***Official*** India in England

[Richard]

Nah, Hoggard's injury changes things and you know it.

Was just kidding, TBH, and hadn't even looked at whether that came before or after the Hoggard injury.

 

[Prince EWS]

My mass post had about 1932134834 typos in it, it seems, so I've fixed it up. My typos are quite annoying though, as I type completely different words rather than letters. There are probably still a few in there - apologies.

 

[Richard]

Was there any great purpose to it, BTW? Seeing such monologues from you is pretty unusual (though obv. I've only read one tour-thread-in-motion in the last 3 years or so).

(Not saying you were off-the-mark in any way, incidentally)

 

[silentstriker]

Fantastic post Prince EWS, and I would second the notion regarding NSW as a Test nation.

 

[Pup Clarke]

Haha, touch harsh on the Vaughan dismissal me feels. The ball actually did move off the seam and it wasn't quite their for the drive. Good thinking from RP really to change the angle and Vaughan probably wasn't quite sure where his off stump was.

 

[Prince EWS]

Was there any great purpose to it, BTW? Seeing such monologues from you is pretty unusual (though obv. I've only read one tour-thread-in-motion in the last 3 years or so).

(Not saying you were off-the-mark in any way, incidentally)

Just venting, really. I don't think I've had such a rant before, if that's what you're asking.

 

[Prince EWS]

Haha, touch harsh on the Vaughan dismissal me feels. The ball actually did move off the seam and it wasn't quite their for the drive. Good thinking from RP really to change the angle and Vaughan probably wasn't quite sure where his off stump was.

Would have been nice if Vaughan could have managed to move his feet, though. He was asking to get out to it, regardless of how good the ball was.

 

[Pup Clarke]

I also thought India didn't bowl particiulary bad after the first say 20 overs which is understandable because of the occasion and the Lord's slope. Zaheer was pretty much off colour throughout the day really, Sreesanth after his wayward spell first up bowled very good lines and RP Singh bowled pretty well for the most of the day. England tbh will be kicking themselves to have lost the two wickets right before close.

 

[Turbinator]

Really honestly enjoyed reading that Prince . I mean I rarely take the time to read "long long" posts, but this is probably the first "long long" post I've read on CW.

 

[Prince EWS]

I also thought India didn't bowl particiulary bad after the first say 20 overs which is understandable because of the occasion and the Lord's slope. Zaheer was pretty much off colour throughout the day really, Sreesanth after his wayward spell first up bowled very good lines and RP Singh bowled pretty well for the most of the day. England tbh will be kicking themselves to have lost the two wickets right before close.

Yes, but that pretty much happened in the reverse order to what you'd expect of two well-performing sides. Each team really threw away its best opportunity to get initiative, only to have it given back by the opposition when they failed their opportunity.

India's key period was with the new ball - on pitches like these, bowling first, the new ball is what you make inroads with. They were as dire as possibly imaginable though.

Then came England's turn - all they had to do to hold initiative was concentrate late in the day and make sure they didn't throw any wickets away - but then they did exactly that.

Both teams failed their key tests as far as I see it, which is what makes it such a sorry state of affairs.

 

[Pup Clarke]

And a fascinating day hopefully tomorrow (rain permitting).

 

[Prince EWS]

And a fascinating day hopefully tomorrow (rain permitting).

Haha, exactly. That's what makes test cricket so great really - we had a day where the match swung in a reverse order to the norm (due to poor cricket from both sides IMO) and we have tomorrow set up perfectly for a complete rectification on both parts. The game is evenly balanced now, and tomorrow should be a cracker, despite the poor quality today.

 

[Pup Clarke]

Am looking forward to Sreesanth v Pietersen with the new ball. That will be one hell of a contest.

 

[Prince EWS]

Am looking forward to Sreesanth v Pietersen with the new ball. That will be one hell of a contest.

Yep, agreed. Providing Sreesanth bowls something like he did in his second spell today, that should be great to watch.

 

[Pup Clarke]

My Predictions for tomorrow

England to end up with around 450, Pietersen to get to 50 but not carrying on, Backing Zaheer to get a few wickets tomorrow morning.

And at the close India to be around 150-2 with Jaffer and Karthik gone.

 

[Richard]

Haha, exactly. That's what makes test cricket so great really - we had a day where the match swung in a reverse order to the norm (due to poor cricket from both sides IMO) and we have tomorrow set up perfectly for a complete rectification on both parts. The game is evenly balanced now, and tomorrow should be a cracker, despite the poor quality today.

Poor quality, mistake-laden cricket is often hugely interesting.

See The Ashes 2005, for instance.

 

[Richard]

Just venting, really. I don't think I've had such a rant before, if that's what you're asking.

Ah, right. In that case...

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.

Saj.

 

[TT Boy]

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.

Presumably because it’s one of his ‘shots’, I would be more concerned with Cook if he got out playing an extravagant drive or some other shot his not particularly adept at playing. He missed a straight one for sure but nine times out of ten he would have nailed it. It was not a ridiculous choice of shot for Ali, considering the shot is apart of his makeup.

 

[Prince EWS]

Presumably because it’s one of his ‘shots’, I would be more concerned with Cook if he got out playing an extravagant drive or some other shot his not particularly adept at playing. He missed a straight one for sure but nine times out of ten he would have nailed it. It was not a ridiculous choice of shot for Ali, considering the shot is apart of his makeup.

One should not try to play balls on off-stump through midwicket though. If that was the best choice of shots he could muster, he should have blocked it.

 

[Pup Clarke]

One should not try to play balls on off-stump through midwicket though.

Kevin Pietersen does...but not many moan at him when he gets out like that.