***Official*** India in West Indies

[JBH001]

Strange that WI did not declare before close of play.

The last 1/2 hr to get at India woud have been ideal.

(They may not have time to force a result tomorrow)

 

[silentstriker]

If at first look you think it is not out, then you cannot whinge if it is given not out.

Thats why I specifially said that I didn't notice it too. Thus, I wasn't whining about the decision. IN any case, I'm not an international umpire, they are. They're supposed to be more accurate than I.

In any case, the commentators at the end of the day pointed out nine appeals that were turned down by Jerling that were clear outs beyond any reasonable doubt. Not to mention two of the three actually given out, that weren't.

And it wasn't bias, since he gave Sreesanth not out when he clearly was. So it's just incompetence.

 

[silentstriker]

India got four wickets in the last session. Granted, WI were going for runs so if INdia were playing there's no saying if they would have lost any wickets. But, I think they probably still would have lost at least one, maybe two or three. The odd ball was keeping low and though its still decent for batting, its showing signs. Couple that with the added pressure, and WI could very well have been on top at the end.

If India had followed on, West Indies COULD NOT HAVE LOST. Even if INdia got a lead (and its doubtful if the lead would have been any thing substantial), WI could easily have either chased it, or at the very least lasted until the end. If India did get a lead, they would only have a session and maybe a little more to bowl WI out...which wouldn't have happened.

If WI had enforced the follow on, they would have been

60% chance victory
35% chance draw
5% chance loss (if Jerling got on a roll against the WI, it could have happened)

Now:

90% chance draw
5% chance loss
5% chance win

So what did they gain?

 

[silentstriker]

http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/wivind/content/current/story/251437.html

Lara defends his decisions. His bowlers tiring might be a valid point, but that was pretty much the only chance they had. Can they really bowl India out in two sessions (thats all they'll have)?

If Dhoni goes back to his Mumbai mode again, who knows? But I have more faith in Dravid, if no one else, that they can last two sessions.

 

[Dasa]

http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/wivind/content/current/story/251437.html

Lara defends his decisions. His bowlers tiring might be a valid point, but that was pretty much the only chance they had. Can they really bowl India out in two sessions (thats all they'll have)?

If Dhoni goes back to his Mumbai mode again, who knows? But I have more faith in Dravid, if no one else, that they can last two sessions.

Going from that article, Taylor seems to have a very poor attitude for Test cricket. Whinging about having to bowl 25 overs? The two Indian pace bowlers each bowled over 30 overs each....

 

[Rajeev]

Roles reversed, India on recieving end and they don't have an 4th innings "staying-on-the-crease record"

I think the 300+ score now is enough anyways, they should give India 3 sessions to make this a classic

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Strange that WI did not declare before close of play.

The last 1/2 hr to get at India woud have been ideal.

(They may not have time to force a result tomorrow)

But it would have set the game up for India to win if we had.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Roles reversed, India on recieving end and they don't have an 4th innings "staying-on-the-crease record"

I think the 300+ score now is enough anyways, they should give India 3 sessions to make this a classic

332 runs in about 90+ overs with 10 wickets in hand on this pitch against a West Indian attack minus Collins? Difficult? Hardly.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Going from that article, Taylor seems to have a very poor attitude for Test cricket. Whinging about having to bowl 25 overs? The two Indian pace bowlers each bowled over 30 overs each....

Agreed that 25 overs is nothing in the context of the modern game (or the game ever) but in fairness regarding the point about the Indian seamers, they've generally been used in 4-5 over bursts with long rests in between. Also, Patel bowled 32 of 170 overs - 19%. Sreesanth bowled 18%. Taylor bowled 26 of 107 overs - 24%. That's a substantial difference.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Lara defends his decisions. His bowlers tiring might be a valid point, but that was pretty much the only chance they had.

Exactly. India was never going to win this match after the West Indies first innings score. By enforcing the follow on he would have basically had India looking to survive 4 sessions despite the bowling attack.

 

[Dasa]

Agreed that 25 overs is nothing in the context of the modern game (or the game ever) but in fairness regarding the point about the Indian seamers, they've generally been used in 4-5 over bursts with long rests in between. Also, Patel bowled 32 of 170 overs - 19%. Sreesanth bowled 18%. Taylor bowled 26 of 107 overs - 24%. That's a substantial difference.

Fair enough, but the article still seems to portray him quite negatively. Is Taylor known for a bad (or weak) attitude, or is this unusual for him?

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Fair enough, but the article still seems to portray him quite negatively. Is Taylor known for a bad (or weak) attitude, or is this unusual for him?

He's usually a 110% kind of guy, but his fitness has always been an issue.

 

[silentstriker]

Exactly. India was never going to win this match after the West Indies first innings score. By enforcing the follow on he would have basically had India looking to survive 4 sessions despite the bowling attack.

Right, I mean unless you had the WI pace attack of old or even the current English attack, I could see that you can allow yourself only two and a half sessions and be fairly confident. But, neither side has a bowling attack thats anywhere near that quality and both sides need to give themselves a day and a session minimum to bowl someone out - even on the last day.

 

[silentstriker]

Well, WI did really well, got some runs at 7.5 runs/over for about 30 mins. Can they take 10 wickets? I don't think they will, but you never know.

I don't think India should or will go for the runs. If it looks like India are about to make the runs, the WI will just slow down the overs and make it impossible anyway. So just score at an OK rate so they don't get too aggressive with the field placings, and defend away.

 

[silentstriker]

They need to get Sehwag a bowling machine that only bowls short. And make him play 5000 short balls a day, every day, until he stops looking like a walking wicket against them.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Only a West Indian could drop a simple chance like that. Take off the shades, Chris!

 

[silentstriker]

HOLY CRAP! A hook shot! It exists!


By Sehwag of all people.

 

[Rajeev]

Enjoy it while it lasts, once he is out..game will take a different mode

 

[aussie]

Dropping Sehwag will hurt the windies, this is one of the best 5th day pitches i've seen could be an exciting run chase if India keep wickets in hand.

 

[silentstriker]

Enjoy it while it lasts, once he is out..game will take a different mode

Yes, but Sehwag hooking...thats odd. I know he does hook from time to time but I don't think of him as a hooker (ha!), as he doesn't play the short ball very well.