India in England/Ireland/Scotland

[zub2005]

did india play with only two fast bowlers, if that is so you can understand why he put on ganguly, but you cant go with two fast bowlers, should of put on a spin bowler

 

[playkid12]

I
And why did he not try Tendulkar ?
He`d have been the ideal choice for the last over, at least if not a longer spell.
He was clearly trying to defend the target when the need of the hour was wickets.

I don't understand that either. Tendulkar has shown time and again that he's a partnership breaker when it comes to bowling. Why is he not used more often? And like the person above said, there were only two pacemen so using Ganguly was because of that - atleast in Dravid's mind. I didn't understand the point of keeping Gambhir 1 down. He should've opened with either Tendulkar or Ganguly (and left whoever he didn't open with as one down). 1 Down is a lot of responsibility - especially if a wicket falls early. You can't let someone like Gambhir, who has shown throughout his short career so far that he's inconsistent, to be one down. I mean, yes he did wonderful against Ireland at 1 down, but that was <i>Ireland...</i>

Bah, I feel like I'm just pointing fingers because I'm disappointed now. I'll just wait until all this leaves and the logic comes back. :

 

[cricphan]

yet again dravid has lost a match due to his inept captaincy.We shuld have won this one .

India should push dravid to number 3 . Dhoni at 5 .yuvi at 4 . sachin n souran at 1 and 2 . This shuld be the udeal batting order.

 

[sohum]

yet again dravid has lost a match due to his inept captaincy.We shuld have won this one .

India should push dravid to number 3 . Dhoni at 5 .yuvi at 4 . sachin n souran at 1 and 2 . This shuld be the udeal batting order.

Blaming Dravid for the loss is just making a scapegoat out of him and ignoring the fact that the South African bowlers are far, far, far superior to our bowlers. Ntini and Nel bowled marvelously as did Phillander and if Langeveldt hadn't bowled like crap, we would not even have been in the game going into the interval. So blaming it on Dravid is just shortsightedness.

 

[cricphan]

Blaming Dravid for the loss is just making a scapegoat out of him and ignoring the fact that the South African bowlers are far, far, far superior to our bowlers. Ntini and Nel bowled marvelously as did Phillander and if Langeveldt hadn't bowled like crap, we would not even have been in the game going into the interval. So blaming it on Dravid is just shortsightedness.

I beg to differ . He is too bookish .He does not think on his feet.What is the point of giving rohit an over.The bloke is playing his first day ,he has not had good outing and must have been a bit low on confidence.
What was gambhir doing at 3 . He either opens or is out of the team.Dravid shuld be at no.3
Why was sachin not tried in the middle overs or at the end ?
What was a sweeper cover doing when you need 6-7 runs of 10 balls and 4 wickets in hand . It is okay if you need 6 runs from 3 ball.
I am sorry to say this but his skippering was not good as usual.

 

[zub2005]

i am just wondering. were all of indias pace bowlers unwell besides zaheer khan and r p singh.

 

[cricphan]

i am just wondering. were all of indias pace bowlers unwell besides zaheer khan and r p singh.

yes . all had a bout of flu n cold including sachin,rahul,zaheer.
RP was allright.

 

[m_vaughan]

I beg to differ . He is too bookish .He does not think on his feet.What is the point of giving rohit an over.The bloke is playing his first day ,he has not had good outing and must have been a bit low on confidence.
What was gambhir doing at 3 . He either opens or is out of the team.Dravid shuld be at no.3
Why was sachin not tried in the middle overs or at the end ?
What was a sweeper cover doing when you need 6-7 runs of 10 balls and 4 wickets in hand . It is okay if you need 6 runs from 3 ball.
I am sorry to say this but his skippering was not good as usual.

none of these questions would have been raised had India won that game. Its easy to find alternatives now that the game is over. There is no guarantee that Sachin would have done anything different, probably would have been more expensive than any of other bowlers.

People say the match was close as it went down to the last over but anyone who saw the entire SA innings would have realised that they were never really in any trouble chasing. They paced their innings accordingly and would have adjusted it to chase a few more runs.

 

[sohum]

I beg to differ .

So you are suggesting that we lost primarily due to Dravid's captaincy and not due to the superiority and experience of the South African bowlers? I think that is closing the eyes to the light. As suggested earlier, Tendulkar may have gotten a wicket but he just may have well gone for 10 an over (like he did today). You are incorrectly assuming that Dravid made all the worst decisions, something you cannot back up because you don't know what would have happened if he made the decisions you suggested. Dravid's captaincy left a lot to desire, I agree, but blaming the loss on him is stupid.

i am just wondering. were all of indias pace bowlers unwell besides zaheer khan and r p singh.

Pretty much. Sreesanth is still sick and Agarkar has also been added to that list. That's why Ishant Sharma and Ranadeb Bose were brought in early.

People say the match was close as it went down to the last over but anyone who saw the entire SA innings would have realised that they were never really in any trouble chasing. They paced their innings accordingly and would have adjusted it to chase a few more runs.

Yup, South Africa were in complete control once Kallis and Boucher solidified the little collapse in the middle overs. The only way India would have won it were if South Africa threw it away by giving away 2-3 wickets an over in the last 2 overs, like Zimbabwe did against Ireland in the World Cup.

 

[zub2005]

i have been looking at the cricinfo commentary and sharma did not looked pretty good. can i have some information on how he played

 

[Cricketman]

I beg to differ . He is too bookish .He does not think on his feet.What is the point of giving rohit an over..

Hey!! I can bowl! :

 

[sohum]

i have been looking at the cricinfo commentary and sharma did not looked pretty good. can i have some information on how he played

He was not spectacular. The good thing was that he pitched it up quite a bit. But as soon as he strayed short, he was put away with ease. Don't know how successful a bowler he'll be in international cricket, tbh.

He is too bookish .He does not think on his feet.What is the point of giving rohit an over.The bloke is playing his first day ,he has not had good outing and must have been a bit low on confidence.

Missed this earlier, but giving a debutant a bowl in a close match (in terms of the scorecard, rather than the actual game) is not exactly being bookish is it? He was following his gut instinct (which was not really that great, eh?). :

 

[icyman]

He does'nt have a clue as to what he is doing.
Maybe,he finds it tough to control a team in which you have the likes of his ex-captains Sourav and Sachin.

It is time,for him to step aside.

 

[zub2005]

nice to see india win. now they need to continue this form and get the series wrapped up on sunday. i was a bit concerned when india were 4 down. i thin if 1 more wicket fell s africa might of took it

 

[andrew_nixon]

nice to see india win. now they need to continue this form and get the series wrapped up on sunday. i was a bit concerned when india were 4 down. i thin if 1 more wicket fell s africa might of took it

Discussion of the India v South Africa series does not go in this thread.