India in England/Ireland/Scotland

[Adarsh]

The match has been abandoned as a draw, how frustrating and disappointing to know that England were only 1 wicket away from victory! I think it is kind of pathetic with the match so close to an end, the light was massively similar to that of the Norfolk game and they were still playing when I left.

Come on, the light was poor. Remember it was England that set the standards in the first day. If they felt that it was poor then, then the umpires have to be consistent.

 

[Skater]

Come on, the light was poor. Remember it was England that set the standards in the first day. If they felt that it was poor then, then the umpires have to be consistent.

Oh, there's no doubt the light was poor, but I thought with such a good match nearing a conclusion they could have played on. Then again, I'm coming from the England side!

If there was only one thing I could change about cricket it would be the bad light rule. I would soon destroy those light meters!

 

[Adarsh]

If there was only one thing I could change about cricket it would be the bad light rule. I would soon destroy those light meters!

What changes would you make ?

 

[dhoni dhamaka]

well played dhoni, showed he can save a match as well as winning a match.....

 

[Sureshot]

Indeed it has, but unlike the West Indies series, the rain may cost England the series.

I don't think it will. I can actually see the whole series being drawn 0-0. Trent Bridge has had horrible weather of late, something which doesn't look like lifting and The Oval is a great batting track. Even though both sides bowlers did really well, I still can't see either attack doing that all series. I thought we played Kumble quite well, but he could be a handful at the Oval.

What changes would you make ?

It's a bit silly that people new to the game will see the players going off for bad light, especially when we have floodlights at our disposal. I think all Test match grounds should have Floodlights. I'm not complaining about what happened today btw, it was fair to both sides and by the book. But it's stupid that we go off for bad light, especially when people bowling at 50MPH are on. The laws of that side of the game need to be changed for the better, imo.

 

[SaiSrini]

Wow, thats one of the closest escapes that India might have ever had. Obviously with one wicket away from a win, England deserved the victory. But seeing the innings that Dhoni played today (when in a comfortable situation, he scores or else he gets out cheaply). Today he batted for 76* precious runs that ultimately saved the match for us.

I wont say India deserved to lose. They also played good cricket throughout the match. Their batting wasnt upto the standards that they are normally used to, but their bowling was good, they had a good fight with England who also enjoyed home conditions even though their attack was second string.

All in all, a very good test match. Looking forward to the rest of the series. Hope they turn out to be as exciting as this test (though the result need not be the same).

 

[Animator!]

You cannot compare the light at a Norfolk game to that of the test match.
Firstly; Micahel Eccles, supposedly Norfolks quickest bowler is about only just 5-10 mph quicker than Monty when Monty spears it down. Eccles is a nothing pace. Neither are many bowlers in minor counties cricket. Their pace is by far and away slower than that at Test cricket.

 

[Adarsh]

Obviously, I would get rid of those digital light meters for a start! I would leave it all down to human judgement on how dangerous it really is to play.

There should be some sort of consistency when it comes to bad light, the Karachi test all those years ago and today were incomparable really.

You really think subjective views from umpires will lead to more consistency than the technology of the objective light meters ???

 

[Animator!]

They take a consistant light with the metres on day one. They stick to this light for the rest of that test match. It is the only proven fair way for both sides. To suggest it's flawed is ridiculous. If it had been us batting, 9 down with 100+ to win, you would have loved us getting offered the light. Don't jump to conclusions just because the rules have worked against us.

 

[newzolt]

England definitely have an edge over India as both teams prepare for the next game.Again, the glorious uncertainties of the game seen in this match!

 

[evertonfan]

Fair play to the umpires. It's good that they are consistent. I'm slightly miffed that we didn't get that lbw to win it, but that's the game of cricket. We'll probably get a shocker given in our favour at Trent Bridge to balance it out. England just aren't meant to win at Lords these days.

I'm confident we can win the series, but if Trent Bridge is anything like the dustbowl it was last year then Kumble and Panesar will be licking their lips.

 

[MuchMore]

They take a consistant light with the metres on day one. They stick to this light for the rest of that test match. It is the only proven fair way for both sides. To suggest it's flawed is ridiculous. If it had been us batting, 9 down with 100+ to win, you would have loved us getting offered the light. Don't jump to conclusions just because the rules have worked against us.

I second that

 

[angryangy]

It's a bit silly that people new to the game will see the players going off for bad light, especially when we have floodlights at our disposal. I think all Test match grounds should have Floodlights. I'm not complaining about what happened today btw, it was fair to both sides and by the book. But it's stupid that we go off for bad light, especially when people bowling at 50MPH are on. The laws of that side of the game need to be changed for the better, imo.

Floodlights don't work for Tests. Any time a ground in Australia resorts to the lights, the batsmen will soon be offered the light or, probably more likely, rain strikes (as it did today, mind you). Floodlights aren't very bright compared to the Sun, even through good cloud cover and the dark red ball is simply not suited to low-light conditions.

At lower levels or informally, one might be happy to play until they can barely see (evidently they're trialling this in the World Cup), but at the top level, even though it might be safe to play, it eventually becomes quite unfair.

 

[Skater]

My last post was clearly misunderstood! I wasn't bitter about the test result, although I was frustrated, I have just always had the bad light rule as a pet hate of mine.

 

[BigCrickNan]

The rules suck and annoy us, but it won us the 2005 ashes. Fair play to the umpires.