***Official*** England in India

[alternative]

Solanki England captain? What did I miss?

for the practice match..

 

[Barney Rubble]

for the practice match..

I know - but that doesn't make it alright.

 

[GIMH]

No Flintoff, no Strauss, Solanki captained the A tour, it was a natural choice I guess

 

[Barney Rubble]

No Flintoff, no Strauss, Solanki captained the A tour, it was a natural choice I guess

Meh, the selectors are boring. Forget the natural choice, it's only a warm-up game - let's make KP captain.

 

[honestbharani]

5-2 or 6-1 India.

This is like the 3-0 predictions, isn't it?

 

[wpdavid]

This is like the 3-0 predictions, isn't it?

Don't forget that England's ODI record is far worse than in tests, and India recently won these comfortably in Pakistan.

 

[honestbharani]

You and your Bogus theories. Akash chopra was gone long before Chappell set foot in India to apply for the Coach's job.

I think what he means is that by giving ideas of Yuvi being a good opener, he actually saved his slot and made sure Yuvi wouldn't challenge him for that. Something Chappell did say about Sourav. It may have been right or wrong, but it is obvious that the fact that Sourav was standing in the way of youngsters like Yuvi and Kaif is something that Chappell picked on Sourav straightaway, really...

 

[honestbharani]

Don't forget that England's ODI record is far worse than in tests, and India recently won these comfortably in Pakistan.

lol, I was juz kidding. I felt Marc was trying the reverse fortune thingy, where you predict a horrible loss for your team and then they end up doing well.

 

[silentstriker]

As an Indian fan, I want 0-7 India.

This will force some changes. I feel we have gotten too complacent. We need to drop half the team....seriously, we do. We might lose the WI series, but at least it will be a message. When they come back for the SA tour, they will know that their place hinges on performance and playing responsibally.

That was the worst collapse in Indian history, 15.2 overs????? What the hell is that?

 

[Sanz]

I think what he means is that by giving ideas of Yuvi being a good opener, he actually saved his slot and made sure Yuvi wouldn't challenge him for that. Something Chappell did say about Sourav. It may have been right or wrong, but it is obvious that the fact that Sourav was standing in the way of youngsters like Yuvi and Kaif is something that Chappell picked on Sourav straightaway, really...

These are assumptions at best. Sourav was the captain, and in 2004 he wasn't trying to save his spot, there was no talk of removing him from captaincy then.

Kaif is still not in the team (he wont be in the team even if we played 6 batsmen) , so to suggest that Sourav was standing in his was is really taking it a bit too far. About Yuvraj, well he has not really been lightening the Cricket world with his batting, is he ?

 

[honestbharani]

sorry you think I have a chip on my shoulder about India...I really dont, I just recoil from much of the hype that surrounds this team since 2001

I think it is obvious there will be hype... Look at England fans claiming they were #1 after the Ashes, and apparently they are #2 in ODIs as well, according to someone here. And with a nation of 1 billion people, you basically should have expected the hype. I suppose the trolls got on your nerves, but if you had concentrated on the posts of those of us who know what we are talking about here, you would see that there was no real hype about this side, not even now when we are doing very well in ODIs. The jury is still out on this new INdian side, both the ODI side and the test side. It has not ven been a year since Chappell took over and yet we have comments here ranging from "he is the best" to "he is the worst". You got to expect such things from Indian fans. More the people = more the trolls.

 

[honestbharani]

These are assumptions at best. Sourav was the captain, and in 2004 he wasn't trying to save his spot, there was no talk of removing him from captaincy then.

Kaif is still not in the team (he wont be in the team even if we played 6 batsmen) , so to suggest that Sourav was standing in his was is really taking it a bit too far. About Yuvraj, well he has not really been lightening the Cricket world with his batting, is he ?

Like I said, I am not sure it is right or wrong. He may or may not have done it. Like you said, it is only an assumption either way. But can't you just let SJS have his opinion?

 

[Sanz]

 

[Swervy]

He averaged 55.68 and hit 4 centuries in 2002. Surely you jest that he's been past his best for 5 years?

He had a bad 2003, but that was down to playing very few tests, because he absolutely owned it in ODIs in 2003. Sachin has been inconsistent in tests from 2004-2006, and is now in the worst form patch of his career. Its coincidentally (not really) the worst period he's ever had with injuries.

2002 in tests vs half decent teams

79 1st Test v WI 2001/02 [1598]
117 2nd Test v WI 2001/02 [1599]
0
0 3rd Test v WI 2001/02 [1601]
8
0 4th Test v WI 2001/02 [1602]
41 5th Test v WI 2001/02 [1604]
86
16 1st Test v Eng 2002 [1610]
12
34 2nd Test v Eng 2002 [1612]
92
193 3rd Test v Eng 2002 [1613]
54 4th Test v Eng 2002 [1614]
35 1st Test v WI 2002/03 [1616]
43 2nd Test v WI 2002/03 [1618]
16*
36 3rd Test v WI 2002/03 [1622]
176
8 1st Test v NZ 2002/03 [1631]
51
9 2nd Test v NZ 2002/03 [1633]
32

M I NO Runs HS Ave 100 50 0
14 23 1 1138 193 51.72 3 5 3

That to me isnt Tendulkar at his best. 8 out 23 innings over 50...nah

The last time I saw Tendulkar play like he really can play on a consistant level was the previous year...2001 ..his average was 10 more, and he contributed more often..half of his innings were of 50 or more...and he simply looked a better play then.

The year before that 2000 , he hardly played, so that isnt really fair to judge

1999 probably is about as good as I saw him, when again he scored 9 innings of 50 or more basically half the time

1998= he couldnt really do much better to be honest
1997= oustanding on a consistant basis

So as far as I am concerned, Tendulkars performances and consistancy started taking a dip in 2001.

 

[Nishant]

As an Indian fan, I want 0-7 India.

This will force some changes. I feel we have gotten too complacent. We need to drop half the team....seriously, we do. We might lose the WI series, but at least it will be a message. When they come back for the SA tour, they will know that their place hinges on performance and playing responsibally.

That was the worst collapse in Indian history, 15.2 overs????? What the hell is that?

i'm an indian fan too. I want a few changes but for god's sake, man, i don't want the team to lose 7-0. India should win this and show the critics that they can still win the WC 2007. GO ON INDIA!!!!!!!!!

 

[silentstriker]

i'm an indian fan too. I want a few changes but for god's sake, man, i don't want the team to lose 7-0. India should win this and show the critics that they can still win the WC 2007. GO ON INDIA!!!!!!!!!

I'm on record as saying I'd rather win the world cup over winning a test series in England or a Australia.

Well, I take that back. The sadness I felt after the WC loss was nothing compared to the absolute disgust I feel right now, after the heartless and inexcusable capitulation to the England 'A' team. Test cricket is whats important, and we need to get rid of Dhoni, Pathan, Yuvraj, Sehwag, and Harbhajan for at least the next one series, so they can get it through their heads that they can't take their spots for granted.

Sehwag: Lose some weight and get fit fatass. Also, learn the 'forward defensive shot' and the 'leave'. Also, I would like to remind you that you don't have to play at the short ball.

Pathan: Um, I know Kumble is the best bowler India has, but we want you to replicate his attitude, approach and success and not his pace.

Dhoni: Die. Please, just die.

Harbhajan: Order about 100 Kookabura balls, and ****ing learn how to bowl with them

Yuvraj: Test matches are not ODI

 

[Swervy]

Which performances. List them.

OK,maybe its more of the more fanatical people who jump on the India bandwagon as soon as they win a test, or have a good session...or one of the bowlers beats the bat..or whatever

They rarely lose a series, period. The losses I pointed out, two were away, one was at home. They didn't lose to England away. They've lost 3 series.?

Interesting really, as in the last 5 years vs decent decent test teams (ie not Zimb or Bang), India have lost more series than they have won

When was the Indian batting line-up from 2003-2004 exposed when conditions did not suit them? It'd help if you mention these things instead of just making random comments.

well India havent played outside the subcontinent vs decent teams for over 2 years..so really there isnt too much to go on is there. And yeah India did a job in Australia back then, but before then was NZ..and they didnt exactly cope did they

Yes but you only came out after India lost. Where were you after they drew with Australia, beat Pakistan away, won after the 2nd test?

I dont know where I was, I dont think I was really staying away on purpose...was I not around for those times???? I dont know

One thing is for sure, India made the most of a depleted Australian team who didnt play particularly well and simply were outplayed for most of the time...but hey ho!!!! Well done India

Pakistan...c'mon now, that Pakistan team was about as bad as I have seen a Pakistan team be for about 20 years..

2nd test??? erm...I really dont know...again well played India, against a weakened England team who fell apart after pushing India hard for most of the game

Tendulkar had a fine 2002. His 2003 barely had any tests in it... and explain to me how he can be past his best in 2003 in one form of the game, yet absolutely rip apart everyone in the World Cup in the same year??

Tendulkar had an ok 2002 in tests (by his standards) but there is no doubt his consistancy was slipping at that point...not the Tendulkar of a couple of years before then..not only run wise, but he just didnt look like the same player..IMO

The last time I have watched Sachin play in a test and really gone 'wow' was vs England in 2001, when some of his play was brilliant to watch..I havent had that from Tendulkar since (in tests)

Its not what you're saying that sounds conceited, its the convenient times you come and say it. My question was why didn't you come out and state India were overrated after the 2nd test when England collapsed in a heap?

well if Iam getting stick for saying they are overarted after they were completely destroyed by England, then imagine the stick I would have got if I had said that after they won

 

[Nishant]

Dhoni: Die. Please, just die.

......i got the same feeling

 

[RolledOver]

Dhoni: Die. Please, just die.

Thats unfortunate.

Dhoni will end up as a legend, the guy has more potential than Gilchrist , he's new to test cricket and with a bit of experiance he will be the top WK Batsman in the world.

He's already one of the top OD batsman of the world.

 

[Sanz]

2002 in tests vs half decent teams

79 1st Test v WI 2001/02 [1598]
117 2nd Test v WI 2001/02 [1599]
0
0 3rd Test v WI 2001/02 [1601]
8
0 4th Test v WI 2001/02 [1602]
41 5th Test v WI 2001/02 [1604]
86
16 1st Test v Eng 2002 [1610]
12
34 2nd Test v Eng 2002 [1612]
92
193 3rd Test v Eng 2002 [1613]
54 4th Test v Eng 2002 [1614]
35 1st Test v WI 2002/03 [1616]
43 2nd Test v WI 2002/03 [1618]
16*
36 3rd Test v WI 2002/03 [1622]
176
8 1st Test v NZ 2002/03 [1631]
51
9 2nd Test v NZ 2002/03 [1633]
32

M I NO Runs HS Ave 100 50 0
14 23 1 1138 193 51.72 3 5 3

That to me isnt Tendulkar at his best. 8 out 23 innings over 50...nah

So Sachin had in 1996 4 50+ innings out of 15, 7 out of 17 in 1997, didn't play much in 1998, 9 out of 19 in 1999, didn't play much in 2000, 7 out of 14 in 2001 .

And 51.75 is means he was in decline, doesn' it ? And that includes a series where Tendulkar was one of the 3 batsmen to score 100+ in 4 innings. Dude, did you even watch NZ tests ? Its like bringing the Mumbai Test (Vs. australia) to prove that Clark is a better bowler than Warne.

The last time I saw Tendulkar play like he really can play on a consistant level was the previous year...2001 ..his average was 10 more, and he contributed more often..half of his innings were of 50 or more...and he simply looked a better play then.

The year before that 2000 , he hardly played, so that isnt really fair to judge

1999 probably is about as good as I saw him, when again he scored 9 innings of 50 or more basically half the time

1998= he couldnt really do much better to be honest
1997= oustanding on a consistant basis

so basically he had 3 good years out of 17, didn't he ? Rest all was hype.

So as far as I am concerned, Tendulkars performances and consistancy started taking a dip in 2001.

The bold part is the keyword there.