***Official*** India in Australia

[Laurrz]

Adam Gilchrist also took aim at criticism of Australia's delay in closing their second innings today, shouting "How about that declaration, Tony Greig" while Ponting was conducting a radio interview. The Indian media also made an official complaint to the BCCI about what a journalist called the "humiliating" treatment from Ponting during an abbreviated press conference before he attended the hearing involving Harbhajan.

rofl on ya gilly

 

[luckyeddie]

Adam Gilchrist also took aim at criticism of Australia's delay in closing their second innings today, shouting "How about that declaration, Tony Greig" while Ponting was conducting a radio interview. The Indian media also made an official complaint to the BCCI about what a journalist called the "humiliating" treatment from Ponting during an abbreviated press conference before he attended the hearing involving Harbhajan.

rofl on ya gilly

I thought that the timing of the declaration was absolutely perfect, because it took India totally by surprise, allowing the openers to stew on the field for about 30 minutes then have to face two overs before lunch.

 

[Manee]

I heard that Wasim Akram gave Pathan a few tips and told Star Sports what they were. Can anyone fill me in on the tips that he gave Pathan.

 

[irfan]

Absolutely gutted we lost this test. Have an extremely hollow feeling inside.

I am highly convinced (~99%) that if a few of the nightmarish decisions from the Benson-Bucknor crew didn't go against India we would have drawn this test match. That being said, players like Jaffer and Yuvraj should really have capitalised on this Sydney pitch and shown a bit of mettle.

ATM, Jaffer looks like just another domestic opener (Gambhir anyone?) who can't cut it, drive it or defend a ball coming at real pace. Really dissapointing that he hasn't lasted more than an opening spell from the quicks in this series.

Yuvraj who had been knocking down the door for Test match inclusion, gets a few chances and fluffs em all. For a player of his calibre and talent the amount of time he spent at the crease this series would have embarassed a tailender. It seems to me the door he was knocking on is revolving and more insipid perfomances like this and he will be shunted out.

So if you want to blame someone besides the Benson-Bucknor for this loss look no further than these two.

On the other hand, I thought we bowled tremendously well considering our pace attack is second string and kudos to them for keeping Australia on the backfoot early. The main problem was a lack of a quality quick to run through a lineup but that's been India's achilles heel for a while now.

Full marks to Kumble for bowling and then batting magnificently in the 2nd inns, really feel for the guy and feel that ALL his comments were completely justified.

Ramble over.

 

[social]

Absolutely gutted we lost this test. Have an extremely hollow feeling inside.

I am highly convinced (~99%) that if a few of the nightmarish decisions from the Benson-Bucknor crew didn't go against India we would have drawn this test match. That being said, players like Jaffer and Yuvraj should really have capitalised on this Sydney pitch and shown a bit of mettle.

ATM, Jaffer looks like just another domestic opener (Gambhir anyone?) who can't cut it, drive it or defend a ball coming at real pace. Really dissapointing that he hasn't lasted more than an opening spell from the quicks in this series.

Yuvraj who had been knocking down the door for Test match inclusion, gets a few chances and fluffs em all. For a player of his calibre and talent the amount of time he spent at the crease this series would have embarassed a tailender. It seems to me the door he was knocking on is revolving and more insipid perfomances like this and he will be shunted out.

So if you want to blame someone besides the Benson-Bucknor for this loss look no further than these two.

On the other hand, I thought we bowled tremendously well considering our pace attack is second string and kudos to them for keeping Australia on the backfoot early. The main problem was a lack of a quality quick to run through a lineup but that's been India's achilles heel for a while now.

Full marks to Kumble for bowling and then batting magnificently in the 2nd inns, really feel for the guy and feel that ALL his comments were completely justified.

Ramble over.

Not a ramble - basically sums it up

 

[Andrew Pollock]

From cricinfo

http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/ausvind/content/story/329322.html

When you pick up a pack of Benson & Hedges you get a statutory warning: "Smoking cigarettes is injurious to health." From this day on, the firm of Benson & Bucknor may well have to come with some sort of warning.

 

[Andrew Pollock]

from the same article:

http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/ausvind/content/story/329322.html

Andrew Symonds was the one to suffer the most against Ganguly, being taken for three consecutive boundaries through cover in one over, as well as having him dropped at slip off his bowling. The fast men did not trouble Ganguly much either, that is until the ball that terminated his innings. Having raced to a half-century Ganguly slashed one to Clarke in the slips cordon. Clarke went low to take the catch and it was not clear if he had got his fingers under the ball, but that should have proved to be irrelevant as he subsequently grounded the ball, tumbling to his left in the process of completing the catch. Mark Benson, called upon to rule on this one, chose not to ask his partner at square-leg, or go to the third umpire, and instead was satisfied by a word from Ricky Ponting, also stationed at slip. Only a few minutes before this Ponting had claimed a bat-pad catch after clearly grounding the ball in the process. Why Benson chose to take Ponting's word for it, after all that had happened, is something only he knows the answer to.

Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

 

[sideshowtim]

from the same article:

http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/ausvind/content/story/329322.html

Andrew Symonds was the one to suffer the most against Ganguly, being taken for three consecutive boundaries through cover in one over, as well as having him dropped at slip off his bowling. The fast men did not trouble Ganguly much either, that is until the ball that terminated his innings. Having raced to a half-century Ganguly slashed one to Clarke in the slips cordon. Clarke went low to take the catch and it was not clear if he had got his fingers under the ball, but that should have proved to be irrelevant as he subsequently grounded the ball, tumbling to his left in the process of completing the catch. Mark Benson, called upon to rule on this one, chose not to ask his partner at square-leg, or go to the third umpire, and instead was satisfied by a word from Ricky Ponting, also stationed at slip. Only a few minutes before this Ponting had claimed a bat-pad catch after clearly grounding the ball in the process. Why Benson chose to take Ponting's word for it, after all that had happened, is something only he knows the answer to.

Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Kumble, Ponting and the match referees sat down before the series and made an agreement that there wouldn't be referrals on catches, and the player's word would be taken. During India's first innings, Ponting took a catch he wasn't 100% sure of and informed the umpires, thus holding up his end of the bargain. In the case of Clarke, Ponting was simply confirming that Clarke believed 100% that the catch had been taken, and as per Ponting and Kumble's wish, his word was taken without a referral.

 

[Andrew Pollock]

Andrew Symonds was the one to suffer the most against Ganguly, being taken for three consecutive boundaries through cover in one over, as well as having him dropped at slip off his bowling. The fast men did not trouble Ganguly much either, that is until the ball that terminated his innings. Having raced to a half-century Ganguly slashed one to Clarke in the slips cordon. Clarke went low to take the catch and it was not clear if he had got his fingers under the ball, but that should have proved to be irrelevant as he subsequently grounded the ball, tumbling to his left in the process of completing the catch. Mark Benson, called upon to rule on this one, chose not to ask his partner at square-leg, or go to the third umpire, and instead was satisfied by a word from Ricky Ponting, also stationed at slip. Only a few minutes before this Ponting had claimed a bat-pad catch after clearly grounding the ball in the process. Why Benson chose to take Ponting's word for it, after all that had happened, is something only he knows the answer to. Either way it was time for Ganguly to go, on a well-made 51 and India were 6 for 137.

 

[sideshowtim]

There was no indication that he grassed the ball at all. What a terrible piece of jounalism, they say it as if it's fact. Anyway, if Pup felt he caught it, which I think he did too, the captains of both sides agreed that in such instances the fielders word would be taken without referral.

 

[Manee]

There was no indication that he grassed the ball at all.

http://i11.tinypic.com/6ywfiow.jpg

 

[Andrew Pollock]

There was no indication that he grassed the ball at all. What a terrible piece of jounalism, they say it as if it's fact. Anyway, if Pup felt he caught it, which I think he did too, the captains of both sides agreed that in such instances the fielders word would be taken without referral.

From Fox Sport

India captain Anil Kumble, who was seething over the performances of match umpires Steve Bucknor and Mark Benson, suggested that Australia claimed some catches that should not have been appealed.

Kumble also criticised the spirit in which Australia played the Test match.

“Only one team was playing with the spirit of the game, that's all I can say,” Kumble said.

“It's tough when you've played all forms of cricket over the last 25 years and end up on the losing side like this - it does affect you.

“You try and take it sportingly, but it's very difficult and it hurts when you lose like this and then when you've had a great chance to win the Test match and square the series, but unfortunately it didn't happen.”

 

[sideshowtim]

http://i11.tinypic.com/6ywfiow.jpg

I'm sorry, but if that's 'grassing' the ball, then nearly every diving catch in slips history is 'grassed'.

 

[Andrew Pollock]

I'm sorry, but if that's 'grassing' the ball, then nearly every diving catch in slips history is 'grassed'.

Are you a Liberal voter??

 

[Manee]

I'm sorry, but if that's 'grassing' the ball, then nearly every diving catch in slips history is 'grassed'.

No it is not, you have to get your hands under the ball.

 

[sideshowtim]

No it is not, you have to get your hands under the ball.

He had already done that, and had the ball under control, he was merely rolling as it was part of him going down to get the catch. You're acting as if he caught the ball like that while it was forced into the ground.

 

[Cevno]

I'm sorry, but if that's 'grassing' the ball, then nearly every diving catch in slips history is 'grassed'.

I am sorry,but your history is very weak .
If that was allowed then how was herschelle gibbs catch in the 1999 wc disallowed?
If he had not touched the ball on the ground and had turned his palm up to avoid touching the ground then the ball could have popped out it would have been clearly not out.

 

[luckyeddie]

There was no indication that he grassed the ball at all. What a terrible piece of jounalism, they say it as if it's fact. Anyway, if Pup felt he caught it, which I think he did too, the captains of both sides agreed that in such instances the fielders word would be taken without referral.

Just going from the highlights (and I only saw it once), the big issue for me was that he appeared to press the ball to the ground. The same thing happened in the West Indies v South Africa game yesterday, and I believe that is sufficient to render the catch invalid.

 

[Cevno]

I'm sorry, but if that's 'grassing' the ball, then nearly every diving catch in slips history is 'grassed'.

I am sorry,but your history is very weak .
If that was allowed then how was herschelle gibbs catch in the 1999 wc disallowed?
If he had not touched the ball on the ground and had turned his palm up to avoid touching the ground then the ball could have popped out it would have been clearly not out.

 

[Evermind]

I'm sorry, but if that's 'grassing' the ball, then nearly every diving catch in slips history is 'grassed'.

Incorrect.

Gavaskar made a very pertinent point that Chappell couldn't counter. The point was that is the player deemed to be in control of the ball at a stage where he is rolling over? Gavaskar says no, simply because if the ball happens to pop out at that stage, it is given not out, and the catch is not given. So the player is not deemed to be in control of the ball during the time he is rolling over.

Now if at that point it doesn't pop out, but he puts it on the ground, considering that it's still a period when he is not in full control, should he be adjudged to have taken the catch? Logically, very simply, the answer is "no". He should be in complete control of the ball before he allows it to touch the ground, and the issue is that he wasn't.

It's a moot point anyway. The catch should've been referred to the third umpire - because it was not seen by Benson - and not to Ponting (FFS). The third umpire on seeing the replay would've found the evidence inconclusive, and would've given not out. Simple as that. If the umpires had followed the straightforward regulation, there would've been no controversy, and Ganguly would've not been sent back. It's not terribly complicated.