• 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*** South Africa in India

Manee

Cricketer Of The Year
Ishant to undergo fitness test on Sunday
Cricinfo staff
April 5, 2008

Ishant Sharma is set to undergo a fitness test at the National Cricket Academy in Bangalore on Sunday in order to determine his availability for the third Test against South Africa in Kanpur, which starts on April 11. The team for the final match is expected to be selected at the end of the Ahmedabad Test.

Murali Kartik, the left-arm spinner, is also expected to be tested in Bangalore on Sunday. Kartik was included in the squad for the first two Tests but an ankle sprain sustained on the day of the selection ruled him out for three weeks.

Joginder Sharma, VRV Singh and Sudeep Tyagi are the others currently undergoing rehabilitation at the NCA.
Full article: http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/india/content/story/345157.html

Please, we do not need Murali Kartik - Harbhajan Singh and Anil Kumble are fine as spinners in India and I do not rate him at all. Furthermore, India need to take care of their fast bowlers - rehab at the NCA is a good step, but prevention through fitness work and action modification would be better. VRV Singh touched sublime form in the Duleep Trophy as did Tyagi in the Ranji Trophy and now both are injured!
 

cricketboy29

International Regular
Piss-poor performance. While, we're doling out demotions, for one I'd like to see Dhoni and Sehwag step down from the Test team. On flat pitches, their great sure 'look at us, hit the ball', on pitches with a bit of movement, nothing. Sure hit a 4 or two, and then get out going for a similar shot. Absolute crock of ****e.
 
Last edited:

Leslie1

U19 Captain
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

86.1 Steyn to Harbhajan Singh, 5 wides, going, going, gone... Steyn slips that wide down the leg side and beats Boucher, that would have made Steve Harmison proud

:laugh: :laugh:

Good god I hope Harmison doesn't get that tag for the rest of his life, let alone his career while he's still playing.
 

Manee

Cricketer Of The Year
Piss-poor performance. While, we're doling out demotions, for one I'd like to see Dhoni and Sehwag step down from the Test team.
Dhoni did just hit a fifty.

Sehwag is an interesting case - he does score a lot of runs; but in won games, he only averages 45.64, compared to 71.27 in drawn fixtures - this shows a tendancy to score moreso on flat pitches than result orientated ones. We certainly cannot drop him with our opening crisis, but he is certainly not the Test great that figures will have us believe.
 

Xuhaib

International Coach
Dhoni did just hit a fifty.

Sehwag is an interesting case - he does score a lot of runs; but in won games, he only averages 45.64, compared to 71.27 in drawn fixtures - this shows a tendancy to score moreso on flat pitches than result orientated ones. We certainly cannot drop him with our opening crisis, but he is certainly not the Test great that figures will have us believe.
Hard to believe people are asking for Sehwag's when he had scored 2 back to back hundreds in the previous two games, this shows how fickle are the sub-cont supporters.
 

Scaly piscine

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
You mean ala Kolkata 2001? Mate, they're called 'miracles' for a reason (that Test is frequently referred to by Indians as the Kolkata miracle - for me, it'd be more like the Kolkata disaster or something). They just don't happen more than once under the same set of circumstances. Besides, Waugh made India follow on when Australia were around 270 (?) runs ahead. As Laurrz said, India are 400 runs behind. If they make South Africa bat again, they would've done pretty damn well, for mine.
Piss poor logic. As I set it's very unlikely, but if you just gift a side an extra say 0.2% chance of winning that's pretty silly. We all know what can happen in cricket with relatively well matched sides, one team can get a 400 lead in one match and be 400 behind in another - these extremes are of course unlikely themselves but they do happen.
 

Manee

Cricketer Of The Year
Hard to believe people are asking for Sehwag's when he had scored 2 back to back hundreds in the previous two games, this shows how fickle are the sub-cont supporters.
I am certainly not calling to drop him, just saying that a lot of his runs are scored on flat pitches. He hasn't scored a hundred in a won match since 24th March 2004!

Click here for the fascinating analysis
 

cricketboy29

International Regular
Hard to believe people are asking for Sehwag's when he had scored 2 back to back hundreds in the previous two games, this shows how fickle are the sub-cont supporters.
Or perhaps it shows how some people are taken in with one 'great' performance on a flat track.
 

pasag

RTDAS
Well done SA, comprehensive victory, dominated with the bat and the ball and have already proved a lot of people pre-series wrong. Granted India's best bat and best bowler was out, but still, India were supposed to have awesome reserve depth, so to lose a Test at home by an innings and with two days to spare does those claims a hell of a lot of harm.
 

ret

International Debutant
Wow, way to talk around the point. Keep flogging something when you are clearly wrong. SA picked 6 specialist batsmen. Sure they are lucky that Kallis bowls but there are 6 batsmen and a v. good keeper bat at 7. Teams rely on top 7, not top 5 to score heavily in modern cricket.

Pathan doesnt add balance at 7, he weakens the team and he is massively inferior to Amla as a batsman and isnt comparable to Kallis as an allrounder. Bowling allrounders are out of place in the top 7 unless they are guys like Kapil and Flintoff.

If Dhoni was a proven and successful Test batsman then Id maybe see how picking 5 bats may be justified. However he isnt at the moment and has not deserved a top 6 spot.

Pollock was a better batsman than Pathan yet he spent most of his career at 8 or below.

There is no two ways of looking at it. The composition of this Indian team is poor and you can try and draw similarities with the SA team but its false.

Dhoni at 7 looks good. Dhoni at 6 looks very weak.
Dude, SA can pick 6 specialist batsmen because one of the 6 specialist batsmen is the 5th bowler .... If Kallis didn't bowl then SA would have played another all-rounder in place of Amla [or some other batsman]

On Pathan not adding balance to the side, well he did bowl quite a few overs and also scored runs so it doesn't go with your point .... Dhoni scored a 50 too. he may look weak to you at 6 but not to me

yeah India, like every team, is relying on the everyone to score runs but it's the top 5 batsmen in the side [and not necessarily the ones from one to five] who have to do the bulk of scoring

For a moment, let's assume that India went in with one more batsman, so who would it have picked from the squad in stead of Pathan [who did well with the bat in this test]? What you are suggesting is that Ind pack in more batsmen in their squad even though Pathan is doing well with the bat just coz Dhoni coming in at 7 looks good on paper :laugh:

Anyways, keep coming out with theories that don't apply in the real world
 

Lillian Thomson

Hall of Fame Member
Anyways, keep coming out with theories that don't apply in the real world
A splitting of five-dimensional spacetime into the Einstein equations and Maxwell equations in four dimensions was first discovered by Gunnar Nordström in 1914, in the context of his theory of gravity, but subsequently forgotten. In 1926, Oskar Klein proposed that the fourth spatial dimension is curled up in a circle of very small radius, so that a particle moving a short distance along that axis would return to where it began. The distance a particle can travel before reaching its initial position is said to be the size of the dimension. This extra dimension is a compact set, and the phenomenon of having a space-time with compact dimensions is referred to as compactification.

In modern geometry, the extra fifth dimension can be understood to be the circle group U(1), as electromagnetism can essentially be formulated as a gauge theory on a fiber bundle, the circle bundle, with gauge group U(1). Once this geometrical interpretation is understood, it is relatively straightforward to replace U(1) by a general Lie group. Such generalizations are often called Yang–Mills theories. If a distinction is drawn, then it is that Yang–Mills theories occur on a flat space-time, whereas Kaluza–Klein treats the more general case of curved spacetime. The base space of Kaluza–Klein theory need not be four-dimensional space-time; it can be any (pseudo-)Riemannian manifold, or even a supersymmetric manifold or orbifold or even a noncommutative space.

As an approach to the unification of the forces, it is straightforward to apply the Kaluza-Klein theory in an attempt to unify gravity with the strong and electroweak forces by using the symmetry group of the Standard Model, SU(3) × SU(2) × U(1). However, an attempt to convert this interesting geometrical construction into a bona-fide model of reality founders on a number of issues, including the fact that the fermions must be introduced in an artificial way (in nonsupersymmetric models). A less problematic approach to the unification of the forces is taken by modern string theory and M-theory. Nonetheless, KK remains an important touchstone in theoretical physics and is often embedded in more sophisticated theories. It is studied in its own right as an object of geometric interest in K-theory.

Even in the absence of a completely satisfying theoretical physics framework, the idea of exploring extra, compactified, dimensions is of considerable interest in the experimental physics and astrophysics communities. A variety of predictions, with real experimental consequences, can be made (in the case of large extra dimensions/warped models). For example, on the simplest of principles, one might expect to have standing waves in the extra compactified dimension(s). If an extra dimension is of radius R, the energy of such a standing wave would be E = nhc / R with n an integer, h being Planck's constant and c the speed of light. This set of possible energy values is often called the Kaluza–Klein tower.

Examples of experimental pursuits include work by the CDF collaboration, which has re-analyzed particle collider data for the signature of effects associated with large extra dimensions/warped models.

Brandenberger and Vafa have speculated that in the early universe, cosmic inflation causes three of the space dimensions to expand to cosmological size while the remaining dimensions of space remained microscopic.

So far no evidence has been found to support the existence of extra dimensions yet the idea remains popular among theoretical scientists. The LHC is hoped to provide evidence for the existence of extra dimensions.
 

DaRick

State Vice-Captain
Piss poor logic. As I set it's very unlikely, but if you just gift a side an extra say 0.2% chance of winning that's pretty silly. We all know what can happen in cricket with relatively well matched sides, one team can get a 400 lead in one match and be 400 behind in another - these extremes are of course unlikely themselves but they do happen.
Did you read Xuhaib's original post, or were you just in a bad mood and looking for someone to throw the book at? :unsure:

Here's what Xuhaib said:

"On this with SP it was a poor declaration the wicket is easy and all that was needed was a Dravid-Laxman type partnership to get Saffers sweating."

Here's what I said:

"You mean ala Kolkata 2001? Mate, they're called 'miracles' for a reason (that Test is frequently referred to by Indians as the Kolkata miracle - for me, it'd be more like the Kolkata disaster or something). They just don't happen more than once under the same set of circumstances. Besides, Waugh made India follow on when Australia were around 270 (?) runs ahead. As Laurrz said, India are 400 runs behind. If they make South Africa bat again, they would've done pretty damn well, for mine."

I'm not sure what the hell you're on about, TBH. I wasn't even talking about a side gaining and conceeding a 400-run lead within the space of two matches, nor was I refuting anything that you said when I was talking to Xuhaib.

I was talking about what happened in the Kolkata Test and what happened in this Test. Xuhaib tried to compare the two; I tried to point out that they could not reasonably be compared (due to the differences in leads, captains, bowling attacks, venues, circumstances, etc.). Besides, miracles don't happen more than once under the same set of circumstances (i.e - if Dravid and Laxman came together with a garangatuan deficit in front of them, faced with the exact same powerful Australian attack, a multitude of times, they would only be able to perform a miracle once, if that). If you can show me otherwise, then I'll conceed defeat and salute you for doing so.

Better luck next time, mate. :p
 
Last edited:

Manee

Cricketer Of The Year
Sharma? Not sure I would have said that pre-series after only having played a handful of matches. Especially with Kumble.
Rating him above Kumble was an oversight on my part, but he is among the two best pace bowlers and I would not have been afraid to say that before the series, being somebody who did not rate RP Singh's performance downunder and someone who has not rated Sreesanth's Test bowling since England.

Calling him India's second best pace bowler is barely a compliment and is mostly because, unlike RP Singh and Sreesanth, he has performed well in more than one country.
 

pasag

RTDAS
Dude, SA can pick 6 specialist batsmen because one of the 6 specialist batsmen is the 5th bowler .... If Kallis didn't bowl then SA would have played another all-rounder in place of Amla [or some other batsman]

On Pathan not adding balance to the side, well he did bowl quite a few overs and also scored runs so it doesn't go with your point .... Dhoni scored a 50 too. he may look weak to you at 6 but not to me

yeah India, like every team, is relying on the everyone to score runs but it's the top 5 batsmen in the side [and not necessarily the ones from one to five] who have to do the bulk of scoring

For a moment, let's assume that India went in with one more batsman, so who would it have picked from the squad in stead of Pathan [who did well with the bat in this test]? What you are suggesting is that Ind pack in more batsmen in their squad even though Pathan is doing well with the bat just coz Dhoni coming in at 7 looks good on paper :laugh:

Anyways, keep coming out with theories that don't apply in the real world
Dhoni isn't that good at 7 and certainly isn't a 6. Big deal he made a 50 when the match was well and truly over, it means very little. The Indian lower middle order is too much of a liability and needs to be changed ASAP. Goughy is spot on here.
 

Top