• 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* First Test at Lord's

centurymaker

centurymaker

Cricketer Of The Year
needs to bowl more accurately and his length has to be slightly fuller.
moreover he should be bowling his inswingers and outswingers from roughly the same spot, otherwise it's too easy for the batsman to tell whats coming. basically - bowl smarter
 
Top_Cat

Top_Cat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
From what I saw he was going all out for swing without much variation in pace. If he does stuff like banana'ing a few past the edge and then slips in a slightly quicker one with the attendant less movement, reckon he has a better chance of taking it.
 
Last edited:
GIMH

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
I was meant to quote Teja here but nevermind.

I don't think it matters whether we're talking one delivery, one day, one series, one year. If a bowler is constantly missing the edge that isn't bad luck. Luck is something out of a player's control. It is the bowler's job to make the batsman play at it.

To put it another way, if a batsman slightly mistimes a shot, gets the thinnest of edges and out, it's not unlucky. A bowler missing the edge is their equivalent.

If he was bowling at the tail I could maybe buy it as bad luck because tailenders will sometimes play and miss where a batsman would get out. But Kumar was bowling to some of the world's finest (referring to Cook and Trott, primarily).

Bottom line is that this doesn't mean I've written him off. Not thinking someone was unlucky doesn't mean I think they were ****. If he adjusts his length, who knows. If he bowled like he did yesterday though, and Zaheer can't play (see what I did there :ph34r:) then I think we might see some big totals from our bats.
 
silentstriker

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
Man that was such a great spell from Zaheer...losing him on the first day is literally the worst thing for India. I expected him not to make it for all four Tests but the first day? He is by far the single most important Indian player in the series. :cry:
 
GIMH

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Most important player on either side. Even if we lost Anderson, Bresnan is stil a very good bowler. We'd be weakened for sure but not to the extent India were yesterday.
 
GIMH

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Can any of my shandy-drinking friends provide a weather report? Beautiful blue sky with burning sun here. Perfect batting conditions, you might say.
 
TT Boy

TT Boy

Hall of Fame Member
Good ODI spell by Bhaji. Darting them in nicely. Weather is apparently set fair for today (and the remainder of the test), so expect England to go big.
 
social

social

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
grecian said:
Ahh, well it's a thin line with Social, his anti-british mentality and trolling can just seem very close together. Mind you he was right about Rory McIlroy being a flawed golfer.
Click to expand...
Ha ha

If you had watched him in that tournament you'd have seen that he produced the same mistakes that cost him at Augusta (and replicated at the British Open btw)

Anyway, how is it anti-British to say that Cook and Strauss played poorly and that Kumar didnt bowl as badly as Freddie would like us to think he did - thought that was obvious

It's almost farcical to think that Nick Knight can praise a guy for a play and miss - silly me, I thought that the objective of batting was to hit the ball

Finally, please dont brand me anti-British - Scots, Welsh, and Irish are some of the nicest people you'll ever meet
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top