silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
I think this will be it.
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
***Official*** India in England
- Thread starter adharcric
- Start date
BoyBrumby
Englishman
Been the pick of the Indian seamers from what I've seen. Admittedly I missed most of arvo session, but early on his first 4 overs went for 4 when Sreesanth & Zaheer were serving up leg-side tripe & going for better than a run a ball.
Two late wickets throws rather a different complexion on the day's play; can't blame Colly too much as he got a good one early on, but Vaughan's dismissal was sloppy. It was obvious from his body language that he didn't want to be out there and chased one that he could've quite easily left alone. Credit to RPS as it was a decent nut, but hardly a jaffa.
Manee
Cricketer Of The Year
Doh!I doubt India will take any wickets nor will England score many runs.
steds
Hall of Fame Member
Ganguly outbowled all 3 imo. Says a lot.
I think Colly was as much to blame for his dismissal as Vaughan was for his. He wasn't offering a shot. Bat was firmly behind the pad and outside off stump. Padding up to a bloke who doesn't turn it that much. He was pretty much asking to be given lbw.
Manee
Cricketer Of The Year
He has had good accuracy from over the wicket the whole day and going around the wicket with the slope bringing the ball into the right hander adds a lot of zip to his bowling.
Manee
Cricketer Of The Year
It does, but that is not to take away from the accuracy and swing of Ganguly's spell.
Turbinator
Cricketer Of The Year
Hopefully it doesn't rain tomorrow. I don't want any days lost because rain, no matter what the result.
Last edited:
BoyBrumby
Englishman
I'm not suggesting he played it well, but he hadn't played himself in yet & is always a pretty ropey starter; Vaughan had made a fairly imperious looking 79 & seemed well set for a ton. It's just me playing armchair psychologist, obv, but I reckon he could've allowed the light issue to distract him a tad.
Pratters
Cricket, Lovely Cricket
I listened to RP talking with Harsha right now. Good interview. Firstly, he said they were trying too much earlier getting excited by the swing they were getting. They learnt as they went along about mistakes they made early on. Dravid (it appeared it was Dravid's idea but as far as I remember, it wasn't clearly metioned whose it was) and he discussed and they changed to around the wicket which helped him. Also, despite the swing, the pitch was slightly slower. Also, when Harsha asked if it was reversing, he said it wasn't.
I guess the slope aspect troubled them a bit as it can for youngsters (RP and Sreesanth), also getting excited by Lords and the swing support.
I guess the slope aspect troubled them a bit as it can for youngsters (RP and Sreesanth), also getting excited by Lords and the swing support.
Last edited:
Fusion
Global Moderator
Ganguly: Greatest bowler ever? I think so.
PhoenixFire
International Coach
I'd say so, yes tbh.
adharcric
International Coach
1) Zaheer and Sreesanth in South Africa? Yeah, I know what you mean ... but stop making stupid generalizations after one bad day.silentstriker said:
2) McGrath is not a legend just because he's accurate. Hell, Syed Rasel is pretty accurate but he's crap. McGrath is an extremely intelligent bowler who can outthink the batsman and make the ball talk regardless of the conditions. Assuming Gagandeep can do that to any degree, he should definitely be ahead of these "pace" prospects.
Sanz
Hall of Fame Member
Adharcric - SA was an abberation. What SS said is generally true about our bowling. Our bowlers wont be that crap If they figure out where the stumps.
I still dont understand why is Yuvraj not playing ? Does the captain think His batting is worse than Dhoni's or that Dhoni's wicket keeping is better than Karthick's ?
I still dont understand why is Yuvraj not playing ? Does the captain think His batting is worse than Dhoni's or that Dhoni's wicket keeping is better than Karthick's ?
silentstriker
The Wheel is Forever
Well of course he is intelligent. But it is irrelevent how intelligent you are if you can't do what your mind is thinking. I am sure Zaheer Khan didn't think in his head 'I am going to bowl this one nice and easy down the leg side when my captain has a 7-2 offside field.' Intelligence is irrelevant if you don't have accuracy first and foremost.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
What were we saying about you shaking-off that Greigy tag...
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Right, Foxtel has finally finished showing their delayed telecast and I've caught up with all the posts here. Maybe it was the fact that I was annoyed with the delay and hence my inability to discuss the match here as it was going along, or maybe I was just a bit over-optomistic about what this series offered after the West Indies affair, but that was one of the most frustrating day of test cricket I've seen. To be honest, I loved every minute of it, as is evident by the fact that I stayed up until 6am watching it, but I hated it at the same time. Slightly off topic, but with all the talk of Australia declining in comparison to the other test teams... I just can't see it. In fact, I can only see the gap widening if this is the sort of thing we can expect to see at test level. Sure, the skill level is there (apart from the usual problems pertaining to specific areas in specific teams) but the application, professionalism and basic cricketing know-how on.. well.. winning isn't. Players invite the opposition back into regularly and teams try their best to squander any chance of initiative they have. Test cricket is becoming a battle of who can do a "better" job of throwing it away - or maybe I've just been watching some dire teams lately.
India bowled complete rubbish. And I've read some comments in this thread about how India lack variety, or how they need a fifth bowler, or how they need a genuine fast bowler. All of those things would help (as long as the fifth bowler was a test class allrounder, and the fast bowler actually knew how to bowl well rather than just fast - neither of which I've seen from India at this stage), but no, it is not the problem. The problem isn't actually the skill level or capability of the bowlers selected - it's how they bowled. All three fast bowlers are quick enough to trouble batsmen at international level providing they bowl well. The problem was the fact that they bowled all over the place - the seam position of the bowlers with the new ball was disgraceful, as was the general accuracy with it.. and on a pitch like this one (which, I might add, is a disgrace for a day 1 pitch.. consistently low and slow with no movement at all..), you really have to take advantage of the new ball. I saw it all too often with the West Indies and England as well.. they'd bowl all over the place with the new ball and totally waste it, before bowling good spells later on when they were into better rhythm, but have no success due to the state of the ball, the overhead conditions and the fact that the batsmen were well set. The problem isn't the fact that they all bowl a similar pace or that India only selected four bowlers, it's the fact that they bowled poorly. Not because they are intrinsically poor and can't bowl, but because they bowled without control and, to be frank, without a brain at times.
I have no clue what is going on with Zaheer... I'm legitimately dissapointed to be honest. After years of inconsistent and average performances, I genuinely thought he was finding a good rhythm and was ready to become a consistently "okay" bowler after the series in South Africa. But he's proven he's just as inconsistent as ever - yes I know it was one day's bowling, but he was that dire. Sreesanth did the typical thing as a swing bowler - bowled rubbish with the new ball, then bowled a top spell later on when there was no swing for him. Although, TBH, I actually expected that with him given England's left handers - and problem he didn't have to deal with in South Africa.
RP Singh.. well he's a bit different. I don't think he bowled particularly poorly - I just don't think he's much chop. He bowled okay, but he doesn't have any pace, he bowls too short, he gets minimal movement and he's prone to spray it everywhere in spells. Unlike the other two, though, he probably bowled as well as he can - he showed the required discipline and application, just not the required skill level. I guess that can be expected from the third best fast bowler from India though.
Kumble - well, the pitch couldn't have suited him any less. Slow and low, but consistent, and with no turn at all. A pitch tailor made to NOT suit Kumble. But he was still India's best bowler by far, and although he never looked particularly threatening, he deceived the batsmen enough to show he's definitely going to be a major factor in the series.. not that we didn't know that though.
However, while most of the criticism has been leveled at the Indian bowlers, I was probably more dissapointed with England's batsmen. Generally I don't buy into the whole "he got a start so he should have gone on with it" theory, as you can get a good ball any time in your innings, but if that theory ever applied, it was today. India didn't really "take" a wicket - at all. Collingwood's perhaps, but really, all of them were very soft.
Scaly does like to randomly criticise everyone who isn't Collingwood, Harmison or Plunkett, but his call regarding Cook was perfectly justified. Perhaps not the overall thought that he throws it away - but certainly the criticism of the way he got out. Like all the England batsmen, he looked a million dollars, and got out to the most innocuous delivery of all time due to a lapse of concentration. His wicket was probably the best ball of them all, but it was Ganguly ffs. Now, with all due respect to Ganguly (and altoz), the ball was not great. It pitched off, was hitting off, and he was trying to play it through midwicket.. why? This is test cricket ffs - that sort of ridiculous shot selection should not be seen by an opener in test cricket, especially against someone as innocuous as Sourav Ganguly.
It continued in that way though, as Strauss and Vaughan fell in even more comedic circumstances. Strauss charged Kumble for no apparent reason, which isn't a good idea at the best of times, and got out trying to push on for his ton. It was a nothing ball - a little quicker, and he was gone. It was the best Strauss has batted for a long, long time - but you'd think he'd want to anchor in and enjoy it.. but no. He wanted his hundred on THAT ball- why it had to be that ball is something only he will ever know, but he certainly didn't deserve it if he's going to play those sort of shots despite scoring freely playing normally. Vaughan - well, I loved the innings. It kept me sane, thinking that the cream was rising to the top, and that Vaughan would play a technically perfect hundred and then get out to a gun ball from Sreesanth once the second new ball became available. But no - he got suckered in by the change of angle from RP Singh and possibly all that bad light rubbish, and forgot that his feet were mobile objects. The ball was probably there for that shot, but only if he moved his foot across to play the shot.
Collingwood could almost be forgiven, I suppose, but I still don't really know how to view that dismissal. The ball was the straightest thing ever - surely he's seen Kumble bowl before. Surely he'd been watching the game in the paviliion, and had seen how little turn it was offering. Yet he still thrust his pad out like a lamb to the slaughter and missed the ball by a foot. It reminded me of Devon Smith v Monty Panesar. But, I guess, he got a "good" (very debatable though, that) one early and he can be somewhat forgiven, unlike Vaughan, Strauss and Cook.
Really, it was a contest of who could throw it away best, with India winning early on but England managing to equal them later on in the day. Hopefully the quality is a bit better tomorrow, or I might just start a petition for NSW to be admitted as a test nation.
India bowled complete rubbish. And I've read some comments in this thread about how India lack variety, or how they need a fifth bowler, or how they need a genuine fast bowler. All of those things would help (as long as the fifth bowler was a test class allrounder, and the fast bowler actually knew how to bowl well rather than just fast - neither of which I've seen from India at this stage), but no, it is not the problem. The problem isn't actually the skill level or capability of the bowlers selected - it's how they bowled. All three fast bowlers are quick enough to trouble batsmen at international level providing they bowl well. The problem was the fact that they bowled all over the place - the seam position of the bowlers with the new ball was disgraceful, as was the general accuracy with it.. and on a pitch like this one (which, I might add, is a disgrace for a day 1 pitch.. consistently low and slow with no movement at all..), you really have to take advantage of the new ball. I saw it all too often with the West Indies and England as well.. they'd bowl all over the place with the new ball and totally waste it, before bowling good spells later on when they were into better rhythm, but have no success due to the state of the ball, the overhead conditions and the fact that the batsmen were well set. The problem isn't the fact that they all bowl a similar pace or that India only selected four bowlers, it's the fact that they bowled poorly. Not because they are intrinsically poor and can't bowl, but because they bowled without control and, to be frank, without a brain at times.
I have no clue what is going on with Zaheer... I'm legitimately dissapointed to be honest. After years of inconsistent and average performances, I genuinely thought he was finding a good rhythm and was ready to become a consistently "okay" bowler after the series in South Africa. But he's proven he's just as inconsistent as ever - yes I know it was one day's bowling, but he was that dire. Sreesanth did the typical thing as a swing bowler - bowled rubbish with the new ball, then bowled a top spell later on when there was no swing for him. Although, TBH, I actually expected that with him given England's left handers - and problem he didn't have to deal with in South Africa.
RP Singh.. well he's a bit different. I don't think he bowled particularly poorly - I just don't think he's much chop. He bowled okay, but he doesn't have any pace, he bowls too short, he gets minimal movement and he's prone to spray it everywhere in spells. Unlike the other two, though, he probably bowled as well as he can - he showed the required discipline and application, just not the required skill level. I guess that can be expected from the third best fast bowler from India though.
Kumble - well, the pitch couldn't have suited him any less. Slow and low, but consistent, and with no turn at all. A pitch tailor made to NOT suit Kumble. But he was still India's best bowler by far, and although he never looked particularly threatening, he deceived the batsmen enough to show he's definitely going to be a major factor in the series.. not that we didn't know that though.
However, while most of the criticism has been leveled at the Indian bowlers, I was probably more dissapointed with England's batsmen. Generally I don't buy into the whole "he got a start so he should have gone on with it" theory, as you can get a good ball any time in your innings, but if that theory ever applied, it was today. India didn't really "take" a wicket - at all. Collingwood's perhaps, but really, all of them were very soft.
Scaly does like to randomly criticise everyone who isn't Collingwood, Harmison or Plunkett, but his call regarding Cook was perfectly justified. Perhaps not the overall thought that he throws it away - but certainly the criticism of the way he got out. Like all the England batsmen, he looked a million dollars, and got out to the most innocuous delivery of all time due to a lapse of concentration. His wicket was probably the best ball of them all, but it was Ganguly ffs. Now, with all due respect to Ganguly (and altoz), the ball was not great. It pitched off, was hitting off, and he was trying to play it through midwicket.. why? This is test cricket ffs - that sort of ridiculous shot selection should not be seen by an opener in test cricket, especially against someone as innocuous as Sourav Ganguly.
It continued in that way though, as Strauss and Vaughan fell in even more comedic circumstances. Strauss charged Kumble for no apparent reason, which isn't a good idea at the best of times, and got out trying to push on for his ton. It was a nothing ball - a little quicker, and he was gone. It was the best Strauss has batted for a long, long time - but you'd think he'd want to anchor in and enjoy it.. but no. He wanted his hundred on THAT ball- why it had to be that ball is something only he will ever know, but he certainly didn't deserve it if he's going to play those sort of shots despite scoring freely playing normally. Vaughan - well, I loved the innings. It kept me sane, thinking that the cream was rising to the top, and that Vaughan would play a technically perfect hundred and then get out to a gun ball from Sreesanth once the second new ball became available. But no - he got suckered in by the change of angle from RP Singh and possibly all that bad light rubbish, and forgot that his feet were mobile objects. The ball was probably there for that shot, but only if he moved his foot across to play the shot.
Collingwood could almost be forgiven, I suppose, but I still don't really know how to view that dismissal. The ball was the straightest thing ever - surely he's seen Kumble bowl before. Surely he'd been watching the game in the paviliion, and had seen how little turn it was offering. Yet he still thrust his pad out like a lamb to the slaughter and missed the ball by a foot. It reminded me of Devon Smith v Monty Panesar. But, I guess, he got a "good" (very debatable though, that) one early and he can be somewhat forgiven, unlike Vaughan, Strauss and Cook.
Really, it was a contest of who could throw it away best, with India winning early on but England managing to equal them later on in the day. Hopefully the quality is a bit better tomorrow, or I might just start a petition for NSW to be admitted as a test nation.
Last edited:
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Nah, Hoggard's injury changes things and you know it.
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
Absolutely.
Accuracy was McGrath's most obvious trait - far from his only one, yes, but his most obvious one - and for a very obvious reason.