• 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*** India in Australia 2014-5

Riggins

Riggins

International Captain
honestbharani said:
The impact point of the ball on the pitch was AFTER the impact point, if any, of the ball on bat.. How that is out will only be known to Fry.. Oz perhaps getting more help from their 3rd umpire than their fielders :p
Click to expand...
You couldn't really see an impact point. Maybe, though.
 
D

Dan

Hall of Fame Member
viriya said:
I really don't know why teams don't do that more often.. get 650-700 and don't bat again.. why declare at anything less if you can downhill skill for a free 100 runs?
Click to expand...
Our opening bowler barely has functioning knees, Hazlewood isn't renowned for his continued fitness, and we don't want to overburden Starc considering he's apparently always in the 'danger zone' when it comes to his back. This attack bowling back-to-back innings is a recipe for disaster.
 
viriya

viriya

International Captain
Dan said:
Our opening bowler barely has functioning knees, Hazlewood isn't renowned for his continued fitness, and we don't want to overburden Starc considering he's apparently always in the 'danger zone' when it comes to his back. This attack bowling back-to-back innings is a recipe for disaster.
Click to expand...
Good point. I'm not used to having my team depending on pacers tbf :D

Even then though - doesn't mean you don't bat again - just that you get a lead easier.
 
Last edited:
Spark

Spark

Global Moderator
Dan said:
Our opening bowler barely has functioning knees, Hazlewood isn't renowned for his continued fitness, and we don't want to overburden Starc considering he's apparently always in the 'danger zone' when it comes to his back. This attack bowling back-to-back innings is a recipe for disaster.
Click to expand...
You declare late in the assumption you won't follow on, though. It's just about reducing risk in the third innings.
 
D

Dan

Hall of Fame Member
Spark said:
You declare late in the assumption you won't follow on, though. It's just about reducing risk in the third innings.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I definitely agree with that aspect -- virya specifically mentioned only batting the once though.
 
D

Dan

Hall of Fame Member
Blocky said:
I was thinking Katich personally would've been great to have.
Click to expand...
Yeah, Katich or Bevan. Basically the same, all things considered. I think early-career Bevan was a better bowler though (with a better wrong'un, iirc), but Katich a far better all-round package for the team.

Both incredibly underrated bowlers (though picking Bevan as a pseudo-specialist spinner was, erm, incredibly overrating him)
 
Blocky

Blocky

Banned
Good team man, trying to do something he just doesn't have up his sleeve.

Set a record - 6 consecutive 50s for an Australian opening batsman in a series.
 
Blocky

Blocky

Banned
Dan said:
Yeah, Katich or Bevan. Basically the same, all things considered. I think early-career Bevan was a better bowler though (with a better wrong'un, iirc), but Katich a far better all-round package for the team.

Both incredibly underrated bowlers (though picking Bevan as a pseudo-specialist spinner was, erm, incredibly overrating him)
Click to expand...
Although he did pick up 10 wickets in the game they did that in :P
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top