Uh what? Ponting was plumbtbh, it was 3 dodgy decisions.
Yes, fair point, they probably have performed to their ability, but when one is criticizing a bowling performance it's also about the selections.That "one bowler" is part of the attack. If they all split 2 wickets, or one takes 6, the end result is still the same.
1. Ishant is ****
2. Harbhajan is ****.
3. Bhuv is a debutant
4. Jadeja doesn't turn a ball
And you don't get 400??????
The fact that they are **** is a large contributing factor to the fact that they haven't bowled well, but they still haven't bowled well. Bowling to expectations and bowling well aren't the same thing.That "one bowler" is part of the attack. If they all split 2 wickets, or one takes 6, the end result is still the same.
For me:
1. Ishant is ****
2. Harbhajan is ****.
3. Bhuv is a debutant
4. Jadeja doesn't turn a ball
And you don't get 400??????
Bowling to expecations is 450+.The fact that they are **** is a large contributing factor to the fact that they haven't bowled well, but they still haven't bowled well. Bowling to expectations and bowling well aren't the same thing.
Yawn. Never read any of Sid Monga's work? Complaining about bias if you don't agree with someone's viewpoint is just boring.How is this piece of commentary from cricinfo:
"Harbhajan Singh to Pattinson, no run, huge lbw appeal. Harbhajan looks disgusted. Harbhajan seems to be asking him why this is not given, and Dharmasena is not saying anything. But I tell you what, lbws don't come plumber than this. Quick delivery, flat, doesn't turn, hits his front pad in front of off, and then the back pad. Perhaps the umpire thought one of the two impacts was off the bat. The pitch mat says it might have hit him just outside the line of off, but it is not conclusive "
That bit in bold was only added in after the replay showed it clearly hit him outside the line...it was utterly conclusive so I dont know what this India prick is on about.
Cricinfo is a site which really tries to stress its journalistic credentials yet the guys who do ball by ball commentary are utter hacks and clearly biased.
Completely different type of argument tbf.That "one bowler" is part of the attack. If they all split 2 wickets, or one takes 6, the end result is still the same.
For me:
1. Ishant is ****
2. Harbhajan is ****.
3. Bhuv is a debutant
4. Jadeja doesn't turn a ball
And you don't get 400??????
Indian prick?How is this piece of commentary from cricinfo:
"Harbhajan Singh to Pattinson, no run, huge lbw appeal. Harbhajan looks disgusted. Harbhajan seems to be asking him why this is not given, and Dharmasena is not saying anything. But I tell you what, lbws don't come plumber than this. Quick delivery, flat, doesn't turn, hits his front pad in front of off, and then the back pad. Perhaps the umpire thought one of the two impacts was off the bat. The pitch mat says it might have hit him just outside the line of off, but it is not conclusive "
That bit in bold was only added in after the replay showed it clearly hit him outside the line...it was utterly conclusive so I dont know what this India prick is on about.
Cricinfo is a site which really tries to stress its journalistic credentials yet the guys who do ball by ball commentary are utter hacks and clearly biased.
I think I should remind everyone at this crucial juncture that a large number of ****s headed by SS himself wanted Ashwin dropped from the test side for this series.That "one bowler" is part of the attack. If they all split 2 wickets, or one takes 6, the end result is still the same.
For me:
1. Ishant is ****
2. Harbhajan is ****.
3. Bhuv is a debutant
4. Jadeja doesn't turn a ball
And you don't get 400??????
Yep. Embarrassing stuff.This excessive appealing is ****ing stupid.
nah Ponting was plumbtbh, it was 3 dodgy decisions.
He bowled like **** and deserved to be dropped a lot more than Ojha.I think I should remind everyone at this crucial juncture that a large number of ****s headed by SS himself wanted Ashwin dropped from the test side for this series.
Never forget.
I seem to remember him being outside the line, but watching it again it probably was out.Uh what? Ponting was plumb