• 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*** Australia in India

honestbharani

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
pup11 said:
Umm.. I don't think India bowled any great deliveries or wicket taking balls and when Australians were batting they were cruising through and they didn't look like losing the game at any stage of the game, Australian batsmen were guilty of poor shot selection.
Players like Gilchrist, Clarke, Symonds played dire shots to get out and in Ponting's case there was enough doubt to give him the benefit of the doubt.
As far as i am concerned the rub of the green went India's way today and they also played good cricket in patches.
Click to expand...
there was never enough doubt in it, if u look at the last zoomed in picture. The only time it looked doubtful was when they showed the other angle, but from the shot we got from the still camera (one of the 4 which has been made mandatory for matches by the ICC), it was reasonably clear that there was no part of his foot BEHIND the line. It was all on the line and Dhoni was even pointing to Ponting's foot position when he was appealing. No way would it have been justice to have given him the benefit of the doubt AFTER seeing that picture. And the zoomed in version they showed after he was given out also confirmed the fact that there was no part of his foot behind the line. Line belongs to the umpire and he was given out. End of story.

I think we did have the rub of the green though, given what happened with Tendulkar. He was out thrice and yet he played. Symonds was also out earlier so it evened it up a bit but at the end, I do think India had the better of the bad decisions in this match.
 
honestbharani

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
pup11 said:
There is no reason why anybody should ever doubt Lee's credentials as an Odi bowler because he swings the new white ball at great pace and that's good enough to knock over many top-order batsmen around the world and he has done that over the years.
Only problem with Lee is that when the ball stops swinging (especially on slow and low tracks) he is then a pretty hittable bowler because he doesn't have too many canny variations up his sleeve, so IMO its better to either bowl out Lee before the death overs (and use him as an attacking option in short bursts during the middle overs) or give him one or two overs at the most to bowl at the death.
Anyways Sree Santh seems to be at it again, he seems to have taunted Symonds after he got out during the 4th Odi and clapped in his face and said your team is gonna lose now!!
Now how pathetic is that is that, after doing all this in front of people who have witnessed him doing this, he doesn't even have the balls to accept this and he is completly denying the incident.
Click to expand...
I have no problems with Sree being a jerk to a jerk like Symonds. And if all he said was that your team is gonna lose now, how is that a problem? Jibes like that get thrown around all the time in a cricket match...
 
Raghav

Raghav

International Vice-Captain
Ponting was wrongly given out... It normally goes under the benefit of doubt and batsman should be given not out...
 
honestbharani

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
pup11 said:
There is no reason why anybody should ever doubt Lee's credentials as an Odi bowler because he swings the new white ball at great pace and that's good enough to knock over many top-order batsmen around the world and he has done that over the years.
Only problem with Lee is that when the ball stops swinging (especially on slow and low tracks) he is then a pretty hittable bowler because he doesn't have too many canny variations up his sleeve, so IMO its better to either bowl out Lee before the death overs (and use him as an attacking option in short bursts during the middle overs) or give him one or two overs at the most to bowl at the death.
Anyways Sree Santh seems to be at it again, he seems to have taunted Symonds after he got out during the 4th Odi and clapped in his face and said your team is gonna lose now!!
Now how pathetic is that is that, after doing all this in front of people who have witnessed him doing this, he doesn't even have the balls to accept this and he is completly denying the incident.
Click to expand...
how are you so sure it happened? Presumably, the only people who will know this are Symonds and Sreesanth and it is just a case of his word Vs Sree's word. In that case, I think we can never say for certain who is right because both of them are complete and equal jerks.
 
honestbharani

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Raghav said:
Ponting was wrongly given out... It normally goes under the benefit of doubt and batsman should be given not out...
Click to expand...
what normally? You give benefit of doubt when there is doubt, here the second replay showed quite clearly that the foot was NOT landed behind the line. It was on the line and was given out. Maybe you had doubts but the umpire and even the commentators and so many others didn't and so he was given out.
 
Raghav

Raghav

International Vice-Captain
honestbharani said:
what normally? You give benefit of doubt when there is doubt, here the second replay showed quite clearly that the foot was NOT landed behind the line. It was on the line and was given out. Maybe you had doubts but the umpire and even the commentators and so many others didn't and so he was given out.
Click to expand...
Who are those commentators who are not having doubts on it......?

Even BBC raised it in their news coverage?

I have doubts for sure and thats the reason I raised here. Many of them have doubts on that decision. I saw the replays and some part of the foot is behind the line. Thats marginal. He should be given not out on the benefit of doubt...
 
honestbharani

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Raghav said:
Who are those commentators who are not having doubts on it......?

Even BBC raised it in their news coverage?

I have doubts for sure and thats the reason I raised here. Many of them have doubts on that decision. I saw the replays and some part of the foot is behind the line. Thats marginal. He should be given not out on the benefit of doubt...
Click to expand...
check your eyes, mate. There was NO part of his foot BEHIND the line. It wasn't even so when Dhoni had started appealing. And those commentators were the ones who were talking when the decision was referred. Surely they know a thing or two about benefit of doubts??? The only person to whine about it was Ponting, not even the Aussie members who were watching the TV. From whatever was shown in the coverage, it seemed to me that Ponting was actually arguing with the guys who were watching the TV and was even pointing to the OTHER replay which wasn't conclusive. But the second replay was conclusive enough for me and presumably, for the umpire and for many others around the world. I don't see any reason how it could be labelled a wrong call and I don't definitely see how you can argue that he had any part of his foot behind the line when he so clearly didn't. The best you can say is that it is a 60-40 decision, one which 60% umpires would have given out and 40% would not have, but at the end, I think the right decision was made and if you can't see that......
 
Raghav

Raghav

International Vice-Captain
honestbharani said:
check your eyes, mate. There was NO part of his foot BEHIND the line. It wasn't even so when Dhoni had started appealing. And those commentators were the ones who were talking when the decision was referred. Surely they know a thing or two about benefit of doubts??? The only person to whine about it was Ponting, not even the Aussie members who were watching the TV. From whatever was shown in the coverage, it seemed to me that Ponting was actually arguing with the guys who were watching the TV and was even pointing to the OTHER replay which wasn't conclusive. But the second replay was conclusive enough for me and presumably, for the umpire and for many others around the world. I don't see any reason how it could be labelled a wrong call and I don't definitely see how you can argue that he had any part of his foot behind the line when he so clearly didn't. The best you can say is that it is a 60-40 decision, one which 60% umpires would have given out and 40% would not have, but at the end, I think the right decision was made and if you can't see that......
Click to expand...

This sentence is good. 60-40 ok,.... that means my eyes are proper :)

BTW, when are you coming to Hyd mate?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top