Ditto. Crawled out of bed at around 6.15 and switched on expecting to see 220 for 2, or somesuch. YEEEESSS!!!!! In answer to the earlier question, yup I was one of those who didn't fancy Hoggy at all out here, and how wrong I was. Is it my imagination, or has he learnt how to use reverse swing? He's definitely made more use of the slower balls than I can remember previously.Barney Rubble said:I got up just after lunch, and I have only one thing to say:
Hoooooooogggggggggggggggyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What a guy.
Maybe, but I think there's been some iffy decisions in the last hour. Once Hoggard had been seen off, what would Kumble have least fancied? Has to be Harmi & Fred bowling fast with a new ball, but we've kept the old ball too long.IndianByHeart said:Unlike Bothom who was a failure as captain, Flintoff seems to be a real leader.
i dont see how the new ball would help, its glaringly obvious that both sides have achieved far more out of the old ball than the new ball(and lets not forget that the England tail really wagged only after India took the new ball).wpdavid said:Maybe, but I think there's been some iffy decisions in the last hour. Once Hoggard had been seen off, what would Kumble have least fancied? Has to be Harmi & Fred bowling fast with a new ball, but we've kept the old ball too long.
ok maybe simon jones is missed here. but cook and collingwood did far more than trescothick and vaughan would've done for england, in fact without those two england had nothing going. so you should be glad your two best batsman didn't show up on this occasion.aussie said:india are lucky england aren't full strenght, then i'd be seriously backing england to win this series.
Actually if it was 15 vs 11 then I would say you are right. There are so many variables you cannot say whether England would do better or worse despite team strength/weakness.aussie said:india are lucky england aren't full strenght, then i'd be seriously backing england to win this series.
I seriously have no idea. We might as well play Shah in the second test and go with just four bowlers if this is how he's going to be used. I mean today even Bell has been prefered to him with the ball.adharcric said:seriously, why is blackwell even in india. he's done absolutely NOTHING.
Partially that's down to poor bowling, of course. Now expecting better this time around may be optimistic given what we've seen from Harmison so far, but sometimes you just need to recognise that the state of the game has shifted and not keep doing what was working an hour previously. Just because an old ball was working nicely after 70 overs doesn't mean it will still do that after 90. Eventually it just gets knackered. And, as I said before, part of my thinking is what would Kumble least fancy?tooextracool said:i dont see how the new ball would help, its glaringly obvious that both sides have achieved far more out of the old ball than the new ball(and lets not forget that the England tail really wagged only after India took the new ball). .
the new ball has taken about 2 wickets this game, one of which came with a slower ball. certainly the old ball has swung more than the new ball and shree santh and to an extent pathan both looked more effective with old rather than new ball. i dont know whether the ball at 90 overs old was still doing what it was at 70 overs, but with harmison and panesar bowling, there is no way of knowing anyways.wpdavid said:Partially that's down to poor bowling, of course. Now expecting better this time around may be optimistic given what we've seen from Harmison so far, but sometimes you just need to recognise that the state of the game has shifted and not keep doing what was working an hour previously. Just because an old ball was working nicely after 70 overs doesn't mean it will still do that after 90. Eventually it just gets knackered. And, as I said before, part of my thinking is what would Kumble least fancy?
Trescothick has been england's best batsman on the sub-continent for a long time, so i reckon he could have done better than Cook while Vaughan has been out of sorts of late so maybe if he had played over Collingwood he wont have scored all those runs. But add Jones & Gilo to the bowling attack making it full strenght, to me judging on this 1st innings may have been enough to cause India's batsmen enough problems.adharcric said:ok maybe simon jones is missed here. but cook and collingwood did far more than trescothick and vaughan would've done for england, in fact without those two england had nothing going. so you should be glad your two best batsman didn't show up on this occasion.