Feb 27 - India v England

[StinkyBoHoon]

I said it earlier, and I'll say it again, I don't think the bowling was as horrible as everyone is making it out to be. They basically got Strauss and Bell out a combined 6 times (2 actual outs, 4 missed opportunities by fielders, and bad decisions by umpires), and got everyone else on England out with relative ease.

If Dhoni appeals on that nick like he should have, or if Bowden reverses the calls like he should have, or if Harbhajan and Kohli take a routine catch, England might not have gotten nearly this much.

yes, but it was lack of intent in the bowling/fielding that was crap. dhoni should be appealing there, he was limp as captain today, fielders should have been going for those chances, the only reason they were dropped is because they were half hearted efforts.

india do have a team good enough to win, the bowling is not great but the batting is good enough to make up for it providing the field contributes. They're not good enough to simply show up for half the game and win. (first 40 overs of batting and last 10 overs of bowling)

 

[Haarithan]

So did Nasser Hussain calling Strauss after Dhoni in the presentation convey that he thought it was more an English victory than a tie ?? Or was it simply because that we wanted to finish off the captain's and MoM speech at one shot ??

 

[Cricketman]

Nah... I think since Strauss was MoM anyways he did not want to call him, call dhoni, and call Strauss back for the award.

 

[Papa_Smurf]

What a match!! So pissed off at myself that I missed it

 

[Haarithan]

Cricinfo's bit

Rakesh: "340 is not a miracle in modern day cricket. Of course sreesanth will be sorely missed, but England can go step by step. Target 65/0 in 10 overs. 130/1 in 20 overs, 180/3 in 30 overs. 260/5 in 40 overs. 60 balls 80 runs 5 wickets in hand. Looks a very reasonable way to get your target."

And from what he said , England managed everything apart from the 10-20th overs (lost an extra wicket) and the finish .

----------

And this one from Geoff Boycott :

‎"We want Sreesanth to play today... So tat we can wack him around"

 

[pcfan123]

.... there were 676 runs scored.

----------


Hehe, I would take that as an Indian fan. We still haven't lost a WC game to Pakistan.

yea cause those 24 runs make all the difference in addressing the horrible imbalance between bat and ball.

 

[Cricketman]

Zaheer Khan's burst alone made it all okay. <3 Zaheer.

 

[Insomniac]

Zaheer Khan's burst alone made it all okay. <3 Zaheer.

The only Indian bowler who can compete with the rest of the world.

The rest are utter garbage

 

[Adarsh]

yea cause those 24 runs make all the difference in addressing the horrible imbalance between bat and ball.

I don't get what you're saying. Are you saying bowlers have no role in the match ? Good bowlers still get rewarded, just that the bar is now different. Anderson was rubbish, Bresnan was good. For One Dayers, I don't know what you mean by balanced. Tests, yep. We need bowlers to take wickets so that there is a result. In ODIs, there's no such thing as a balance between bat and ball. A good bowler can still stand out. Zaheer's spell shows you just that.

 

[darthlewis1]

1. These weren't difficult opportunites. They were easy catches (the Kohli slip drop, and the Harbhajan drop).

2. The Bell LBW non-decision was out. The Strauss nick was out, but Dhoni didnt appeal. These were 2 wickets the bowlers should have gotten. Had nothing to do with fielding.

3. Sehwag's drops weren't anything like the Strauss/Bell drops. The difficulty level isn't even close.

If the fielders fielded decently rather than horribly (they didn't even have to field well, just OK) , the bowlers would have looked much better. IMO, the fielding was our downfall today, along with some bad luck.

But at the end of the day they didn't take the simple catches so they didn't deserve the wickets and the fact that they were easy catches makes the chances even more un-deserved. And India weren't unlucky they just bowled poorly and didn't take easy chances. So India had chances to catch strauss but they didn't, there was no luck involved in that.

Its the same when an edge go's for four were 1st slip would normally be, the bowler defeated the batsmen by getting an edge but the fielder wasn't there so he doesn't deserve the wicket and it's tough on the bowler, just the same as a dropped catch, if the fielder doesn't catch the ball the team doesn't deserve the wicket. And if Dhoni didn't appeal why should India get the wicket? Appealing is part of getting the wicket and Dhoni failed to do so.

And I wasn't talking about the LBW or edge, I just made the point about the dropped catches. Stop blaming India not winning the match on decisions not going their way.

 

[War]

If Morgan was their after Strauss/Bell got out ENG may have won this.

ENG if Broad is fit may have to consider dropping Anderson, since Jimmy although he has now become a top-class test bowler. That has seemingly inversely affected his ODI bowling, which is proving to meat & drink in ODIs.


IND bowling is quite average. Even BANG almost scored 300 vs them. The lack of cutting edge bowling attack is what will at the end of the day prevent IND from winning this WC.

 

[darthlewis1]

I don't get what you're saying. Are you saying bowlers have no role in the match ? Good bowlers still get rewarded, just that the bar is now different. Anderson was rubbish, Bresnan was good. For One Dayers, I don't know what you mean by balanced. Tests, yep. We need bowlers to take wickets so that there is a result. In ODIs, there's no such thing as a balance between bat and ball. A good bowler can still stand out. Zaheer's spell shows you just that.

No he's saying it was much easier to bat than bowl on the pitch they played on so was therefore there was an uneven balance between bat and ball.

 

[Haarithan]

But that's the case when the WC is hosted by the SC . You can't go on complaining about the same imbalance after each and every game . As far as i know , the safest total to defend against any of the top 8 sides here is 360 .

 

[Adarsh]

No he's saying it was much easier to bat than bowl on the pitch they played on so was therefore there was an uneven balance between bat and ball.

Erm, what is easy ? Where do you draw the line ? You could say the England bowlers bowled pretty well to restrict India to 338, and that India found it pretty hard to score 400.

 

[darthlewis1]

Erm, what is easy ? Where do you draw the line ? You could say the England bowlers bowled pretty well to restrict India to 338, and that India found it pretty hard to score 400.

I'm not saying you can't bowl well but its harder to bowl well on flat sub-continental pitches, whereas batting compared to bowling is going to be easier and the bat is more likely to dominate the game as we saw today.