***Official*** India in Pakistan

[adharcric]

I haven't been watching any of the test, but is the pitch as lifeless as the one in the first test? Or did India bowl crap/Pakistan bat well?

The pitch doesn't have too much in it. As for the Indian bowling, RP Singh and Zaheer have been bowling well and should've gotten more wickets. Irfan Pathan has been terrible, bowling in the high 70s and hitting it short on many occasions ... simply pathetic for our strike bowler.

 

[adharcric]

Now that Agarkar has been left out in favor of RP Singh and Zaheer Khan, one gets the feeling his test career is over. Chappell stated that India "need a genuine fast bowler", one of the few times someone from the management has said it so clearly (fans, experts, commentators often say this .. it's obvious). Now I can really see a Munaf Patel or VR Singh selection happening very soon.

 

[luckyeddie]

As an aside, independant studies have shown Wikipedia to be just as accurate as Britannica and most articles on Wikipedia are far longer and more detailed than those in Britannica.

Yes, but Britannica looks better in a bookcase (having paid over £1000 for the 1985 gold-embossed black cover edition from new - and a lot more than that with the updates that come out every year on Science and Nature, Medicine and Health and the Yearbook, I'm bound to say that of course).

If I wish to reference anything, I use both Wikipedia and Britannica CD/ROM

 

[ohtani's jacket]

Any chance that Pakistan will make a game of this and declare early, or is this heading for another big, fat draw?

 

[Tony Blade]

I dont think Pakistan will want to bat twice...they'll probably declare if/once they have a large total on the board.

 

[Anil]

unless they run through the pakistani lineup pretty quick on day 2(and that is highly unlikely), looks like india is in another match-saving situation....

 

[marc71178]

When did I say that Marc. If that is the criteria, India has chosen 5 bowlers and is doing better than in the first test.

You've said that you're pretty happy with the selection of 5 bowlers.

After day 1, Pakistan are 379-4 and still have Razzaq and Akmal to come in at 7 and 8, so how is that India doing better than the 1st Test?

As a consequence of the selection of 5 bowlers, India will have Pathan and Kumble at 7 and 8.

I know which I'd rather have, and that is why I don't think there are many sides who can select 5 bowling options for a Test.

 

[marc71178]

Of course you have to make more runs than your opposition to win a test match. But no matter how many runs you make, you cannot win until you do not take 20 wickets.

You are however much more likely to lose 20 wickets and more likely to lose.

 

[Tom Halsey]

The idea of 5 bowlers isnt as ludicrous as some people have made it sound on the forum. To win a test match the first thing you have to do is take 20 wickets. India definitely improves its chances of doing that taking 5 bowlers compared to 4 regardless of match situations.

Of course you have to make more runs than your opposition to win a test match. But no matter how many runs you make, you cannot win until you do not take 20 wickets. What should India back themselves to do more? Their 4 bowlers to take 20 wickets on foreign soil or their famed batting line up to click?

The second option seems much more logical to me.

The only way you can get away with 5 specialist bowlers is if one of them is a genuine all-rounder (England are a prime example). And no, Pathan is not a genuine all-rounder. You're currently far better off with 4.

 

[ohtani's jacket]

I dont think Pakistan will want to bat twice...they'll probably declare if/once they have a large total on the board.

Yeah, but what are the chances of Pakistan bowling India out twice? I don't see the point in a 600-odd lead.

 

[luckyeddie]

Yeah, but what are the chances of Pakistan bowling India out twice? I don't see the point in a 600-odd lead.

You're not catching me out making a rash prediction this time, oh no.

 

[Prince EWS]

Yeah, but what are the chances of Pakistan bowling India out twice? I don't see the point in a 600-odd lead.

Then what is the point of playing at all?

 

[Jono]

No way should Pakistan declare. They should go for an innings victory.

 

[PAKMAN]

must say jono u r a very well balanced cricket supporter

 

[marc71178]

With that many runs on the board on the first day, and presumably the prospect of 5 full days (since they got 90 overs in today) - Pakistan shouldn't need to declare IMO.

If they can push on again towards 600+ then that is a huge ask to avoid the follow on with that much time left to play.

 

[Jono]

must say jono u r a very well balanced cricket supporter

Thanks

 

[Nate]

Amazing hitting by Afridi, backed up very well by Inzy.

I don`t mind Pakistan`s tactic with the all-rounders, considering the stupidly huge scores always being made between the two sides, it doesn`t hurt to have bowling options. But bowling options doesn`t mean wickets, you need guys that can do the job, and Razzaq`s bowling in Tests hasn`t ever been amazing.

Singh certainly held his own on debut, without him who knows how stuffed India might be. But Pathan! Dreadful. Khan seems to have bowled well, Singh alright, and Kumble not so good. He took on Afridi and lost.

India`s hopes rest with good new ball bowling this morning, and then a solid effort from the big four.

 

[Mecnun]

Pak should be happy with 550+ score and I think they should declare if they go past 600. I would like to see India bat tomorrow for atleast 15-20 overs.

 

[adharcric]

The only way you can get away with 5 specialist bowlers is if one of them is a genuine all-rounder (England are a prime example). And no, Pathan is not a genuine all-rounder. You're currently far better off with 4.

Well that's the ideal situation, but when it's a close call you might want to try once in a while. Australia has tried going in with Watson, but I don't think he's done anything too special as an all-rounder thus far in test cricket. For England, Flintoff is clearly a brilliant genuine all-rounder. Pathan has been doing well lately with the bat, so you can't blame India for trying 5 specialists. The problem is, if Pathan bowls rubbish and Kumble doesn't bowl like he should, it negates the effect of having 5 specialist bowlers.

 

[PAKMAN]

OH so there is a reason for Razzaqs inclusion

http://www.jang.com.pk/thenews/jan2...6/sports/s4.htm