***Official*** India in England

[Shaggy Alfresco]

But the cricket has not been of very high standards.

Isn't that what people say every series? I remember the same thing being said in the 2005 ashes.

 

[Dasa]

Isn't that what people say every series? I remember the same thing being said in the 2005 ashes.

Yeah, well quite a bit of the cricket in that series was poor quality. Dropped catches, some pretty poor bowling and some pretty poor shots. It was exciting, but not really that high quality.

Anyway, what's with all this talk of 'cheating'? Ffs, Sreesanth's antics might be dead stupid and potentially dangerous, but how on earth is it cheating?

 

[Turbinator]

For me, this has been a fantastic series TBH, even if we somehow collapse tomorrow. I'd be dissapointed but I've pretty much enjoyed every day of cricket except for the first day at Lord's. The only thing thats irking me is the fact that there is only one more Test after this.

You think so? I think its been some good bowling from both sides in conditions that favor an even contest between bat and ball, and the fact that both sides are similar just adds so much to the series. There have been some unplayable deliveries, some good knocks, some bad shots and some good banter on the pitch. I can't realistically expect more from Test cricket.

Very much AWTA. I really would've loved for there to be a fourth test, it's been fantastic cricket.

 

[TheGreatAusie]

Very much AWTA. I really would've loved for there to be a fourth test, it's been fantastic cricket.

Yeah, great cricket to watch from a neutral perspective. India completely outplayed England in this test. The talk about the toss being the winning factor is complete BS and loser talk from English fans - the fact is that India still had to bowl well to exploit the conditions.

The swing bowling that India produced in England's 2nd Innings was by far superior to their bowling to England in the 1st innings, yet England managed to hit 300+ with the bowl moving crazily... don't really see why the Sky commentators put it down to India's luck for winning the toss, it was just rubbish batting from England in the 1st innings!

Oh, and the guy who thinks there is justice for England if it rains tomorrow, I really do feel sorry for you.

 

[adharcric]

India's obscene luck helped them get to an absolutely dominant position, England's occasional bits of luck is keeping them in with a very slight chance of winning. Without luck being in it England wouldn't have had a disadvantage batting first might have made 250-300 with Cook/KP staying in (instead of their crap lbw decisions), India might have made anything froom 250-400 instead they had the opening pair making the luckiest century partnership on record with that taking the pressure off, wearing the new ball etc. So it could well be have been only like 60-40 in India's favour, instead it's more like 95-5 in India's favour, England's occasional bits of luck have stopped it being 99.9-0.1 in India's favour - but that extra chance is nothing compared to India's extra chance. Even with the bits of luck you've still got things like Vaughan playing on.

How was the Jaffer-Karthik century partnership lucky? Anderson and Sidebottom may have beat the bat several times but if that is the criteria for luck, Zaheer and co. beat the bat of the English batsmen numerous times as well. Beating the bat does not earn you wickets; inducing an edge does. Jaffer and Karthik were only lucky against Panesar after they had compiled 80 or so.

Let's ignore tail-end wickets for the moment ...

1) Pietersen - apparently he was unlucky, Cricinfo commentary suggests otherwise but I'll take the word of the English fans on here.
2) Cook - definitely unlucky against Ganguly but Sreesanth had him nailed on 19.
3) Karthik - plumb against Panesar
4) Jaffer - once again, no reward for Panesar
5) Tendulkar - terrible decision
6) Ganguly - yet again, not out
7) Collingwood - off the glove down the leg side but perhaps it wasn't clear

I certainly will not claim that England have been luckier than India but "India by a country mile" is far from the truth.

 

[adharcric]

Sreesanth getting rightly rubbished in the post game show. Holding and Gower thought that the beamer was unintentional but they all agreed that the big no balls were intentinal, and their look just said that it was really against the spirit of the game.

Can't say I disagree.

Didn't get a chance to watch it myself but I can certainly believe that the no-balls were intentional from everything I've read. One question - was it because of the umpire not giving Collingwood out? If so, why did he wait four deliveries before creating a scene?

 

[Pratters]

I think its been some good bowling from both sides in conditions that favor an even contest between bat and ball, and the fact that both sides are similar just adds so much to the series. There have been some unplayable deliveries, some good knocks, some bad shots and some good banter on the pitch. I can't realistically expect more from Test cricket.

Yeah. Excellent test series. Just a shame it isn't 5 tests but whatever.

 

[Pratters]

Taufel:

Australian umpire Simon Taufel, who is in the eye of a storm after adjudging Sachin Tendulkar [Images] and Sourav Ganguly [Images] out on the third day of the second Test, has acknowledged that he was "very upset" to have handed a poor decision to Tendulkar.

However, he backed his decision on Ganguly, saying he would give that out every time.

Taufel's comments were conveyed to viewers of Sky Sports by the channel's commentators, David Lloyd and David Gower, who discussed the controversial decisions on the fourth morning of the Test.

"I always look at the big screen after giving a decision. And the minute I saw the replay of Sachin's dismissal, I knew I got it wrong," Taufel is reported to have told the Sky Sports commentators.

"However, I would have given Ganguly out every time," he added.

Lloyd explained that even V V S Laxman [Images], who was at the non-striker's end when Ganguly was batting, agreed that there was some sound as the ball passed Ganguly's bat.

"The big disappointment is that people come to watch the top players and I gave him out wrongly. That upset me," lamented Taufel.

The Australian umpire, who was voted 'Best Umpire of the Year' for the last three years, left Tendulkar stunned in disbelief by declaring him out just nine runs short of his 38th Test hundred.

Tendulkar had put his left foot well down the wicket as he offered no shot to Paul Collingwood [Images], and was given out lbw. Television replays confirmed that the ball would have missed the stumps by a few inches.

Ganguly was ruled out caught behind down the leg side to a ball from James Anderson as he tried to turn the ball to fine leg when he was on 79.

Former England [Images] captain, David Gower, praised Taufel for being a good professional.

"He is a very honest young man and a good professional and he takes great pride in his performance," Gower said.

"He knew had had got it wrong [against Tendulkar] but when he came out this morning he had forgotten what happened yesterday.

"And the first big decision he made today, following an appeal, he gave Cook out to yet another leg before decision."

 

[adharcric]

If you're going to get that wound up over some jelly beans on the pitch then frankly you're an uptight moron who needs to develop a sense of humour. Seriously, a classic one line to Pietersen instead of having a go at him and he would be a legend.

You may take it as a joke sitting on your ass in front of a computer but test cricket is an entirely different atmosphere. Sure, Zaheer (tbf, he does get wound up rather easily) would have done well to respond with class to the jelly bean incident, which was quite lame and pathetic btw. I really doubt that it was only about the jelly beans though ... there has been plenty of verbal crap thrown about in this match. Anyways, not a big deal.

By the way, I enjoyed Prior's sleding. Some nice one-liners at Lord's IIRC.

 

[silentstriker]

Didn't get a chance to watch it myself but I can certainly believe that the no-balls were intentional from everything I've read. One question - was it because of the umpire not giving Collingwood out? If so, why did he wait four deliveries before creating a scene?

I have no idea if it was due to Collingwood. But after that not out, there were some verbals exchanged in the next few deliveries, so it could have just been a matter of being pushed over the edge. But its all guesswork of course.

 

[adharcric]

You think so? I think its been some good bowling from both sides in conditions that favor an even contest between bat and ball, and the fact that both sides are similar just adds so much to the series. There have been some unplayable deliveries, some good knocks, some bad shots and some good banter on the pitch. I can't realistically expect more from Test cricket.

Completely agree. Good bowling, especially from Zaheer and Sidebottom with occasional gems from RPS and Anderson. Classy knocks from Vaughan, Tendulkar and Ganguly as well. Plenty of umpiring controversy, not enough to ruin the match though. Hopefully it doesn't rain in the third test. Or today.

 

[Sanz]

I would back Tuafel on this, Such decisions are part of the game and media should get over this instead of blowing their trumpet on how unjust Taufel was to Tendulkar/Ganguly etc.

 

[adharcric]

I would back Tuafel on this, Such decisions are part of the game and media should get over this instead of blowing their trumpet on how unjust Taufel was to Tendulkar/Ganguly etc.

Yeah, can't help but admire Taufel for his honesty. Did anyone else notice Taufel nodding his head moments (with regret) after giving Tendulkar out?

On the same note, why didn't Taufel recall Tendulkar if he realized that the decision was incorrect? Isn't the umpire entitled to do so? Isn't the replay usually played before the batsman makes it off the field? Even if it wasn't, I'm sure Taufel has had similar incidents in the past (say, for example, when he gave KP or Cook out earlier, etc.) and he claims that he always looks at the replay on the big screen. Referral system ...

 

[adharcric]

Sreesanth ...

Very disappointed in Sreesanth. Instead of spearheading the attack in England, he has been unprofessional throughout the series. Perhaps he was ticked off by some sledging incident (quite likely IMO) but his behavior is inexcusable to say the least. In the past, I have defended him as a hyperactive cricketer who takes his game very seriously and takes big wickets for India. Today, he was dire. He needs to focus on his bowling before he gets into trash talk and aggression. Dravid and the other seniors need to have a chat with him and drop him for the third test if appropriate. India cannot afford to lose such a talent; neither should we have such pathetic behavior from an Indian cricketer on the international circuit.

 

[R_D]

Not that I support SreeSanth's acntics in anyway but just in what way it was a blatatnt attempt of cheating ?

lol yeah i'd like to know that myself...... its certainly not cheating.. against the spirit of game you may call it but how many teams stretch the boundires of that and Sreesanth just took it to extremes yesterday.

 

[R_D]

Yeah, can't help but admire Taufel for his honesty. Did anyone else notice Taufel nodding his head moments (with regret) after giving Tendulkar out?

On the same note, why didn't Taufel recall Tendulkar if he realized that the decision was incorrect? Isn't the umpire entitled to do so? Isn't the replay usually played before the batsman makes it off the field? Even if it wasn't, I'm sure Taufel has had similar incidents in the past (say, for example, when he gave KP or Cook out earlier, etc.) and he claims that he always looks at the replay on the big screen. Referral system ...

yeah wonder why he didn't call Tendulkar back like Kevin Piterson was called back after being given out.

 

[R_D]

How was the Jaffer-Karthik century partnership lucky? Anderson and Sidebottom may have beat the bat several times but if that is the criteria for luck, Zaheer and co. beat the bat of the English batsmen numerous times as well. Beating the bat does not earn you wickets; inducing an edge does. Jaffer and Karthik were only lucky against Panesar after they had compiled 80 or so.

Let's ignore tail-end wickets for the moment ...

1) Pietersen - apparently he was unlucky, Cricinfo commentary suggests otherwise but I'll take the word of the English fans on here.
2) Cook - definitely unlucky against Ganguly but Sreesanth had him nailed on 19.
3) Karthik - plumb against Panesar
4) Jaffer - once again, no reward for Panesar
5) Tendulkar - terrible decision
6) Ganguly - yet again, not out
7) Collingwood - off the glove down the leg side but perhaps it wasn't clear

I certainly will not claim that England have been luckier than India but "India by a country mile" is far from the truth.

Lets not forget.. Vaughan was lucky to not be given lbw to kumble and than KP being out and not given but luckily he was out few balls later.
Luck kind of evend out i'd say.

 

[Rajeev]

Yeah. Excellent test series. Just a shame it isn't 5 tests but whatever.

Didn't get a chance to watch it myself but I can certainly believe that the no-balls were intentional from everything I've read. One question - was it because of the umpire not giving Collingwood out? If so, why did he wait four deliveries before creating a scene?

..from a different source

The same Michael Holding, who, in 1984, bowled 2 consecutive beamers at SMH Kirmani (stand between Gavaskar (236) and Kirmani in Madras) - Kirmani then took guard about 5 feet outside leg and indicated to Holding where the stumps were and where he should be bowling.

Oh, the irony of it all.

 

[alternative]

Zaheer, what a gun.

 

[GIMH]

And if there's any justice, it will piss down all day tomorrow taking a certain victory away from India. There's no way they deserve to go One-Nil up after being just as comprehensively outplayed in the First Test as they've outplayed England in the Second. One-One would certainly be a scoreline more indicative of how the series has gone.

In fact, **** It. I'm gonna do a Richard and decide arbitrarily that the First Test was an England win in my statistical canon