*Official* 1st Test - England v India - Keep all Discussion Here Please!

[Anil]

We never had a match winning bowler(fast or spin)on wickets abroad since Kapil at his peak(that too, he was a one man army) and this more than lack of batting spine has contributed to our miserable run abroad. We have had a succession of world class batsmen and many of them have played in the same era forming powerful batting lineups. It is chiefly our inability to take 20 wickets in a match that has led to lost matches and lost series.

Why do we blame only the batsmen for collapsing to 221 all out? Our bowlers conceded 487 and 301 for 6 and played with as much indiscipline and irresponsibility(if not more) as the batsmen. They get the same match fees as the batsmen, don't they? They have equal responsibility.

 

[Sulphate]

India need to give their 100 percent performance, if they do that, they will easily thrash England.

How can u expect them to win matches, when ur captain, ur main batter, ur senior pacer all performed pathetically??

However India re slow starters, so don't get depressed, they will bounce back with a BANG!

this is rather arrogant. england are a good team in their own respect. even if india play to their full potential theuy are not guaranteed success as england can play well too.

atm englands batters are playing better than their indian counterparts. india wont be able to bowl england out of englands batters perform. the india fasts jst arnt good enough.

*expects 6 england batting collpases in the rest of the series*

 

[luckyeddie]

There is a saying in cricket :

'A collapse of Englandesque proportions'.

We haven't seen too many by the masters of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory recently, but England fans are always aware that our collapses are a bit like buses - none for ages and then three come along at once.

Against the current Indian bowling attack, however, I think we are safe for a bit longer yet.

 

[Rich2001]

There is a saying in cricket :

'A collapse of Englandesque proportions'.

We haven't seen too many by the masters of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory recently, but England fans are always aware that our collapses are a bit like buses - none for ages and then three come along at once.

Against the current Indian bowling attack, however, I think we are safe for a bit longer yet.

Your spot on there LE, however the batting is doing ok of late before the last test England had passed 500 in their last 3-5 innings, and with 481 against India, I was more than happy

 

[aussie_beater]

Why do we blame only the batsmen for collapsing to 221 all out? Our bowlers conceded 487 and 301 for 6 and played with as much indiscipline and irresponsibility(if not more) as the batsmen. They get the same match fees as the batsmen, don't they? They have equal responsibility.

Yes, they do get the same match fees but the bowlers can only do so much on a flat track like the Lords one....it was a batsman's track and what did they do ? ....sucked big time ! So instead of dreaming that India is gonna win matches outright, we ought to think of atleast not losing these matches and the batsman have the keys to that, specially in a flat track like the one at Lords.They can put the match away from the opposition and give the bowlers something to work with.

Just look at the recent West Indies tour and how we lost the two tests.That's what needs to be fixed first for Indian cricket.Famed Indian batting....my foot !

 

[Top_Cat]

If there's one thing that can be said for Indian cricket in general is that there are some HIGHLY skilled players and they seem to be pretty richly talented. I mean you have spinners who can turn the ball a metre and batsmen who can hit lots of boundaries and go over it if neccessary, all with a style all of it's own. It's why I love watching indians play; the batting is like they're in a dream and the rest of the world ceases to exist. It's a freedom which is rarely seen elsewhere.

That said, it's also their Archille's Heel. The guys seem to be so skilled that doing the stuff like a tight line-and-length or paring back the attacking instincts with the bat seems boring. It's why when an Indian player sacrifices a bit of attacking play for some consistency, it's a big deal because it happens so rarely. Rahul Dravid is one guy like that and he averages higher outside of India than inside. He probably goes a bit TOO far the other way, though.

In short, Indian players remind me of some jazz musicians I've played with; they criticise pop music saying "I COULD play and write that stuff but it's beneath me." and skill-wise they're right. Unfortunately, when they try to write something pop it ends up sucking because they find it's not that easy to do the simple things. Indian cricket is the same. I am in no way suggesting they are as arrogant as most other jazz musucians I've met but maybe the simple just bores them because they ARE so skilled.

 

[aussie_beater]

Yes there isn't a greater sight in cricket then watching the Indian batsman on song....but when playing overseas, more often then not, its the sobs that we we see and not the songs !

 

[scorpio]

Some thoughts...

Despite his total crappy bowling in lords agarkar will win his place due to his batting. jeez

nehra is ganguly's blue eyed boy. So even though he deserves to be dropped he will get to stay. WHile Kumble might make way for Hard.

I hope yohannan gets a look in. The guy seems to have a good head..hmm

As for the batting i hope they stick with the same 6 and not tinker with it anymore except pushing laxman up.

And i think Ratra should get atleast one more chance. Mind you he hast played competitive cricket forever. So just dont dump him after one bad round.

 

[Anil]

Quote:
_____________________________________________
Yes, they do get the same match fees but the bowlers can only do so much on a flat track like the Lords one....it was a batsman's track and what did they do ? ....sucked big time ! So instead of dreaming that India is gonna win matches outright, we ought to think of atleast not losing these matches and the batsman have the keys to that, specially in a flat track like the one at Lords.They can put the match away from the opposition and give the bowlers something to work with.

Just look at the recent West Indies tour and how we lost the two tests.That's what needs to be fixed first for Indian cricket.Famed Indian batting....my foot !
_____________________________________________

Did you see what the second-string English attack did on the same "flat track"? True, lots of Indian batsmen got out to bad shots, but for the most part, they were induced by some tight planned bowling(especially in the 1st innings). I am not condoning the failure of the Indian batting, I am just saying that if it is a flat track, there is that much more responsibility on the bowlers to bowl on one side of the wicket, keep a good line and length and deny the batsmen easy runs. Every Indian bowler failed to do that.
So, when you say "but the bowlers can only do so much on a flat track like the Lords one", it is a fact that the bowlers didn't do half as much as they could have done. They didn't even try. Also, do you mean that India should go into a test on a flat track with 11 batsmen because the bowlers feel there is no point in them bowling on it?

To put it simply, they had a job to do and they didn't do it and that makes them as culpable as the batsmen.

 

[aussie_beater]

culpable for not winning the match ? ..yes, the bowlers surely are culpable on that score, but the award for being culpable in losing the match goes to our batsman unequivocally.

Its not about putting eleven batsman in a team, but for the six that are there to perform the job that they are so supposed to do and so famed at doing.

 

[Anil]

Why do you make such a distinction between not winning the match and losing the match?

See, this is what happened as far as I saw it:

The bowlers in the first innings bowled irresponsibly and allowed the batsmen to score 487.(I am not saying that it was entirely due to the Indian bowlers, the English batsmen capitalised on some weak bowling on a placid track and piled on the runs, all credit to them).Also, at this point any chance of India forcing a win vanished.

The batsmen came under pressure because they had to score 288 just to avoid the follow-on. So, what do they do? As is their wont under pressure, they promptly folded up for 221 and conceded a massive lead. Even at this point, with their attitude, chances of saving the match were slim.

Now, the bowlers were under pressure to keep the fourth innings target as reasonable as possible under the circumstances. So, what did they do? They followed the example of the 1st innings and conceded 301 runs to the Englishmen with two batsmen scoring centuries. Their attitude was that of bowling in an already lost game.

The batsmen(especially the top-order) completed the formalities by folding up again and the lower order displayed some heroics in what they clearly considered a lost cause.

There isn't much to choose between these two teams. It is just that English batting and bowling took much better advantage of the conditions while both our batsmen and bowlers sucked big-time and we ended up on the losing side. How can you blame one group unequivocally for such a debacle when what bowling does impacts the batting in such a big way and vice versa?

 

[aussie_beater]

Everybody knows that Indian bowlers are not what you would call a devastating lot and when the wicket isn't helping them one bit, they aren't the ones who have won matches abroad for India ever.That's when the onus shifts completely to the batsman and they are the ones who should perform so that the match atleast isn't lost, if not won.But alas, that's not what they do....they are the stars and have their moods and saving the match wasn't exactly what they had in their minds at that point.

 

[luckyeddie]

True, AB.

There's nothing like a first innings lead of a couple of hundred or so to render any opposition vulnerable.

For the sake of the series, I hope that India win the toss and take first knock at Trent Bridge, and that they are still batting on the Friday morning.

(Then I can go on moaning about how Craig White will never be a test blah blah Corky blah blah).

 

[Rich2001]

For the sake of the series, I hope that India win the toss and take first knock at Trent Bridge, and that they are still batting on the Friday morning.

You might as well let Nasser win the toss as in a interview with a English radio station after the toss in the first test, SG said the toss doesn't matter and it's not the toss that wins test matches... Well I for one wouldn't agree with that statement one bit

 

[Top_Cat]

I dunno, I reckon winning the toss is made mre of a big deal than it really is anymore. When wickets were uncovered and a team was exposed on the first morning to a sticky, sure winning the toss was a big deal.

But now, even pitches which are considered to have a bit of movement in them are quite tame in comparison to bygone days. So winning the toss I don't think is a HUGE advantage. Unless you're talking about a pitch where it's so dry it's crumbling and you look like batting last on it.

The good bowlers will bowl well regardless of the conditions (to an extent). And the good batsmen will be able to adjust their technique depending on the pitch and conditions too.

I just reckon too big of a deal is made of pitches these days.

 

[royGilchrist]

SG is an idiot

 

[luckyeddie]

I know it's still a week away, but the weather here is absolutely awful(I live about 12 miles from Trent Bridge).

It has rained twice in the last 2 days - once for 12 hours and once for 36.

 

[scorpio]

SG is an idiot

I think you are a bigger idiot.

I agree with ganguly that the toss is not that big a deal anymore like T_C said. The pitches are covered now. So unless you suck big time it really does not make a HUGE difference.

Steve waugh already has proven that all these things are just given too much importance. He has won the toss quite a few times and elected to bowl..has let his team play 4th on pitches and has been succesful.

I think ganguly is not the most sharpest captain in the world. But neither was steve waugh too. Guess the biggest strength of those two are that they motivate their team and make their teamates perform at thier best.

And for all those bashing SG...here is a thought...ever since we started playin we lack discipline...no matter what tactics you employ if the bowlers dont stick to a plan then you are gonna get thrashed.

If i remember correctly in the 5 tests in windies and 2 tests in SA...indian bowlers bowled with discipline in exactly 3 innings in 3 separate tests.
One resulted in a victory and 2 in hard fought defeats.

No matter what plans u have if a agarkar proceeds to bowl short at 130 mph..it defeats all purposes..right ?

 

[aussie_beater]

SG as a captain is fine....SG as a batsman needs to pull up his socks fast.

 

[luckyeddie]

What's Sunil Gavaskar got to do with it?