Seeing the previous over he probably thought Steyn would give it away. Whatever reason it is his call.

[zep1706]

INstruction is one thing' date=' executing is another thing.[/quote'] They were most probably instructed not to go for it and they followed it. I don't think Steyn would be told to do his own thing in that situation. So you can get out by blocking too right? That is the point I have been trying to make all along. Refusing the singles does not involve any extra risk.

[zep1706]

He didn't trust Steyn vs Zak? Steyn though wanted the single. So you can't call him a wimp. Philander made that call on his own. Branding entire South African as wimps based on the judgemental call of one batsman is pretty poor.

It's a team game.

[vvvslaxman]

They were most probably instructed not to go for it and they followed it. I don't think Steyn would be told to do his own thing in that situation. .

Where is that probability coming from. No Smith did not instruct anything as he later confirmed. They didn't pressurize them with instructions. As a tailender last thing you would need is screw up the greatest match saving effort of Fauf and ABDV.

[zep1706]

Where is that probability coming from. No Smith did not instruct anything as he later confirmed. They didn't pressurize them with instructions. As a tailender last thing you would need is screw up the greatest match saving effort of Fauf and ABDV.

The probably come from the fact that unlike you I'm not privy to their dressing room conversations. And I don't trust Smith when he says that they didn't give them any instruction. It's a common practice in cricket.

[vvvslaxman]

It's a team game.

No not when you are batting. Entire team don't face the bowlers at the same time. If he gets out and triggers a collapse blame will fall on him not the team. Sure we will brand them as chokers. But still responsibility would fall on one guy. How many times Afridi gets blamed for that. One guy triggering a collapse.

[vvvslaxman]

The probably come from the fact that unlike you I'm not privy to their dressing room conversations.

Smith later told he respected their call. So we cannot assume things. Steyn was not happy for denying single. That should have been a clue that there was no instruction from anyone.

[zep1706]

No not when you are batting. Entire team don't face the bowlers at the same time. If he gets out and triggers a collapse blame will fall on him not the team. Sure we will brand them as chokers. But still responsibility would fall on one guy. How many times Afridi gets blamed for that. One guy triggering a collapse.

At the end of the day it's a team game. You don't attribute win or loss to individuals. A player who's scored zero is still a winner if his team wins. Similar logic here.

[maniac]

People getting upset with S.A playing for a draw,Question....how many of u would have called them chokers and have a hahahah thread for them had they lost overshadowing all their efforts?