***Official Australia in India***

[pup11]

Funny you said "defended without much fuss" when he couldnt prevent it falling onto his stumps. Remember it was no inside edge or such thing.

Aaagh... never mind....

 

[Precambrian]

Nah, find your own VVS tbh. Learn to work the ball from outside off towards mid on.

Heh.

Had it been a greentop with a lot of swing, would you have loved a rule asking atleast 3 fielders to be present on the legside? There will be 4 slips, gully, cover and a lone fine leg for the pull. Crazy suggestion indeed by Pup.

 

[silentstriker]

That is totally uncharacteristic from Australia. India went into a shell in South Africa a couple years back, and it cost them. They can't do the same again this time. Basically, if they can score around 3 an over and bat out tomorrow, the series is theirs, so that's what they should look to do. But they've got to keep the run rate up - Krejza was a handful for the lower order in the first innings, and might be again, so the top order has to score runs.

I can't believe it was Australia who went 166/8 in 84 overs. Completely insane. Both good work by India and bad strategy from Australia though.

 

[honestbharani]

Said before the Test started.

Some kudos, please?

check the random cricketing thoughts thread.

 

[honestbharani]

Shastri was criticising India's negative field setting and how tactcics like these are a negative advertisement for the game and how stuff like this would kill viewer interest for test cricket.

Shastri was talking out of his ass, tbh...


The stuff he said about limiting innings in test cricket to a 100 overs as some way to rejuvenate test cricket were nothing but drivel.......



If you start limiting overs, it won't be TEST cricket, FFS........ Just hope I dont have to live to see the day when a test match can be won on runs and by not taking 20 wickets... I know it happens in very rare cases now but limiting overs, FFS......

 

[honestbharani]

Katich cops a poor decision . Still, hopefully someone will come in and score a run now

how exactly?????????????

 

[Bees]

I'm with HB. Tests like these are in stark contrast to the other forms of the game, and there are just too many formats to be able to fill the canyon between tests and limited overs cricket. The best thing to do is to keep supporting test cricket and illustrate specifically why these so-called negative advertisements are riveting in the big picture of the match.

 

[honestbharani]

Absolutely woeful decision...

Indian commentator trying to justify it as well

again........ how????????? Ball was hitting bang on leg stump.. or is it only LBW if the ball was hitting middle?????????

 

[Rant0r]

did i just read that dav whatmore is coach of the indian a team ? that's definitely a plus, well known for getting the best out of very little, took sri lanka to world cup glory and overachieved in bangladesh.

test is looking interesting, australia could still win. How long can you bowl a foot outside off stump with an 8-1 field before the batsman tries something different ? but then i spose mcgrath took 500 odd wickets bowling in the same spot ball after ball.

 

[ret]

as far as i m concerned, it up to Australia to make a match out of it as a draw gives India the series

Australia is still 210 runs behind with Watson, Haddin and White to follow. it still has some work to do .... on the other hand, a good session for India could get them into business

Interesting game on hands and with that I will hit the sack

appears as if i read the day somewhat yday

India is 86 runs ahead. the dilemma for them would be to go for a win or play for the series. the decision they take would be determined by how things shape up tomm but a Sehwag special would not only make that decision easier but also demoralize the Australians

and it's nice to see wickets being shared by the main Indian bowlers rather than one bowler picking up bulk of them

 

[honestbharani]

I think more than calling in any sort of a restrictions or anything, i think the umpires should be allowed to judge on it, for example if a bowler bowls a leg stump line ala Giles and doesn't give a batsman any legitimate chance of scoring runs, umpires call it a wide in test cricket for negative bowling, so if a team packs one side of the field completely and bowls way outside the off-stump, then they should also be wided.

Let me clarify i don't have any problems with captains setting their fields in any way he wants, but its negative line i have a problem with.

The bodyline restriction was because around the wicket outside leg is basically the "blind spot" for a batsman and there is just no real physical way that you can be in control of your stroke when the ball is delivered there and so many guys are stacked behind square...





Not even in the same ball park as full outside the off in full view of the batsman.......



In one word, over-reaction on your part, mate.

 

[honestbharani]

Would probably depend on the situation, and exactly how negative things were getting. Umpire's interpretation, obviously. That's what we have now anyway, just that it's generally limited to leg side bowling in terms of enforcement.

Australia did the same to New Zealand back in 1999 in Australia when they were looking for quick runs. If I am not mistaken, the umpires had the option to wide them if it was negative bowling even then... But they never did it. If they suddenly start to do this stuff now, it will spark a huge reaction... Need some kind of clearer legislation on this, esp. since it is a lot easier to hit balls outside off than balls outside leg...

 

[honestbharani]

I never said anywhere that the Australians shouldn't be wided for bowling a negative line, did i, and still when Lax and Gambhir were batting despite the outside off line the Australian bowlers bowled, they had plenty of 1's and 2's on offer as most of the Aussie fielders were on the boundary.

ok.. you gotta be clearer now.. do u have a problem with the line or the field?????

 

[honestbharani]

He'd do bloody well to get an LBW to a right-hander from around the wicket.

Nothing wrong with it at all, he's probably aiming for the footmarks. Just not, for my money, an attacking move.

why is it difficult for an offie to get a RHB LBW from around the wicket????


I thought it was the more sure shot way of doing it than from over the wicket, where you will mostly be hitting the pad outside the line of off stump.

 

[honestbharani]

Hopefully Ponting and his management team will learn something from Dhoni and his management team here..



Packing a side of the field with just 2 guys in the deep and still having 2 to 3 catchers and having your bowlers bowl with discipline on that side of the field = PROPER defensive tactics...



Putting 4 guys out on the boundary on the square on both sides of the wicket and taking out all your catchers and stacking them up one next to the other on one side of the wicket and then HOPING that the batsmen get out and don't score runs = "I have no ****ing idea about field settings and my bowlers are bowling both sides anyways" field setting.

 

[IndGunner]

Ret and hb have the same picture confused me for a sec :?

 

[IndGunner]

http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/talk/content/multimedia/377468.html?view=transcript

"it is not the sort of cricket I like to see. Administrators have got to think about suggesting that perhaps no more than two-thirds of the fielders can be on one side of the wicket. It really isn't a lot of fun watching the bowlers bowling well wide of the stumps and batsmen putting their bats on their shoulders."

are you serious. wow some people are really taking pup's suggestion to heart i think this is stupid. This sort of play as been around since the start of test matches and is fair.



"The over-rates were appalling again. The Indians really showed the true colour of cricketers. They are just not bothered by fines. They were quite prepared to slow the over-rate in the morning and even use it as a tactic."

I Think you will find that overrates are judged at the end of the days play and india were back the correct number (with the half hour included that is).

Chappel is trying to stir some s**t up here...

TBH it does require skill to bowl repeatedly on a certain line so i think the bowlers should be given some credit. I know a certain bowler who only bowled one line a lenght, Mcgrath.3

I think if anything the blame should be on the Australian batsmen, Katich and hussey mainly it was up to them to do something maybe if the started to play it around a bit or try then as hayden said they could have forced the bowling to change or something.

 

[pup11]

ok.. you gotta be clearer now.. do u have a problem with the line or the field?????

I have a problem with the line as it hardly allows the batsmen to even put bat to ball, it would still be bearable, but once a team also blocks every possible gap on one side of the field, then that doesn't leave the batsmen with many options, its been done in the past but i think a full-stop should be put to such tactics and whoever bowls such crap way outside off with such fields should be wided imo.

 

[krkode]

http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/talk/content/multimedia/377468.html?view=transcript

"it is not the sort of cricket I like to see. Administrators have got to think about suggesting that perhaps no more than two-thirds of the fielders can be on one side of the wicket. It really isn't a lot of fun watching the bowlers bowling well wide of the stumps and batsmen putting their bats on their shoulders."

are you serious. wow some people are really taking pup's suggestion to heart i think this is stupid. This sort of play as been around since the start of test matches and is fair.



"The over-rates were appalling again. The Indians really showed the true colour of cricketers. They are just not bothered by fines. They were quite prepared to slow the over-rate in the morning and even use it as a tactic."

I Think you will find that overrates are judged at the end of the days play and india were back the correct number (with the half hour included that is).

Chappel is trying to stir some s**t up here...

TBH it does require skill to bowl repeatedly on a certain line so i think the bowlers should be given some credit. I know a certain bowler who only bowled one line a lenght, Mcgrath.3

I think if anything the blame should be on the Australian batsmen, Katich and hussey mainly it was up to them to do something maybe if the started to play it around a bit or try then as hayden said they could have forced the bowling to change or something.

Haha, Chappel sounds positively pissed.

One can argue that India was being defensive and trying to stifle the game and/or the Aussie scoring rate. But it's odd, though, for being so utterly defensive, India still managed to pull 8 wickets out of the situation...

 

[pup11]

Hopefully Ponting and his management team will learn something from Dhoni and his management team here..



Packing a side of the field with just 2 guys in the deep and still having 2 to 3 catchers and having your bowlers bowl with discipline on that side of the field = PROPER defensive tactics...



Putting 4 guys out on the boundary on the square on both sides of the wicket and taking out all your catchers and stacking them up one next to the other on one side of the wicket and then HOPING that the batsmen get out and don't score runs = "I have no ****ing idea about field settings and my bowlers are bowling both sides anyways" field setting.

Ponting has never been a genius as captain, he makes all sorts of weird decisions so that's nothing new with him, the defensive tactic theory on this tour is just a pile of bull****, with the kind of bowlers he had at his disposal in 2004 he was able to pull off that tactic then, because unlike his current crop of bowlers McGrath, Gillespie and Kasper weren't bowling outside off, they were at the stumps attacking all the time, and that's why they were successful.