• 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

adharcric

International Coach
:laugh: That one game at Durban has lived long in your memory.

Surprised you can't remember Nehra's performances against Australia or any other test play nation (excluding Zimbabwe). And for the life of me I can not see how Nehra’s 75mph half volleys would be better than Zaheer Khan’s 82mph ones.
Nehra was actually pretty quick (with a screwed up action) back in the day. Of course, he's slow and pathetic right now, after getting injured, rehabbing in Australia, coming back to Delhi and complaining about flat tracks while serving up 75 mph tripe.
 
Last edited:

adharcric

International Coach
Oh, not to say that Zaheer or Sreesanth bowled with pace today - in fact I think RPS was the pick of the seamers today. I've just seen Sreesanth and Zaheer bowl much better, and I personally don't think RPS is capable of much better. I haven't seen much of him though, so he could prove me wrong.

And that list of his shortcomings wasn't really comparing him to the other Indian bowlers - it was comparing him to bowlers across the board. The likes of Zaheer and Sreesanth get a lot more movement generally and bowl a better length - which gives them something to justify their selection. RPS seems a nothing bowler. Again, I've seen little of him, so I could be wrong.
RP Singh isn't a natural swinger of the ball but he bowls at a decent pace (85+ usually), gets steep bounce and relies on cutting it around a bit and using that angle to take wickets. He doesn't look like strike bowler material but he can be a solid first-change seamer for India. He's not too bad with the bat and he's probably the best fielder to have played for India as a bowler in recent times.
 
Last edited:

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Foxtel showing the match on delay is one of the stupidest things I've ever seen.

Anyway, this looks like a horrible pitch. India's bowlers were horrible, and if I was an English fan I'd be pretty frustrated with those two late wickets because they could have really rammed home the advantage.
The Vaughan one was doubly frustrating because of how obvious it was that he was thinking "I wish we weren't out here", TBH.

And yeah... not exactly a pitch that's going to incite thrilling cricket. Even without the rain forecast for the next coupla days, could have seen this rolling to a draw, though that'd be far more likely were Vaughan and Pietersen still together. With the paucity of our bowling-attack I'd be mildly worried about the possiblity of Dravid et al piling-up 600 for 5 declared and taking a lead of 200 with 2 or so days left, because of countless evidence we've seen regarding how much panic that sometimes causes.

With this bowling-attack, I'd feel safe only if we score 600... rather, funnily enough, like I did in the corresponding series in 2002. :mellow:

BTW... hope Strauss buys Karthik a few of something (dunno if he's a teetotaller, though I suppose there's no reason to presume he should be). :sleep: Only once have I EVER seen a catch as simple as that put down.

EDIT: just spotted Tendulkar and Lara back. AT LAST!!!!!!! is all I've got to say. :)
 

Fiery

Banned
Don't think neccessarily so. Harbhajan can be ridiculously ineffective too. IMO there's no reason other than the natural (and unutterably stupid) four-ineffective-seamers+1-ineffective-spinner-is-better-than-5-ineffective-seamers lark, spouted by near enough everyone when an all-seam attack is ineffective, ignoring the countless times a seam+spin attack is ineffective.

Well reminded, though...
Total no. of times the word "unutterable" has been used in the history of CW: 42
No. of times by Richard: 25
No. of times by Richard today: 3

:p
 
Last edited:

TT Boy

Hall of Fame Member
I’ll be surprised if play starts on time, my street lights are still on and usually at this time of year they are off by 6.30am. Only positive at the moment is that the heavens are yet to open but the light is currently non-existent.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Total no. of times the word "unutterable" has been used in the history of CW: 42
No. of times by Richard: 25
No. of times by Richard today: 3

:p
Is that including the "unutterably"s too? I want full credit yo...

And are you sure you've checked that those apparently used by others haven't been actually merely a quote from me?
 

Fiery

Banned
Is that including the "unutterably"s too? I want full credit yo...

And are you sure you've checked that those apparently used by others haven't been actually merely a quote from me?
Forgot to check that actually. You've actually said "unutterable" 3 times and a poster called "badgerhair" has said it once. You have said "unutterably" 25 times, the rest are all quotes from you, except Brumby has said it once

:p
 
Last edited:

TT Boy

Hall of Fame Member
We have lost the Sky signal in the gym (very bad sign) and the rain is hardcore, I will be amazed if there is any play today. And there goes the lightning….
 

Manee

Cricketer Of The Year
There will probably not even be any play today even if the rain stops now and (living about 15 miles from Lords), the rain shows no signs of stopping.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Forgot to check that actually. You've actually said "unutterable" 3 times and a poster called "badgerhair" has said it once. You have said "unutterably" 25 times, the rest are all quotes from you, except Brumby has said it once

:p
That's more like it. :happy:
 

Arjun

Cricketer Of The Year
We love this weather- not in this part of our city, though- everything drowns and sinks here.
 

Top