Don't Panic,this is what we expected

[Cricket_Hacker]

Seriously,isn't this the kind of defeats we were predicting before the start of the series? Everyone would have been happy before the series if we were 2-1 down after 4 matches So cheer up :icflove:

[sourab10forever]

yap....we all are being greedy

[dangerman1985]

yes we expected too much from these IPL hacks

[zep1706]

No I didn't expect the team to get rolled over in 2 days by a very average England side without their strike bowler.

[BlueBee]

No I didn't expect the team to get rolled over in 2 days by a very average England side without their strike bowler.

+1

[gs]

No I didn't expect the team to get rolled over in 2 days by a very average England side without their strike bowler.

I thought Moen bhai was their strike bowler :giggle:

[Kalia_Test]

Better to be a pessimist - You are either right or pleasantly surprised :winky: Innings defeat with 8 ducks in each innings for India I say :two_thumbs_up:

[CSK Fan]

The worst thing about Dhoni's team is that they always give a hope spot. They will do well some sessions, be on top in some matches. Everyone will think they had a turn around. Then we will have some baffling decisions, some lack-luster performance and bingo!

[FreakazoiD]

The worst thing about Dhoni's team is that they always give a hope spot. They will do well some sessions' date= be on top in some matches. Everyone will think they had a turn around. Then we will have some baffling decisions, some lack-luster performance and bingo!

I think the last session they did well was the post-lunch session at Lord's, which was 3 weeks ago. There have been 22 sessions since then, and 8 days of test cricket. Which, exactly, have they done well in or been on top?

[CSK Fan]

I think the last session they did well was the post-lunch session at Lord's' date=' which was 3 weeks ago. There have been 22 sessions since then, and 8 days of test cricket. Which, exactly, have they done well in or been on top?[/quote'] When they have teams 6 down and then let them go, etc

[rkt.india]

I think the last session they did well was the post-lunch session at Lord's' date=' which was 3 weeks ago. There have been 22 sessions since then, and 8 days of test cricket. Which, exactly, have they done well in or been on top?[/quote'] They won one session at Old Trafford, 3rd day, morning session when they picked 3 wickets for 80 odd runs.

[bowl_out]

^^ I would term that as a drawn session, and not something that India won.

[FreakazoiD]

They won one session at Old Trafford' date=' 3rd day, morning session when they picked 3 wickets for 80 odd runs.[/quote'] Hardly. One of those 3 wickets was a night watchman. 2/80 in a session when you've put 150 on the board looks like a lost session to me. But if its come down to clutching at straws...

[rkt.india]

Hardly. One of those 3 wickets was a night watchman. 2/80 in a session when you've put 150 on the board looks like a lost session to me. But if its come down to clutching at straws...

Because Indian did not bowl in conditions they batted and got out to 150. You do not look at whether India got bowled at 150 or not. In any match, 3/80 in a session won by bowling side and that is how they counted too.

[FreakazoiD]

Because Indian did not bowl in conditions they batted and got out to 150. You do not look at whether India got bowled at 150 or not. In any match' date=' 3/80 in a session won by bowling side and that is how they counted too.[/quote'] Right. This is a totally pointless argument but since I've got some free time let me humour you. Let's assume India gets bowled out for 100 in a session (not unreasonable given the 2nd innings performance at OT), then England score 250 over 3 sessions losing 3, 3 and 4 wickets in these sessions for 83 runs each. And then India get bowled out for 100 in a session again, losing by innings and 50 runs. Yet by your logic, India actually won 3 sessions but lost only 2 in an innings defeat. :haha:

[rkt.india]

Right. This is a totally pointless argument but since I've got some free time let me humour you. Let's assume India gets bowled out for 100 in a session (not unreasonable given the 2nd innings performance at OT), then England score 250 over 3 sessions losing 3, 3 and 4 wickets in these sessions for 83 runs each. And then India get bowled out for 100 in a session again, losing by innings and 50 runs. Yet by your logic, India actually won 3 sessions but lost only 2 in an innings defeat. :haha:

In a test match, a horrendous session is enough to lose you match like we had the morning session day 1 and then evening session day 3 and you can only make a come back after that only if the opposition team goes through similar sessions too. In your example, those sessions won might not be enough to make amends for one horrendous session lost.