OverratedSanity
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Oh boy look at that inconsistent bounce.
More please
More please
They tend to wide the ball if it becomes a negative tactic, rather than just punish the bowler for an occasional wayward delivery.Umpires are far far to shy about widing bowlers in tests. Thakur wouldnt have reached that with a 12 foot bat.
Yeah, but it still looks a bit ridiculous tbh. They wide the ones that go miles above your head a bit more often but bowl it 8 feet wide of off and they seem to allow it for some reason unless its a tactic.They tend to wide the ball if it becomes a negative tactic, rather than just punish the bowler for an occasional wayward delivery.
Lots to unpick in this and I don't want to clog up a match thread. We don't play enough, but (outside covid) play enough. A lot of these problems where predicted, we knew we had an ageing team, that where all going to retire within two to three years of each other. What was done about this, what plans were made, what talent was identified and grown or nurtured? Its not unique to cricket, its a problem that any company has to deal with and make sure there is a progression plan. And three years after the fact we still having to discuss it? And based on the situation you find yourself the plan needs to change. Drip feeding players while you still have a competitive experienced unit is fine. Drip feeding less talented players into an unexperienced poorly performing unit is bad.Part of the problem is that we don't play enough tests. Once a player is picked it's only fair to give him a decent run in the side, but it's taking too long for that decent run to happen. Van der Dussen is playing in his 11th match, which is now enough to be able to make a reasonable assessment of him, but it's taken two years to get to that point.
Of course, the number of tests we play isn't something we can necessarily have that much say in (and obviously COVID messing things has exacerbated the decision), but it does mean that we need to be more intelligent about our selections. The argument for picking a player with loads of first-class experience is that they know their game and will be able to hit the ground running when they make their international debut, but often there's a good reason why they've never been called up to national side while they've been amass that first-class experience, and it's not that previous selectors were wrong in overlooking them.
But something we do have control over is the international players playing in our domestic competition. Of the side, I think it was only Elgar, Petersen, Mulder, and Jansen who've played in the current 4-day series. So is it really a surprise that we looked a little underdone with more than half the team not having played red ball cricket for months?
There really should be a mandate that the national players play for their domestic sides when available. Not only will it give them game time, it improves the standard of the competition by having the best players play, and it's a way of assessing who's in form and how they compare against those who should be challenging them for a place in the test side. I know it can disrupt the domestic teams a little by having players pop in and out, but in the bigger scheme of things it's to everyone's benefit and there's no reason for them not to play.
pretty sure he gets the full series herePujara probably batting for his career here.
So far Jansen's on day 3 & Mayank on day 1 are perhaps straightforward bad calls from HawkeyeThe hawkeye continues to be dodgy. And Rabada not helping himself with the noballs and the drops.
Hmmm need to get around 300 asap and declare or get bowled out trying to get there!I think India should give their bowlers 40 overs today. And looking at the weather forecast, 20-30 overs might be possible tomorrow if the bowlers don't clean them up by today.