***Official** Malaysia Tri-Series

[Pratters]

Explanation = bias.

I would agree with you regarding the bias. A case can be made for both teams for the victory and so it isn't right to assume Windies were saved by rain.

 

[pug]

It wasn't a certainity that either team woudl have wn and by the DL method, Windies were ahead, so they won. I dont understand where luck came into this, although, in general, one tends to feel for the bowling side in such situations because they never had the opportunity to have a come back.

You answered that yourself. Deprived of 30 overs' worth of chances to make a comeback due to rain doesn't count as being unlucky?

India lost fairly under the rules set and agreed upon. I'm not saying anything about that. But had the game gone on, neither result was a certainty and with so many overs left, in any circumstances the team which loses under D/L can be justified in feeling slightly unlucky whether it be India or South Africa or whoever.

Do you honestly think that India had absolutely lost the match beyond any hope of a comeback at that point? If not, then yes they were unlucky.

Feeling slightly unlucky has nothing to do with taking the result unsportingly. One can feel unlucky in sevaral situations say if a controversial umpire decision costs a team a match. Nothing wrong with that.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Nah but I'm accusing you of being a **** head.

Wow aren't you a clever little boy.

 

[Johnners]

This is disgusting. Australia are supposedly likely to play the B team yet again, and this time I'll be at the ground to witness their mediocrity. PLEASE bring back Hayden, Martyn, Lee, Hogg, Hussey, Clark, and CLOWN - just for me?

Hayden is part of the B team in ODI's. He may have the experience, but he is 34(35?), 7(8?) years Jaques senior, and Jaques is just as, if not more damaging (although we failed to see it in the 1st match).

 

[Boggvir]

Wow aren't you a clever little boy.

Aren't you an annoying little man? What do you expect, when you say something inflammatory like that?

 

[Fusion]

Aren't you an annoying little man? What do you expect, when you say something inflammatory like that?

Welcome to CW! As you will soon find out, Scaly is quite fond of making comments like those. What's dispointing to me is that Jono gets a rebuke for answering him. However, Scaly gets away with what could be considered trollish statements all the time.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Welcome to CW! As you will soon find out, Scaly is quite fond of making comments like those. What's dispointing to me is that Jono gets a rebuke for answering him. However, Scaly gets away with what could be considered trollish statements all the time.

Wouldn't be much of a forum if there were no controversial comments, dumb comments however are different. You should also note with that I wasn't even referring to this forum or anyone here, just to some obviously stupid and biased folks on cricbuzz and making a light hearted remark on the sort of conspiracy theories such crackpots would likely come up with. If I was Slow_LoveTM or whatever I'm sure I could go on about how it was a parody of your own work in the contemporary Pakistan in England thread and how it was almost swiftian in it's rapier-like subtlety.

I hadn't seen the mild warning otherwise I wouldn't have bothered with the remark on the last page.

 

[Arjun]

Let's not comment too much on the second match. After all, just 20 overs were bowled in the West Indies' innings. Yet, the exclusion of Ramesh Powar was shocking, given he's one of the best ODI bowlers the team has had recently, and can take the pace off the ball quite well. He's also partnered Harbhajan rather well in the matches he got, and of course, he's a much better batsman than all the other bowlers in the team.

As strike bowler, Irfan's form is a concern, but taking him off after two overs was not the answer. It will only weaken both him and the bowling team. He's their man for the early wickets with the new ball, and taking him off when the ball was fresh and new was really, really foolish, when even Agarkar and RP were bowling rubbish. In this whole mess, there is a genuine strike bowler prospect in Munaf Patel, so the selectors have an option. Harbhajan was woefully off-colour, but he is one of the top 2 (or even 2) bowlers in the team, so you have to stick with him.

Let's have Sehwag and Dravid batting at their original positions, shall we?

 

[nightprowler10]

As strike bowler, Irfan's form is a concern, but taking him off after two overs was not the answer. It will only weaken both him and the bowling team.

That part I disagree with, but the rest of your post is spot on.

IKP had given away 22 runs in just 2 overs. Given his recent form with the ball, Dravid had to be concerned keeping in mind that D/L would most definitely come in to play. He needed to control the run flow more than he needed wickets. And Irfan wasn't the man for the job, at least to him.

 

[pug]

I'd rather take Pathan for his batting abilities than Powar.

No, I want Tendulkar to open as long he manages to turn out innings like this. Honestly, don't tell me Tendulkar did something wrong.

Really that made no sense, maybe you wrote Dravid instead of Tendulkar. Anyway, since the Indian team is so keen in experimenting with orders why not have Dravid-Tendulkar against oppositions with quality bowlers (Australia, Pakistan) and go with Sehwag-Tendulkar against less formidable bowling attacks.

 

[nightprowler10]

I'd rather take Pathan for his batting abilities than Powar.

No, I want Tendulkar to open as long he manages to turn out innings like this. Honestly, don't tell me Tendulkar did something wrong.

Really that made no sense, maybe you wrote Dravid instead of Tendulkar.

I didn't make any comment about Tendulkar and neither did Arjun.

I disagree with your original point about IKP. He is not in the team for batting. India have plenty of that. He is in there to take wickets, and if he doesn't then the job should be given to someone who can.

 

[pug]

I didn't make any comment about Tendulkar and neither did Arjun.

Having Sehwag and Dravid back as openers means dropping Tendulkar down the order. I was responding to Arjun.

I disagree with your original point about IKP. He is not in the team for batting. India have plenty of that. He is in there to take wickets, and if he doesn't then the job should be given to someone who can.

Arjun said Powar is a better batsman than any other bowler. My comment was only in that context.

 

[Dasa]

Having Sehwag and Dravid back as openers means dropping Tendulkar down the order. I was responding to Arjun.

He said he would have Dravid and Sehwag back at their 'original' positions meaning Dravid into the middle-order (preferably at 3) and Sehwag opening.

 

[pug]

He said he would have Dravid and Sehwag back at their 'original' positions meaning Dravid into the middle-order (preferably at 3) and Sehwag opening.

Oh silly me.

Sorry arjun.

 

[SJS]

Why doesnt anyone ever think that Harbhajan could/should be dropped and Powar tried in his place?

 

[silentstriker]

Why doesnt anyone ever think that Harbhajan could/should be dropped and Powar tried in his place?

Doosra. Harbhajan is an average bowler without one.

 

[pug]

Why doesnt anyone ever think that Harbhajan could/should be dropped and Powar tried in his place?

Same reason why for a long time no one considered replacing Ganguly.

 

[Isolator]

silentstriker: "Doosra. Harbhajan is an average bowler without one."


Yeah, but does that make him better than Powar?

 

[shankar]

I actually thought Harbhajan bowled really well yesterday. He had a good tussle with Lara and almost had him stumped only for Dhoni to mess it up after which Lara got on top of him.

 

[adharcric]

Indian Express says "Windies were saved by the rain"


Can anyone explain?



BTW, I seriously think we were robbed of a double delight. We did get to see Sachin back to his best but I got the feeling that Lara was shaping up for a ton as well. You know how it is with him these days, he either gets out very early or plays a big one. As Lara himself admitted, the game was nicely poised when the rain came. But unfortunately, in any formula, you can only take into account the no. of batsmen remaining, not their quality because then it becomes subjective and it is impossible to come up with a subjective system in case of rain interruptions.

Makes sense. The West Indies were "saved by the rain", but probably not in the sense implied by any biased Indian media source. At 20 overs, the match was wide open and WI were in no way favorites considering their weak lower order and what happened against Australia. India went from uncertainty to defeat, while WI went from uncertainty to victory. In that sense, the WI were saved and India were screwed by the rain.