Ami i the only one who thinks Philander played Sensibly?

[Lord]

btw I don't think we'd have gone for it either

[Old guy]

btw I don't think we'd have gone for it either

18 runs in 3 overs ? With ashwin playing ..we would have gone for it every time Have u forgotten game against windies :hysterical:

[Lord]

18 runs in 3 overs ? With ashwin playing ..we would have gone for it every time Have u forgotten game against windies :hysterical:

yeah 2 needed in 2 balls with 2 wickets in hand and he blocked it.I remember :giggle: also dont forget the game in WI when we didnt go for 90 odd target in 15 overs IIRC

[putrevus]

Once you think about loss after displaying so much courage and fortitude all day you have erased most of your hard work, that is what happened with SA. Indian players should be the last people who can rub it in, they refused to chased 90 odd runs in WI.

[Lord]

Once you think about loss after displaying so much courage and fortitude all day you have erased most of your hard work' date=' that is what happened with SA.[/quote'] ++

[urbestfriend]

yeah 2 needed in 2 balls with 2 wickets in hand and he blocked it.I remember :giggle: also dont forget the game in WI when we didnt go for 90 odd target in 15 overs IIRC

Yeah...We needed 55 runs in 15 overs and 10 runs in last 3 overs in that Mumbai match :giggle:

[Detonator]

This is India's game when day 5 started. ADBV and Faf almost snatched the victory from us. A freaky run out changed the game. SA shld ve gone for the victory after all those hardwork. I m sorry but our pacers are just looking for lucky breaks, and SA missed that chance.

[Old guy]

yeah 2 needed in 2 balls with 2 wickets in hand and he blocked it.I remember :giggle: also dont forget the game in WI when we didnt go for 90 odd target in 15 overs IIRC

Totally different from this scenario 3 wickets and 1 wicket in hand are different thing He blocked one ball so that we don't lose it and attacked last one Here they had opportunity to attack and if they lose one they can defend ..

[Lord]

Totally different from this scenario 3 wickets and 1 wicket in hand are different thing He blocked one ball so that we don't lose it and attacked last one Here they had opportunity to attack and if they lose one they can defend ..

c'mon that was just for 2 balls and we had 2 wickets in hand,not 1.still he blocked 2nd last ball. here they had to bat 3 overs,if they had lost one early,it'd been more difficult for Tahir and injured Morkel to bat out 2 overs

[Old guy]

c'mon that was just for 2 balls and we had 2 wickets in hand,not 1.still he blocked 2nd last ball. here they had to bat 3 overs,if they had lost one early,it'd been more difficult for Tahir and injured Morkel to bat out 2 overs

Then attack just in last over Also ur forgetting ash win did get us near from similar position We could have defended 6 overs ago too like these guys did

[vvvslaxman]

considering history was at hand and it would mean a huge inspiration and stuff of legends for decades,they should have gone for it. they could have lost. but its a shortsighted approach. a win like this could have meant a lot for their cricket for the next decade. the prize was too big to be ignored.but knowing their past record, I expected it.

They have already won chasing 414. No team would risk losing especially SA who often tines used to play for. Draw from first day when they toured india

[vvvslaxman]

We just don't factor in things like nerves, pressure, fear of losing. Remember how India abandoned chase very early in windies. Duncan said if Rahul can't score nobody can. Mind works mysteriously under pressure.

[Lord]

Then attack just in last over Also ur forgetting ash win did get us near from similar position We could have defended 6 overs ago too like these guys did

thats because RPO was around 3 and he got us close by ones and twos whereas here it was 5 RPO so they needed to bit more aggresive. both shut shop with victory in sight though

[Lord]

We just don't factor in things like nerves' date=' pressure, fear of losing. Remember how India abandoned chase very early in windies. Duncan said if Rahul can't score nobody can. Mind works mysteriously under pressure.[/quote'] If they had fear of losing they'd blocked all day no.it was difficult chase from the start. they got so close by positive batting and then just threw it all away:headshake:

[Old guy]

thats because RPO was around 3 and he got us close by ones and twos whereas here it was 5 RPO so they needed to bit more aggresive. both shut shop with victory in sight though

5 rpo is easy if even one of them took risk on one ball If he gets out they can defend

[maniac]

I agree with C_G above....even if Philander or Steyn had got out.....It had a injured Morkel and Tahir who is your typical X1 to follow.....That would mean it would be India's game to lose. I still think it was a smart move....at that point no one wanted to lsoe

[Lord]

5 rpo is easy if even one of them took risk on one ball If he gets out they can defend

3 RPO is even easier.2 from 2 balls is even easier thats all I'm saying.not defending Proteas

[vvvslaxman]

5 rpo is easy if even one of them took risk on one ball If he gets out they can defend

How? If Shami bowls an inswinging yorker to new batsman like Tahir match will be over in 2 balls. They know the next 2 wickets are totally useless. So it was like they were 9 down. one wicket they could have lost it very well.

[maniac]

5 rpo is easy if even one of them took risk on one ball If he gets out they can defend

Tahir is a bunny and clearly no confidence in him to last even 3-4 balls and Morkel was out of the game.....it's easy in hindsight and come up with scenarios but if logic dictates that was realistically the last S.A wicket

[Old guy]

Tahir is a bunny and clearly no confidence in him to last even 3-4 balls and Morkel was out of the game.....it's easy in hindsight and come up with scenarios but if logic dictates that was realistically the last S.A wicket

Ah..hindsight I am actually happy they did that cos match was gone for sure :hysterical: