I think it is - any tactic that benefits your team which is within the rules is good cricket. Now, that doesn't mean its exciting cricket. But many people say neither is Kallis or Dravid - I don't think that makes them players who don't play 'good' cricket.
You seem to have unrealistic high opinion about Australian team.......They are very ordinary in this series......and will remain to be so (exception Bangladesh/Keya/Zimbabwe)
You can come back and say that when India have dominated world cricket for the next decade. Until then keep it shut.
I think negative cricket which is designed neither to take wickets or score runs is "bad cricket" so to speak. That doesn't mean defensive cricket though. Setting a defensive field and bowling defensively is fine. Bowling in a way to ensure that it's more or less impossible for a batsman to score runs and also almost impossible to get them out (ie: way outside off or consistently outside leg, especially for a spinner), is bad for the game IMO and the umpire can and should call wides if it's done consistently.
Hey man i never called the Australian team defensive i was just showing what some crazy journo said im sorry if u didn;t get what i was saying
I understand the reasoning for calling it wide. However, how do you separate doing it with the intention of carrying on forever, or doing it for a session to try to suffocate the other team and getting them to make mistakes and thus lose wickets that way? The latter is a strategy to force a result, the prior is purposefully killing the time.
I didn't say it had to be exciting cricket for it to be good. But spinners bowling outside leg continuously is neither exciting, or good cricket. It's a negative tactic, that does nothing to advance the game as the bowling team clearly are not trying to take wickets, nor can the batting team score runs.
But Giles for example, stifled the scoring from one end while the other guys from the other end might have a better chance at taking a wicket. I'm not sure if that is considered not advancing the game. It's hardly having six slips of course, but I don't think its proper to legislate against.
Just as a general question, do people think the bowling yesterday is as hard to score off as coming around the wicket and bowling outside leg? For mine, there is a real difference in degree. Yesterday's bowling, whilst negative, is far easier to score off and should not be pulled up by the umpire quite so quickly as the outside leg stump line.
Whipped them, didnt they? :-) So nice for Chelsea.Oh BTW im waiting for duffer to get on and tell me all about how arsenal beat the devils. Loving it
Bull crap, how does one side get the other all out playing defensively? India got Aus all out, whether thy used outside off stump line or not, and to be frank not one guy in Australia got out chasing a wide one. Absolute hypocrisy.
yea 2:1
