*Official* India in Pakistan Thread

[luckyeddie]

It's called 'playing to your strengths'.

If he had put Pakistan in and they were now 300-3, you would be saying 'What on earth prompted Dravid to bowl first? Bring back Ganguly'

Ah, prophetic words from the duckmeister.

In all seriousness, the Indian attack looked somewhat ragged, in particular in the run-up to tea. Now the new ball has been taken, things could happen very quickly (yes, I know that's a no-brainer).

Farhat's ton was well-deserved, but in the end he was fortunate to limp over the finishing-line.

Inzy has looked so solid (chuckle). When he bats in circumspect mode, he looks like he will never get out (quick single in 5....4....3....).

On the bowling front, Pathan (Khan)'s seam position is very good indeed and he is extracting considerable swing with his one over with the new ball. The next hour could be interesting.

Advantage Pakistan.

 

[indianreligion]

Inzy has looked so solid (chuckle).

 

[Sehwag309]

Steve Bucknor, man doesn't give much LBW to India

Irfan had Inzi and Youhana

 

[luckyeddie]

Steve Bucknor, man doesn't give much LBW to India

Irfan had Inzi and Youhana

Disagree.

Extremely marginal as to whether either batsman was struck outside the line.

Good bowling, though.

 

[Sehwag309]

Disagree.

Extremely marginal as to whether either batsman was struck outside the line.

Good bowling, though.

Hawkeye spoiling me

 

[Pratters]

It looked plumb as far as I am concerned.. time for Bucknor to call it quits or take a holiday

 

[Sehwag309]

Disagree.

Extremely marginal as to whether either batsman was struck outside the line.

Good bowling, though.

Cricinfo

86.5 Pathan to Yousuf Youhana, no run, another super delivery, swung
back in sharply after pitching in-line with the off stump, hits
the pad in-line, once again the appeal is turned down
Tv replays shows that it was plumb, Pathan unlucky - Youhana lucky

Abt Steve Bucknor

http://www.rediff.com/cricket/2004/mar/04ashu.htm

http://www.thatscricket.com/2003/test_series/ind-aus/0801ganguly1.html

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/433273.cms

 

[luckyeddie]

Either of them could very easily have been given out

Yousuf Youhana was very much on the move, and yes, Hawkeye did seem to indicate that he was struck in line of the off stump.

 

[V Reddy]

Ganguly should return to the team. IMO captaincy seems to affect Dravid. He has dropped quite a few catches in this series than i have ever seen him do. I hope Ganguly takes a bold decision and opens the batting himself

 

[tooextracool]

Either of them could very easily have been given out

Yousuf Youhana was very much on the move, and yes, Hawkeye did seem to indicate that he was struck in line of the off stump.

why cant u just admit that it was a poor decision and should have been given out??:rolleyes:

 

[luckyeddie]

Abt Steve Bucknor

http://www.rediff.com/cricket/2004/mar/04ashu.htm

http://www.thatscricket.com/2003/test_series/ind-aus/0801ganguly1.html

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/433273.cms

Well, you are really scraping the barrel with those 'articles'.

Do you honestly think that Steve Bucknor has it in for India?
A few months abo, there were people on these boards bleating that Shepherd ought to retire because he had given Tendulkar out. How many umpires do you think there would be left on the international list if everyone who people thought had made a bad decision affecting their favourites got the boot?
There were a few desperately close ones turned down yesterday too.

 

[Pratters]

Do you honestly think that Steve Bucknor has it in for India?

Bucknor has made a few harsh calls vs India but it cant be termed as Bucknor having it against India.

My problem with him is he is hardly as good as he used to be. He was one of the best umpires for a long time along with Shephard n Venkat. Now he is below standard and as players become out of sorts so can umpires.

I just cuoldnt imagine I would see Bucknor being as inconsistent as he has been over the last 2-3 months..

 

[tooextracool]

There were a few desperately close ones turned down yesterday too.

the difference being that the ones today were plumb

 

[luckyeddie]

why cant u just admit that it was a poor decision and should have been given out??:rolleyes:

Even the post of mine which you quoted states that it could have gone either way.

I am watching the game, I saw the action replay five times and my first impression was that it 'might' have been outside off stump. My second impression was that there 'might' have been a bit of wood involved, especially allowing for the speed the ball ricocheted away. My others were that, on the balance of probabilities, he hadn't hit it and that the ball would in all likelihood hit the stumps.

 

[luckyeddie]

the difference being that the ones today were plumb

No. The difference is that today's ones were by Indian bowlers on Pakistani batsmen - and you WANT them to be given out. I am an impartial observer, watching a good game of cricket. I don't care who wins.

The Inzy one could not by any stretch of the imagination be considered plumb - he might well have been outside the line of off stump.

They are going through them now in the studio - and the consensus is that, maybe, one out of the four was out - the Youhana one - but there might well have been an inside edge.

Who said that? Sunil Gavaskar.

I will accept your apologies now.

 

[luckyeddie]

Simon Taufel just missed that caught behind though, I'll grant you that.

 

[V Reddy]

No. The difference is that today's ones were by Indian bowlers on Pakistani batsmen - and you WANT them to be given out. I am an impartial observer, watching a good game of cricket. I don't care who wins.

The Inzy one could not by any stretch of the imagination be considered plumb - he might well have been outside the line of off stump.

They are going through them now in the studio - and the consensus is that, maybe, one out of the four was out - the Youhana one - but there might well have been an inside edge.

Who said that? Sunil Gavaskar.

I will accept your apologies now.

Is TEC an Indian? I thought he was an englishmen living in bangalore as i remember him referring to England as "our" in a discussion and most of his comments on this forum are on England

 

[tooextracool]

No. The difference is that today's ones were by Indian bowlers on Pakistani batsmen - and you WANT them to be given out. I am an impartial observer, watching a good game of cricket. I don't care who wins.

The Inzy one could not by any stretch of the imagination be considered plumb - he might well have been outside the line of off stump.

They are going through them now in the studio - and the consensus is that, maybe, one out of the four was out - the Youhana one - but there might well have been an inside edge.

Who said that? Sunil Gavaskar.

I will accept your apologies now.

on the contrary....im not a supporter of either of these teams but from a cricketing point of view i want pakistan to win so that the series goes down the last test. that being said the youhanna one was absolutely plumb along with a few decisions that bucknor gave against india in australia. unlike others i do not support poor decisions on the basis of whether i prefer the team or not

 

[Arjun]

If you ask me, the best umpire these days is Simon Taufel, since he backs his decisions, is not afraid to give someone out leg-befor or caught-behind, doubtful as they may seem, and rarely uses the third umpire.

 

[luckyeddie]

on the contrary....im not a supporter of either of these teams but from a cricketing point of view i want pakistan to win so that the series goes down the last test. that being said the youhanna one was absolutely plumb along with a few decisions that bucknor gave against india in australia. unlike others i do not support poor decisions on the basis of whether i prefer the team or not

OK.

However, Sunil Gavaskar disagrees with you on the Youhana one - he thinks it might have been an inside edge.

What's your take on the (ridiculous) appeal for caught behind off Inzy a few minutes ago?