**Official** Australia in India Thread

[Dasa]

Or , maybe Chopra will open (doubtful) and he will decide to offer the bat rather than the pad to incoming deliveries and maybe he will get his first test fifty and more.

Chopra already has 2 Test 50s... both in the one match against New Zealand.

 

[SJS]

Chopra already has 2 Test 50s... both in the one match against New Zealand.

Thanks for the correction. I should have said first test hundred or more

 

[Sanz]

Oh, I understand the value of the inning, I just don't see why their inability to get Gillespie out quickly makes India undeserving winners.
If the Indians had won on the final day, Gillespie's innings would have merely delayed the win.
I understand that when G'spie played, the match was in the balance while Pathan's was played when the match was almost lost, but had the Indian's won on the final day, g'spie's inning would have gone down as a valiant attempt, but made in vain..

No Sir, when Gillespie came Match was in India's favor, their top 4 batsmen were back in pavilion and their lead was only 4 runs. Gillespie's innings brought the game into the balance and 5th day could have gone either way and looking at the form of our batsmen, Warnie's bowling and remaining aussie attack, there was a good chance of an Australian win.

You are assuming that India was going to win, I am assuming that match could have gone either way thanks to Gillespie's innings. Infact there was a good chance that match would have been over on 4th day itself.

 

[Sanz]

Dravid could have made a century quickly, all of the Indian's could have scored quickly.

Do you post anything sensible ?

 

[viktor]

No Sir, when Gillespie came Match was in India's favor, their top 4 batsmen were back in pavilion and their lead was only 4 runs. Gillespie's innings brought the game into the balance and 5th day could have gone either way and looking at the form of our batsmen, Warnie's bowling and remaining aussie attack, there was a good chance of an Australian win.

You are assuming that India was going to win, I am assuming that match could have gone either way thanks to Gillespie's innings. Infact there was a good chance that match would have been over on 4th day itself.

I am saying in case or rather IF India had won, Gillespie's innings would have just delayed the victory. But I see you point, if he had got out, there is a chance India would have got some time on the 4 th day itself to chase; though as some one else pointed out, Clarke was batting well and if he and Marto had got a partnership together, India might have had a bigger target as Clarke scored faster than G'pie.

 

[Sanz]

Clark batting to save the match and clark coming on to bat after a healthy lead (about 150 runs) are two different situations. I would have loved to watch Clark bat in that kind of extreme pressure.

 

[viktor]

True, he might not have handled it well...

 

[KennyD]

but htats ok, Clarkey`s young, he`ll come good

 

[marc71178]

still u can't be sure that if gilsipe got out early so would everyone else, and he scored 26 runs, even if he scored 0 and got out early that still leaves 200 runs for IND to score in 2 sessions or so, I dont see that happening.

Erm no, because the scores were very close at the start of day 4.

 

[maxpower]

Erm no, because the scores were very close at the start of day 4.

yeah fine, as soon as gillispie "would" have gotten out in this hypothetical, AUS would have rolled like a $2 hoe. I give up.

 

[marc71178]

No that was you saying even if he had got out and Australia collapsed in a session then India would've needed 200 - they'd have had 60 or 70 to chase.

 

[Sanz]

yeah fine, as soon as gillispie "would" have gotten out in this hypothetical, AUS would have rolled like a $2 hoe. I give up.

Maxpower, It is not about 'How Many Runs' Gilliespie scored, Let me repeat it again, Gilliespie batted for 242 minutes (4 hours and 2 minutes) and played out 165 balls(27.5 overs) and built the highest partnership of the test.

I am not saying that after Gillespie's wicket Australia would folded up Infact I am pretty sure they would have scored as many runs but in a lot less time and there was a good chance that India were left with 4-5 hours and 35-50 overs to chase down 150-210 runs. At least we would have got a better chance to finish it up on 4th day itself.

 

[Mr Casson]

Clark batting to save the match and clark coming on to bat after a healthy lead (about 150 runs) are two different situations. I would have loved to watch Clark bat in that kind of extreme pressure.

There was not much less pressure once Clarke came out to bat. Australia didn't have a match-winning lead.

 

[JustTool]

After you read this I think David Shepherd is wrong and Chappell is right. Shepherd should look at how some of his idiot conuterparts (namely Bucknor) behave on the field. Look, it's the people who have been great players like Atherton and Chapell who have the best perspective. Certainly not the parochial posters here who don't think any press opinions coming out of the sub-continent have any legitimacy. I remeber Michael Holding used to keep a record of how many dubious decisions were given by Aussie umpires in favor of Australia versus the visiting team. And, every time the bias made him so sick he would abandon the tracking mid way through the Test

Australia accused of double walking standards

Wisden Cricinfo staff

October 20, 2004



Michael Atherton believes Australia will be accused of double standards if their walking phase continues alongside appealing for doubtful decisions.

Atherton, who is commentating on the series, said the move opened the team up for "accusations they have been far from consistent on this tour". "It is worse to be a selective walker than a non-walker," Atherton was reported in the Courier-Mail. "After all, selective walking is really just about conning the umpire into believing you are an honest man and so benefiting from such a reputation."

In the second Test Adam Gilchrist, Michael Kasprowicz and Jason Gillespie walked for Australia while Sourav Ganguly and Yuvraj Singh did the same for India.

But Atherton was concerned by the appeal of players in front of the wicket against Virender Sehwag, who was given out lbw despite a clear edge, and questioned why he was not recalled under their fair play agreement. "How far are they prepared to go?" Atherton said. "Or, as Ian Chappell said when I asked him for his reaction, 'Hypocrisy is alive and well.' I was a confirmed non-walker and could easily live with the fact that I was asking an umpire to perform a job he is paid to do. I didn't, and still don't, regard that as cheating."

Ricky Ponting, Steve Waugh and Allan Border believe the decisions even themselves out over a player's career. But David Shepherd praised Kasprowicz, encouraged others to follow and denied the honesty-first policy could make a mockery of an umpire's decision.

Shepherd was about to give Kasprowicz not out after he edged a ball on to his pads and was caught by VVS Laxman. His departure left Shepherd stunned. "I saw Michael Kasprowicz straight after stumps and congratulated him on what he did," Shepherd said. "It's a tremendous thing when a batsman walks. Any batsman who doesn't walk, he knows he is doing the wrong thing."

Shepherd said Test cricketers had an obligation to behave themselves because millions of youngsters were copying them.

 

[shaka]

Atherton has a point there, but Australia have only just started to incresae their use of walking. In the terms of appealing 'unlikely' decisions means that emphasis is placed on how good the umpire is. Everyone would do this if they had an opportunity, no matter what their stance on walking was.

 

[JustTool]

More from New Zealand

I won't walk unless given out: Cairns

TIMES NEWS NETWORK[ WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 20, 2004 12:46:19 AM ]

<< Previous |
The other trend that has caught on is walking before the umpire gives you out.

Cairns: (Smiles with a hint of sarcasm) Is this the Australian team or what? I don't know what's happening. I wouldn't walk unless I'm given out. The umpires are there to do a job and I would leave it to them.

 

[SJS]

For all those who thought walking is dissent thereby giving the impression that umpires would not be happy with this....

...David Shepherd praised Kasprowicz, encouraged others to follow and denied the honesty-first policy could make a mockery of an umpire's decision.

Shepherd was about to give Kasprowicz not out after he edged a ball on to his pads and was caught by VVS Laxman. His departure left Shepherd stunned. "I saw Michael Kasprowicz straight after stumps and congratulated him on what he did," Shepherd said. "It's a tremendous thing when a batsman walks. Any batsman who doesn't walk, he knows he is doing the wrong thing."

Shepherd said Test cricketers had an obligation to behave themselves because millions of youngsters were copying them.

 

[Mister Wright]

Walking was introduced in England by professional cricketers between the 1st & 2nd World Wars, because if you didn't walk after being given not out you were depriving a bowler of a wicket and possibly his livelihood. So an agreement was made between professional cricketers to walk.

Before then walking was seen as disent and critisied and frowned upon.

 

[SJS]

If Parthiv was to drop out of the third test with an injury at this stage ? Who will lament more ?

1. Parthiv
2. His sponsors
3. Ganguly
4. Australian Batsmen



AN ADVERTISEMENT

For an ODE to Parthiv Patel . Please visit the Bizzare and strange thread.

 

[thirdumpire]

The 19 byes conceded by Parthiv Patel in second innings equals the worst performance by an Indian wicketkeeper against Australia. Nayan Mongia had also conceded 19 byes at Kolkata in 2000-01.

Patel conceded 26 byes in the match- a new record for an Indian wicketkeeper against Australia. The previous record was on the name of Nayan Mongia who conceded 25 byes in Kolkata match in 2000-01. Overall it was the fourth worst performance by an Indian wicketkeeper.

Patel has now allowed 20 or more byes in a match on three occasions in his short career of 18 Tests, which equals the tally of Farokh Engineer. Now only Nayan Mongia (6) is ahead of Patel for India.