aussie_beater
State Vice-Captain
whatever happened to Mullaly ? I kinda lost track of this guy, maybe because I don't follow county cricket a lot, but he wasn't bad.
-
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* 4th Test - England v India - Keep all Discussion Here Please!
- Thread starter luckyeddie
- Start date
luckyeddie
Cricket Web Staff Member
Re Corky's gesture : Simon Hughes and the Channel4 team were quite scathing on day 1 regarding England's selection of Cork at number 7.
He scored a 50 and shoved 7 fingers up at the Channel4 commentary box a la Nasser earlier in the season (ODI ton at 3).
He scored a 50 and shoved 7 fingers up at the Channel4 commentary box a la Nasser earlier in the season (ODI ton at 3).
luckyeddie
Cricket Web Staff Member
Thoughts after an hour and a half of play on day 4
If the decision to test out the middle of the wicket is Cork's, then I agree that he should NEVER even be considered for England again.
If it is Hussain's decision (as I suspect it may well be - see his article in today's Sunday Telegraph) then it's time for a new skipper.
Probably both - my guess is that it is a 'cunning plan' they hatched up between them.
I'm sick of it (good grief, I've got to watch it in order to do the match report).
Scorpio, you have my permission to be as scathing in your criticism as you like (as if you need my permission anyway
)
If the decision to test out the middle of the wicket is Cork's, then I agree that he should NEVER even be considered for England again.
If it is Hussain's decision (as I suspect it may well be - see his article in today's Sunday Telegraph) then it's time for a new skipper.
Probably both - my guess is that it is a 'cunning plan' they hatched up between them.
I'm sick of it (good grief, I've got to watch it in order to do the match report).
Scorpio, you have my permission to be as scathing in your criticism as you like (as if you need my permission anyway
)
luckyeddie
Cricket Web Staff Member
Caddick will probably get dropped for going against team policy.
He came on, pitched the ball up and straight away removed Laxman.
Why oh why oh why oh why oh why oh why oh why (etc) have we wasted the best part of a day and a half with the short stuff? It's simply moronic. We haven't got the equipment to play that sort of game. You have to play to your strengths. I am so flipping fed up. I've got to watch 4 more hours of this rubbish today.
I wish it would rain.
He came on, pitched the ball up and straight away removed Laxman.
Why oh why oh why oh why oh why oh why oh why (etc) have we wasted the best part of a day and a half with the short stuff? It's simply moronic. We haven't got the equipment to play that sort of game. You have to play to your strengths. I am so flipping fed up. I've got to watch 4 more hours of this rubbish today.
I wish it would rain.
aussie_beater
State Vice-Captain
Yes Nehra and Mullaly are pretty much the same type of bowler, but I would say that Nehra has to go quite a lot to be considered a force as he is still unable to use favourable conditions to his advantage.His performance in this series in England has proved that this guy needs serious help to harness whatever he has got in him.The conditions in England should have been the stuff of dreams for any bowler of his type, but all he could manage is be a peashooter.
Neil Pickup
Request Your Custom Title Now!
That Article was a Joke. "The game is over" was basically what he said - such negative thinking was pathetic, and the "Test out the Toecaps" philosophy needs to be sent somewhere near Agarkar's middle stump...
luckyeddie
Cricket Web Staff Member
For once, I have added a little bit of my opinion to my match report today.
It's not something I did with any relish, but what the hell. If the England skipper can spout a few column inches of negative claptrap in a national newspaper and get paid a few thousand pounds, then I can give him a couple of paragraphs of mildly pointed criticism totally for free.
Now I'm safely in the forum rather than being a reporter, I can say exactly what I feel. IMHO, for the sake of English cricket, Nasser Hussain should be sacked forthwith and the job given to Marcus Trescothick. The last two days have shown him to be an over-cautious, retroactive skipper.
With a score of 515 on the board and the series in the balance, England were reduced to employing a sweeper on the cover point boundary with India having scored less than 50. When they had reached 100, we didn't even have a gulley.
No-one was prepared to pitch the ball in the batsman's half until India had scored almost 400 - in other words, no risks were taken while there was still a possibility of losing. I'm undecided whether to describe the skipper's performance as spineless, gutless or pitiful.
The last two days have been painful to watch, but I forced myself to. Aren't you proud of me? The things I do for CricketWeb.
It's not something I did with any relish, but what the hell. If the England skipper can spout a few column inches of negative claptrap in a national newspaper and get paid a few thousand pounds, then I can give him a couple of paragraphs of mildly pointed criticism totally for free.
Now I'm safely in the forum rather than being a reporter, I can say exactly what I feel. IMHO, for the sake of English cricket, Nasser Hussain should be sacked forthwith and the job given to Marcus Trescothick. The last two days have shown him to be an over-cautious, retroactive skipper.
With a score of 515 on the board and the series in the balance, England were reduced to employing a sweeper on the cover point boundary with India having scored less than 50. When they had reached 100, we didn't even have a gulley.
No-one was prepared to pitch the ball in the batsman's half until India had scored almost 400 - in other words, no risks were taken while there was still a possibility of losing. I'm undecided whether to describe the skipper's performance as spineless, gutless or pitiful.
The last two days have been painful to watch, but I forced myself to. Aren't you proud of me? The things I do for CricketWeb.
yeah.. it was soooo boring especailly laxman and dravid partnership... I fail to understand what they were doing tapping the ball..! And Hussain was horrific!!.. The only joy was listening to the commentators pick on him during the match 
Dravid played very well.. congrats to him..
wonder who will be given m-o-series.. both Vaughan and he deserves it. both have played splendidly
Dravid played very well.. congrats to him..
wonder who will be given m-o-series.. both Vaughan and he deserves it. both have played splendidly
full_length
U19 Vice-Captain
England will never go for the win, and India simply can't win otherwise. Come to think of it, England can't win even if they try to show the spirit. Maybe organising this series was a mistake. They could have had some ODIs where they force people to try and get results 
It will be very interesting if India's bowliing performance continues to suck tomorrow morning. Then Hussain will be faced with a dilemna- there will be a stage where he has 250+ runs in hand with a required runrate of 5+ for India. Then he'll have a chance to prove us wrong. In this hypothetical situation, I don't see Hussain taking the chance and throwing India a challenge with the attitude he has shown so far.
And quit dissing Sehwag, Scorpio! He's done nothing wrong so far. I notice that people always talk of poor technique only if the batsman is an attacking player. For all that, Sehwag does have good technique both in defense and when attacking. His only problem is with shot selection, and even there he's not done very badly. Somehow, people don't talk about Nasser Hussain's penchant of choosing to play the ball with the edge of his bat for his first 30 runs, or Gary Kirsten's penchant of knocking the ball back to his stumps (due to flawed technique) just because they are dour batsmen.
His test career is still in its early days:
8 matches, two centuries, three fifties with both centuries and the 84 coming in SA and England.
In my books, he has it to be better than what Slater was in the 90s. Slater was surely one of the top three openers of the entire decade of the 90s in world cricket. Sehwag, if persisted with, can get there. Remember that whenever he gets going he can take the day away from the opposition. And if Hussain poses India a challenge of something like 7 runs an over tomorrow, we will all be looking at Sehwag to win it for us
[Edited on 9/8/02 by full_length]
It will be very interesting if India's bowliing performance continues to suck tomorrow morning. Then Hussain will be faced with a dilemna- there will be a stage where he has 250+ runs in hand with a required runrate of 5+ for India. Then he'll have a chance to prove us wrong. In this hypothetical situation, I don't see Hussain taking the chance and throwing India a challenge with the attitude he has shown so far.
And quit dissing Sehwag, Scorpio! He's done nothing wrong so far. I notice that people always talk of poor technique only if the batsman is an attacking player. For all that, Sehwag does have good technique both in defense and when attacking. His only problem is with shot selection, and even there he's not done very badly. Somehow, people don't talk about Nasser Hussain's penchant of choosing to play the ball with the edge of his bat for his first 30 runs, or Gary Kirsten's penchant of knocking the ball back to his stumps (due to flawed technique) just because they are dour batsmen.
His test career is still in its early days:
8 matches, two centuries, three fifties with both centuries and the 84 coming in SA and England.
In my books, he has it to be better than what Slater was in the 90s. Slater was surely one of the top three openers of the entire decade of the 90s in world cricket. Sehwag, if persisted with, can get there. Remember that whenever he gets going he can take the day away from the opposition. And if Hussain poses India a challenge of something like 7 runs an over tomorrow, we will all be looking at Sehwag to win it for us
[Edited on 9/8/02 by full_length]
marc71178
Eyes not spreadsheets
England will never go for the win, and India simply can't win otherwise. Come to think of it, England can't win even if they try to show the spirit. Maybe organising this series was a mistake. They could have had some ODIs where they force people to try and get results
NO NO NO NO NO!!!!!!!!
I've had enough of that smash bang rubbish. Test Cricket is the only proper cricket.
luckyeddie
Cricket Web Staff Member
I agree.
Too much one-day cricket
Too much one-day cricket
Well it was India that demaned this Test match rememeber. If it was England's way the Test series would have finished about a week ago. And they could have fitted a couple of extra one dayers in before the ICC comp next weekMaybe organising this series was a mistake. They could have had some ODIs where they force people to try and get results
[Edited on 9/9/02 by Rich2001]
full_length
U19 Vice-Captain
I thought it was pretty obvious that I was simply irritated with the quality of the decider: everyone knew that the most probable result was a draw immediately after the first day, with the benign nature of the pitch, and the fact that both teams have lousy attacks.. This could have been a really good series... but a dead pitch for the decider and lack of killer instinct on part of the Indian bowlers and England's captain destroyed any chance of that happening.
India did demand for the fourth test and that turned out to be correct afterall, the series would have been tied at 1-1 otherwise, *without* even a decider. Now atleast, there was an opportunity for either team to show some spirit- sadly they didnt choose to. Surely you will agree that somehow test cricket can do that to people 
Lots of individual records, and good innings, but really, its "India vs. England" and not a test to see if dravid can bat or Caddick can bowl.
ODIs are just as important and relevant to cricket as test matches are. Long back people called it pyjama cricket, and whatnot. I would simply call that snobbishness. ODI makes cricket a complete team game. It is true that a test match tests out some qualities of a team, and importantly, tells up about the quality of the individual players. ODIs, by giving neither team an opportunity to draw the game brings out several other qualities that are not quite brought out by test cricket. It is true that a good ODI side need not be a good test side, and the same holds the other way round too. Lets accept that and move on!
I dont even want to compare, say, the recent Natwest series final to the test match at Chennai that India played against Australia. It will be almost like comparing a hockey match and a cricket match! But surely a Bevan or Klusener (of the '99 WC) is worthy of as much respect as any test match player. (yeah i know that klusener is also a proven test player..) .
IMO, the best thing to happen to cricket after its advent as an international sport was the introduction of the Limited overs contests. And that's NOT just about the money.
BTW, the most significant happening in cricket since 1990 for me would be the reinclusion of SA in the scheme of things. Their fielding in ODIs was a revelation, and the rest of the world soon learnt from them. What do you think?
India did demand for the fourth test and that turned out to be correct
afterall, the series would have been tied at 1-1 otherwise, *without* even a decider. Now atleast, there was an opportunity for either team to show some spirit- sadly they didnt choose to. Surely you will agree that somehow test cricket can do that to people Lots of individual records, and good innings, but really, its "India vs. England" and not a test to see if dravid can bat or Caddick can bowl.ODIs are just as important and relevant to cricket as test matches are. Long back people called it pyjama cricket, and whatnot. I would simply call that snobbishness. ODI makes cricket a complete team game. It is true that a test match tests out some qualities of a team, and importantly, tells up about the quality of the individual players. ODIs, by giving neither team an opportunity to draw the game brings out several other qualities that are not quite brought out by test cricket. It is true that a good ODI side need not be a good test side, and the same holds the other way round too. Lets accept that and move on!
I dont even want to compare, say, the recent Natwest series final to the test match at Chennai that India played against Australia. It will be almost like comparing a hockey match and a cricket match! But surely a Bevan or Klusener (of the '99 WC) is worthy of as much respect as any test match player. (yeah i know that klusener is also a proven test player..) .
IMO, the best thing to happen to cricket after its advent as an international sport was the introduction of the Limited overs contests. And that's NOT just about the money.
BTW, the most significant happening in cricket since 1990 for me would be the reinclusion of SA in the scheme of things. Their fielding in ODIs was a revelation, and the rest of the world soon learnt from them. What do you think?
F_L: Sehwag and slater comparison doesnt even arise. Slater has accomplished a lot more..and sehwag has a long way to go. Slater was prick..but had a very good technique and was also a very good opener.
Sehwag is a ranji tropy bully..who became better...and now recognized as a international class batsman. His techinque is still weak...(In only a few instances) but his terrific eye and coordination saves him. His shot selection is pretty bad...for an opener. I am not saying he is crap...but he has to go a long way to be reasonable effective..in short he will be sorted out unless he improves..
THis test is a disgrace..thts all i can say..
Sehwag is a ranji tropy bully..who became better...and now recognized as a international class batsman. His techinque is still weak...(In only a few instances) but his terrific eye and coordination saves him. His shot selection is pretty bad...for an opener. I am not saying he is crap...but he has to go a long way to be reasonable effective..in short he will be sorted out unless he improves..
THis test is a disgrace..thts all i can say..
full_length
U19 Vice-Captain
Why 'Ranji trophy bully' ? Not getting into an arguement here- just wanna know what makes Dravid Mr Consistent in ranji and sehwag a bully...
usually bullies are characterised by cowering when faced with stronger opposition. methinks he's done pretty well for himself at the international arena to date.
I'm not yet comparing sehwag's and slater's achievements. Just like someone can say he's not good enough to be an opener from 8 tests (in which he incidentally has a 50+ average) I can surely say that he will be better than slater ever got after 8 tests like these. Do we agree on this?
I have seen Sehwag play a few times (not enough.. btw, Akram says sachin and sehwag are the only players that make him turn on the television to watch cricket). He seems to have a good technique alright. Since he's progressively got better since when he was another afridi...almost, chances are, he'll mature into an excellent test opener- if things work right for him.
His defense is positive, he's comfortable off both front foot and backfoot, he'll smash a loose ball if its his first one (or if he's on 99) and is a compact player. That's why I was happy to hear he's gonna open (along with Kaif i thought, but jaffer must now be given a run).
usually bullies are characterised by cowering when faced with stronger opposition. methinks he's done pretty well for himself at the international arena to date.
I'm not yet comparing sehwag's and slater's achievements. Just like someone can say he's not good enough to be an opener from 8 tests (in which he incidentally has a 50+ average) I can surely say that he will be better than slater ever got after 8 tests like these. Do we agree on this?
I have seen Sehwag play a few times (not enough.. btw, Akram says sachin and sehwag are the only players that make him turn on the television to watch cricket). He seems to have a good technique alright. Since he's progressively got better since when he was another afridi...almost, chances are, he'll mature into an excellent test opener- if things work right for him.
His defense is positive, he's comfortable off both front foot and backfoot, he'll smash a loose ball if its his first one (or if he's on 99) and is a compact player. That's why I was happy to hear he's gonna open (along with Kaif i thought, but jaffer must now be given a run).
Sehwag is an exciting talent. He is a natural stroke player who has had a wonderful test career so far. I am pretty sure he has been asked by the team management to get after the bowling in the early overs. His kind of approach won't always succeed, but when it does, it really takes the wind out of the opposition. Besides, he is too good a player to sit out the tests and play only one dayers, and there is no other position for him with 3-6 occupied by players in great form. He is not a natural opener, but he is worth the experiment. I don't think it is wise to compare him to Slater yet. Their approach to the game is similar, but Slater has had a long career while Sehwag has just started his.
One thing about Sehwag, he is definitely not just a "Ranji trophy bully".
[Edited on 9/9/02 by anilramavarma]
One thing about Sehwag, he is definitely not just a "Ranji trophy bully".
[Edited on 9/9/02 by anilramavarma]