India's Defeat is of Their Own Making

[veer]

the likes of dhondy' date=' cc and lurker r probably pakis, but just incase ther r indians they should be stripped of their citizenship[/quote'] take it easy dude... they are sons of vibrant democratic India.. and debating an issue is always good..

[Guest HariSampath]

Lurks....you are talking of playing out 70 overs...ok, pls answer me, I challenge you it is not possible for ANY team you name to play out 7 OVERS in the following circumstances.. *** Batsman plays a ball to gully along the ground.....howzaaat..he is given out LBW *** Batsman.takes a swipe at a wide, ball rolls over for 5 wides...and howzaaaat..given out caught behind *** batsman lofts a ball to longon, caught within 10 yards of boundary ( Aussie batsman)...and umpire calls for 3rd umpire replay, and batter ruled notout...sixer awarded *** batsman pulls a ball to squareleg boundary....fielder fumbles twice , ball drops on ground twice...fielder picks it up and appeals....umpire gives OUT... ***..batsman coverdrives for boundary....howzaaat ...given out legbefore..lbw... IF the above happens and you STILL say "ok, umpiring was bad but batting team should have played 70 overs...."....HOW ?????? How ...Lurks ???? just tell us all

[Lurker]

Lurks....you are talking of playing out 70 overs...ok, pls answer me, I challenge you it is not possible for ANY team you name to play out 7 OVERS in the following circumstances.. *** Batsman plays a ball to gully along the ground.....howzaaat..he is given out LBW *** Batsman.takes a swipe at a wide, ball rolls over for 5 wides...and howzaaaat..given out caught behind *** batsman lofts a ball to longon, caught within 10 yards of boundary ( Aussie batsman)...and umpire calls for 3rd umpire replay, and batter ruled notout...sixer awarded *** batsman pulls a ball to squareleg boundary....fielder fumbles twice , ball drops on ground twice...fielder picks it up and appeals....umpire gives OUT... ***..batsman coverdrives for boundary....howzaaat ...given out legbefore..lbw... IF the above happens and you STILL say "ok, umpiring was bad but batting team should have played 70 overs...."....HOW ?????? How ...Lurks ???? just tell us all

You are just being paranoid Hari, arent you? Give me all those 5 example with regards to India playing 70 overs. You are giving example of Aussies batting and everything else. Please show me how many umpiring errors costed India wickets in 2nd innings and what %age does it form of the total. xx

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Guest HariSampath]

You are just being paranoid Hari, arent you? Give me all those 5 example with regards to India playing 70 overs. You are giving example of Aussies batting and everything else. Please show me how many umpiring errors costed India wickets in 2nd innings and what %age does it form of the total. xx

me ?? paranoaid ?? wtf...just see the replays...Hussey out twice......and more importantly, answer my questions...aussie batters never out....India batters anyways out....and u call this a test match ??? have a few and hit the bed Lurks, you need it

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[prince40]

Lurks....you are talking of playing out 70 overs...ok, pls answer me, I challenge you it is not possible for ANY team you name to play out 7 OVERS in the following circumstances.. *** Batsman plays a ball to gully along the ground.....howzaaat..he is given out LBW *** Batsman.takes a swipe at a wide, ball rolls over for 5 wides...and howzaaaat..given out caught behind *** batsman lofts a ball to longon, caught within 10 yards of boundary ( Aussie batsman)...and umpire calls for 3rd umpire replay, and batter ruled notout...sixer awarded *** batsman pulls a ball to squareleg boundary....fielder fumbles twice , ball drops on ground twice...fielder picks it up and appeals....umpire gives OUT... ***..batsman coverdrives for boundary....howzaaat ...given out legbefore..lbw... IF the above happens and you STILL say "ok, umpiring was bad but batting team should have played 70 overs...."....HOW ?????? How ...Lurks ???? just tell us all

lol SPOT ON mate:two_thumbs_up::two_thumbs_up::two_thumbs_up:

[Lurker]

me ?? paranoaid ?? wtf...just see the replays...Hussey out twice......and more importantly' date=' answer my questions...aussie batters never out....India batters anyways out....and u call this a test match ??? have a few and hit the bed Lurks, you need it[/quote'] Making snide comments doesnt make for a good response Hari. :haha: My question remains - All those example were of entire 5 day of this Test. Show me 5 such examples in 1 single innings. If Indian team of 11 cant play out 70 overs for a draw, and I will not complain against Dravid and Gangs, then I feel they did not perform. Simple. So where are those 5 examples in 2 session 70 over game?

[Lurker]

shall we start from the beginning ? Why jump to the 4th innings ? Lets start from Day 1 ... shall we ?

What is there to discuss on that? I thought I had already made my stand to you clear on this when I asked you to check what I had mentioned to Kabira earlier. Heck I have argued about 5-6 threads on whole software testing process in a cricket thread! And yes the mistakes on day 1 doesnt absolve of mistakes commited on day 5, dont mix the issue.

[Guest HariSampath]

don't descend to moronic levels Lurks....you bring any team to me...if your top batters are given out ridiculously....and my top batters are given notout , no matter what , at least twice each...I win by a huge margin....doubt it ?? bring a team...I bring the umpires

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Guest HariSampath]

What is there to discuss on that? I thought I had already made my stand to you clear on this when I asked you to check what I had mentioned to Kabira earlier. Heck I have argued about 5-6 threads on whole software testing process in a cricket thread! And yes the mistakes on day 1 doesnt absolve of mistakes commited on day 5, dont mix the issue.

wtf are u talknig about...u senile or what ??? A game progresses day by day. day one : Aus 134-6....( main batter given 3 inngs and gets 160) Day 4 Aus 400-7 dec ( main 100 maker Hussey out twice )...given 3 inngs Day 5 ( India 200 allout) Main batters , Dravid, Ganguly given out in arrogant violation of laws of cricket.... You are crazy Lurks...??? you need to take your Ritalin...till the men in white coats come

[Lurker]

don't descend to moronic levels Lurks....you bring any team to me...if your top batters are given out ridiculously....and my top batters are given notout ' date=' no matter what , at least twice each...I win by a huge margin....doubt it ?? bring a team...I bring the umpires[/quote'] Ridiculous comment. I take it you couldnt find me 5 instances in Indian 2nd innings which stopped India from playing out 70 overs. Good. Thought so. xxx

[prince40]

Making snide comments doesnt make for a good response Hari. :haha: My question remains - All those example were of entire 5 day of this Test. Show me 5 such examples in 1 single innings. If Indian team of 11 cant play out 70 overs for a draw, and I will not complain against Dravid and Gangs, then I feel they did not perform. Simple. So where are those 5 examples in 2 session 70 over game?

disgraceful justification here to put it mildly

[Lurker]

wtf are u talknig about...u senile or what ??? A game progresses day by day.

No I am not senile but you Sir sure are. I am not gonna respond to you since I have already made the same points over and again within this thread. Please read up you shall find 20 of my post within this thread. And yes India needed to bat 2 session and play out 70 overs to draw this test. It was crystal clear and we failed to do so. It is NOT all umpires fault, save some for our batsmen too.

[Sachinism]

why are you guys even arguing with these morons, they are pathethic we have a reason to complain these people dont understand how much difference giving a batsman not out makes navjot sidhu said today, "if tendulkar was given 2-3 chances in every game, he would be scoring a 100 every game" these morons just cant understand that

[Guest HariSampath]

as simple as that ... Me and Hari as umpires ... in BD vs AllTime greats First ball Murtaza to Bradman play and miss ... a enquiry by the bowler ... I raise my finger .... Bradman out caught behind ... its in the book ... what now ?

No BB....World All time 11 versus Pakistan virgins ( its just imaginary)..... Game starts...DGB and Sachin to open....I give DGB out....timed out...for taking more than 2 min.. BB...you give Sachin out...handled the ball ....( no ball has been bowled yet...who cares)... I give Viv Richards out for obstructing the field ( while Viv is tgaking guard) ......u get the idea....World 11..allout 0..against pakistan Virgins....( later...world 11 and Don and Sachin , Viv...banned permanently for asking ....when will the cricket match start..)...that is dissent...

[The Outsider]

Yup, I know I won't be on many people's Christmas list next year, but what the hell, as if I care! There are several uncomfortable questions to be asked. Firstly us, the fans- do we hold ourselves to the same standards that we demand from umpires, players...other fans?

Why should fans hold themselves to the same standard that are expected from umpires? They are not professional fans, umpires are professionals - get paid to do the job. Fans on the other hand spend time and money to follow the sport. There is no logic asking fans to hold themselves to the same standards as paying professionals.

How many of you were jumping up and down when Sreesanth was not given out despite being plumb to Monty in the Lords Test last year? Who knows what would have happened had England won that Test match? As it is, the decision allowed India to hold out for a draw, and England never recovered.

There were decisions that went against India in that very test, none more prominent than that of Dravid. The reason that Sreesanth's leg before gets highlighted is it was in the last over. Sreesanth would not have been batting had decisions were correctly taken in the test.

Sangakkara got a similar decision in the recent series against Australia. At that point anything was possible. SL might have pulled off a series levelling win had Sanga been allowed to stay, an event that would have been as momentous as, say, the Aussies winning 16 in a row. Funny, I didn't see calls for all of us to write in to the ICC then? Or is it because it was only SL?

There were threads and posts here on ICF talking about the decision, of course not as vociferously as about Indian decisions, but this is an Indian cricket fans website and that is expected.

Does anybody remember the decision against Kasper that sealed the 2005 Ashes? His hand was off the bat, yet he was given out in a schoolboy umpiring error, a decision that cost the Aussies a proud record they had held for two decades. Did I hear a cacophony of protests on this board? Calls for boycott of future tours?

Schoolboy umpiring error? Kasper's hand was a few millimeters off the bat at the time of impact and it took multiple slow motion replays to figure it out. How is that a schoolboy umpiring error? And yes, after losing the series Ponting made noises about umpiring and immediately got technology introduced for the following Super Series.

Now, when umpiring errors have gone against us, we are aggrieved, are we? We all knew Bucknor's record coming into this match. Why didn't we protest against his exclusion then? It's not as if we didn't know that he'd screw us...he's done it every time he's had the chance in the last 10 years, starting from that negated run out against Cullinan in SA to the 2004 Sydney Test. Why did we then wait till he had another opportunity to finger us?

Completely wrong. There were many threads on this board talking about Bucknor before the series began. The Indian team has in the past made noises about not letting Bucknor umpire in their matches. Whatever you are alleging is completely baseless. If the ICC did not do anything about it, the blame lies with the BCCI not with the players or fans who have been making noises about Bucknor since time immemorial.

By raising a threnody of wailing now, we come across as nothing but a bunch of losers, who seek to degrade the opposition's moment of glory to make ourselves feel better. OTOH, had we voiced our reservations officially before the match, given what has followed, we could have turned back to the ICC and lambasted them for not paying heed to our concerns. Opportunity lost.

No we have done exactly what you are asking for. Complained about Bucknor before the matter and now after the worst has come to fruition, telling everyone that it was bound to happen and with such serious and recent blunders the time is right to go on an all out offensive to get the cheat thrown out, not cower into a corner and wail over the defeat.

But that's not all. It's amazing to see that Australian cricketers are being branded as cheats because they appealed for a bump catch, stood their ground after nicking the ball, or claimed a deflection off the pad as a catch. Right, so we have never resorted to these kind of tactics before, eh? Off the top of my head, I can remember at least two occasions when Ganguly claimed a bump catch in recent series, and several occasions when nicks from Indian batsmen went unnoticed while they stood their ground. Don't recall the integrity of our players being questioned then? The point is, international cricket is a high stakes, winner-takes-all contest. There are million dollar deals up for grabs. Players are under pressure to perform, and know that the difference between a successful career and penury could be a line as thin as being given a second chance at the crease. Under the circumstances, it's naive to expect them to be honest or forthright. Joh jeeta, wohi sikander.

Agree on that. It's international sport and teams and players will do whatever they can to win and nothing wrong in that. Most of the ire is directed towards the umpires, one of whom set a new precedent by consulting the fielding captain before making a decision.

May I suggest that India wouldn't have landed in this situation, but for their ham-handed decision making? Their steadfast reliance on a failed opening pair, championing of a mediocre spin bowler because of his record against one particular batsman, the selectorial idiocy of flogging the fast bowlers to death in inconsequential ODIs, and their board's supreme avarice in leaving the side with no preparation time before a vitally important series, were all follies that deserved to be punished, and duly have been.

Yes, India could have prepared better. Don't think anyone is debating that. The point is that despite all of the above you wrote, we would have won this test match if the umpires were not hand in glove with the opposition. Third umpire not making the right decision, third umpire not being called, the fielding captain being asked whether it was out or not. These are not your everyday umpiring errors where edges are missed and leg befores denied. This a breakdown of the entire system at best and connivance with one of the teams at worst.

Finally, it would be prudent to recognize that you make your own luck. And the way you do that is by winning. The more you win, the more gilded your reputation becomes, and umpires suconsciously make a note of your success. It's a situation the Aussies find themselves in by ruthlessly decimating all before them over the last decade or so. Which umpire dare give a marginal decision against them? Do you buck the odds when you are unsure at work, or do you take the safe option? Ask yourself.

That's a catch 22 situation. How are you going to start winning in the first place if the umpires are not letting you win? And aren't the umpires supposed to be beyond that and claim to be so also? Again, a breakdown of the system.

India had the chance to win convincingly against England and Pakistan and come into this series with a burgeoning reputation on the back of 2-0 victories against major opposition, and as the unequivocal second placed side, a record that would have given the umpires something to think about. On both occasions, they chose the safety first approach to preserve what they had. That conservative approach is now coming home to roost.

Yes, they could have aimed for a 2-0 at both places more aggressively. But the first priority is to secure the series. Even your revered Australians left the declaration for too late today by the comments of all commentators. Perhaps they knew the umpires were going to hand it over to them, so 72 overs would be enough?

Must say that we are one of the worst bunch of fans at taking defeat. I don't recall a match where we have introspected and looked inwards to address our own deficiencies to the exclusion of extraneous influences. It's always the umpires, the conditions, or the conniving opposition. We are shamelessly opportunistic and practitioners of double and triple atandards. I can only hope that the blokes who represent us out in the middle don't think like us.

Perhaps, some. But fans is not some monolithic existence where you can generalize like that. There are many fans on this very board who have written about changes and improvements about the team many times. There are going to be all sorts of people but to generalize and say that all of us keep whining after every defeat is nothing but an attempt to rile up people, in which you have been successful BTW.

[Guest HariSampath]

No I am not senile but you Sir sure are. I am not gonna respond to you since I have already made the same points over and again within this thread. Please read up you shall find 20 of my post within this thread. And yes India needed to bat 2 session and play out 70 overs to draw this test. It was crystal clear and we failed to do so. It is NOT all umpires fault, save some for our batsmen too.

You ARE senile AND drunk probably...HOW the fck can 10 batters play out 70 overs if half of them are given out for NO reason ????? U don't get it ???

[Sachinism]

You ARE senile AND drunk probably...HOW the fck can 10 batters play out 70 overs if half of them are given out for NO reason ????? U don't get it ???

dude seriously stop wasting your time with him its obvious he's not thinking straight