• 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 England in India***

Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Precambrian said:
Pathetic appeals from Panesar. Would do a lot of good if he reads the LBW laws and come.
Click to expand...
I often think he appeals - to some extent - as soon as the ball hits the pad, regardless of anything else.

Looks like Gambhir might've got away with one there though.
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Precambrian said:
Panesar bowling negative already.
Click to expand...
It's understandable though. If Sehwag is content to kick it away for a 2 or 3 overs, get back around, but it's worth a try to see if Sehwag isn't happy to be stopped completely. It's always a possibility.
 
Precambrian

Precambrian

Banned
As long as Panesar is able to get the ball spinning into the body of Sehwag, it is ok. But if he starts bowling the leg side without any possibility of taking a wicket, not good at all.
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Goughy said:
Maybe, but he was bowling 1 side of the wicket and the ball was going in consistently the same area. He was also the most threatening of the bowlers.

Sehwag took him on. It happens sometimes and he was successful but he was helped by the wrong field being set and all the runs coming in the same unprotected area.

It wasnt as if Sehwag was picking off bad balls as Harmison sprayed it all over.
Click to expand...
No, just bad balls that were constantly in the same area. Short and wide, short and wide, short and wide. Yes, a field could've been set to cut the stroke off, but I don't think that many are in favour of setting fields for bad balls. I'm certainly not.

And yeah, that Gambhir one was definately glove. Can't really blame Harper too much, for once, but it should've been out.
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Precambrian said:
As long as Panesar is able to get the ball spinning into the body of Sehwag, it is ok. But if he starts bowling the leg side without any possibility of taking a wicket, not good at all.
Click to expand...
If the ball keeps going past the body on the leg-side, it should be wided, and the Laws state as much. But if he threatens the stumps by hitting the rough and forces Sehwag to put the pad in the way, fair noof IMO. But as I say, if Sehwag is happy to kick it for a few overs, get back around. Else it's only playing into his hands.
 
duffer

duffer

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Going by cricinfo it sound slike Monty is just firing in darts right now. Would that be an accurate description?
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
That Swann-Sehwag lbw wasn't far away. Can't expect it to be given out, but I always thought it was quite possible it was hitting.
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
duffer said:
Going by cricinfo it sound slike Monty is just firing in darts right now. Would that be an accurate description?
Click to expand...
Against Gambhir, yeah. Against Sehwag, he's putting it in the rough and bowling a bit more slowly, but certainly not "attacking" bowling at either batsman.

Not sure why the approach against Gambhir, but it's nothing too new.
 
Goughy

Goughy

Hall of Fame Member
Richard said:
No, just bad balls that were constantly in the same area. Short and wide, short and wide, short and wide. Yes, a field could've been set to cut the stroke off, but I don't think that many are in favour of setting fields for bad balls. I'm certainly not.
Click to expand...
They are not bad balls. It is Harmisons natural area and it is Sehwags favourite area. Doesnt take a genius to put a 3rd man in. And for all the negativity you are giving that attack, he was the most likely to take a wicket as the shots were powerful but seldom controlled. Sehwag took him on and with some luck it paid off.

What is more likely, a glide or cut to 3rd man or a drive through mid off when Harmison bowls to Sehwag?

You may not want to set a field for that bowling but then that shows a lack of awareness to the participants in the game. You would rather set a field for where the ball is not going to go?
 
Last edited:
Precambrian

Precambrian

Banned
Goughy said:
They are not bad balls. It is Harmisons natural area and it is Sehwags favourite area. Doesnt take a genius to put a 3rd man in. And for all the negativity you are giving that attack, he was the most likely to take a wicket as the shots were powerful but seldom controlled. Sehwag took him on and with some luck it paid off.

What is more likely, a glide or cut to 3rd man or a drive through mid off when Harmison bowls to Sehwag?

You may not want to set a field for that bowling but then that shows a lack of awareness to the participants in the game. You would rather set a field for where the ball is not going to go?
Click to expand...
Yeah, the English thinktank came short in that department by not putting in a thirdman for Sehwag. He revels in that area, esp to bowlers like Harmy who gets it to bounce.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top