India out-reversed on dry pitch

[Vilander]

You have idiots from India like Sid Monga who agrees with everything they say and only write negatively about Indian team. Why do you blame them ? Sid Monga is similar to Laxman Siva and Arun Lal who dont have capacity to think for themselves' date=' so they agree with whatever other commentators say which will usually be biased in favor of their own country.[/quote'] The exponent of that art is Harsha Boghle, he even belittles berates Indian achievement because of his personal inferiority complex.

[Vilander]

Better != Picking up more wickets. India bowler better than England with the new ball' date=' once again relative statement.[/quote'] 202-7 was better than what England did to India definitely.

[Crookbond]

Indian bowlers couldnt do much with the new ball. They were as ineffective as English bowlers. They couldnt beat the batsmen or trouble them. It was only after 50 overs where Ishant got the ball to move back in and that's where 3 wickets fell followed by B Kumar's spell where another couple of wickets fell.

Once again, look at it relatively. Monga says India were "better" than England with the new ball. I think that is an accurate statement to make. It doesn't mean India picked up wickets, it means India were relatively better than England

I just don't understand why the writer in the original article thinks India didnt do well enough to get reverse swing when 6 wickets fell after 50 overs in 1st innings. Even if you think that's conventional swing' date=' then there is no need to get the ball to reverse because the ball was swinging and wickets were falling.[/quote'] Your barometer of bowling well is picking wickets. You CAN bowl well and not pick up wickets.

[Crookbond]

The exponent of that art is Harsha Boghle' date=' he even belittles berates Indian achievement because of his personal inferiority complex.[/quote'] To much hate for Harsha Bhogle on this forum. Here's an inferiority complex display by Harsha during commentary Nasser - When are India going to be in FIFA WC? Harsha - Better not to participate than being kicked out in the 1st round. Common guys! Lets not be like the ones we complain about all the time. Check the post which I replied to. 202-7 doesn't mean India reverse the ball or England bowled well which is what I am contending against.

[NareshK]

Once again, look at it relatively. Monga says India were "better" than England with the new ball. I think that is an accurate statement to make. It doesn't mean India picked up wickets, it means India were relatively better than England Your barometer of bowling well is picking wickets. You CAN bowl well and not pick up wickets.

I have seen the game. Eng bowlers didnt particularly get better reverse than India which I think is illogical. How are you coming to that conclusion ?

[NareshK]

To much hate for Harsha Bhogle on this forum. Here's an inferiority complex display by Harsha during commentary Nasser - When are India going to be in FIFA WC? Harsha - Better not to participate than being kicked out in the 1st round. Common guys! Lets not be like the ones we complain about all the time. Check the post which I replied to. 202-7 doesn't mean India reverse the ball or England bowled well which is what I am contending against.

So what you mean is India got conventional swing, right ? Then what was the need to get reverse swing ?

[Crookbond]

I have seen the game. Eng bowlers didnt particularly bowl better than India. How are you coming to that conclusion ?

:wall: Monga isn't saying England bowlers were better than India. He says, England got more reverse than India or at least they were trying to get more reverse by using grey area tactics like throwing the ball one bounce to the WK, sticking their boots out so they can touch the ball with their spikes. If anything, Monga is actually saying that England used "dirty" tactics to make the ball reverse and they benefited albeit marginally. Lets not get into all kulcha mode before trying to completely understand things. I hope we had a Meira Kumar on our phorum.

[Old guy]

So what you mean is India got conventional swing' date=' right ? Then what was the need to get reverse swing ?[/quote'] Exactly..also way reverse works you cannot get both at same time ...

[NareshK]

:wall: Monga isn't saying England bowlers were better than India. He says' date= England got more reverse than India or at least they were trying to get more reverse by using grey area tactics like throwing the ball one bounce to the WK, sticking their boots out so they can touch the ball with their spikes. If anything, Monga is actually saying that England used "dirty" tactics to make the ball reverse and they benefited albeit marginally. Lets not get into all kulcha mode before trying to completely understand things. I hope we had a Meira Kumar on our phorum.

This is exactly what I'm saying. There's nothing to suggest this.

[Crookbond]

This is exactly what I'm saying. There's nothing to suggest this.

Please read my post completely. The article mentions of instances where England used grey tactics to roughen up the ball. Clearly, that is trying.