India v England 2008

[King Pietersen]

Sorry, but that's ridiculous. He only scraped 9 in the first innings, and then fairly slogged his way to 83 in the 2nd. He may have somewhat changed the course of the game, but it was Tendulkar's hundred that won the game, and Strauss' 2 tons that set up the final chase. It's not often that a player hits 2 centuries in a game, and he deserved the MOTM award more than Sehwag. I wouldn't have minded if Sachin got it, because he played magnificently, and won the game for India. Bit of a strange decision.

 

[Geekery]

oooooooookay, sehwag gets the MOM... seriously, strauss deserved it more imo

 

[Neo95]

sachin should have got it IMHO.

 

[karnog]

I would've prefered sachin and then strauss but its not completely wrong to give it to Sehwag. Mind you i feel gutted for Strauss. Not everyday a century in both innings leads to a loss. He knows how Lara feels i guess. But what a pity its only 2 test matches.

 

[Sureshot]

Sehwag changed the game though, he scored a 5th (roughly) of the total in about 10 overs. He set India up, it's not about who got the most runs, it's about who made the biggest impact on the result.

Well done to India, out batted us. Disappointed with Monty, Jimmy and Harmison. We need to sort that out. Still think we need to drop Bell too, he just doesn't have the mental ability to play test cricket. So often flops at big times. I know he averages 45 btw.

 

[MasterBlaster76]

Well done, England! Once again, snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory, how do you do it? Seriously, that session yesterday, what was it? 52 runs and only two boundaries? That just handed the psychological advantage back to India, you could see the way they went off, jogging off, clapping, shouting at each other! What's wrong with a bit of drop and run, against a team that's been in the field, in that heat, for almost two days England???? You don't just have to hit fours and sixes! There's no doubt in my mind that's the session that lost us the Test.

 

[deerkick]

Yeah Strauss should've gotten MOM for sure

 

[King Pietersen]

I don't think Bell's problem is mentality, it's just that he can't adapt his game to the Subcontinent. I think it's fair enough to drop him for the Subcontinent, but in England he's a key player, he's got a fantastic record at home, just needs to develop away from home on different pitches to the ones in England and he'll be sorted. I'd probably go for Shah for the 2nd game tbh.

 

[WORLD CHAMPIONS]

WTF : Sehwag got MOM : Strauss deserved more than anyone

 

[aussie_ben91]

Gutsy decision on the MOTM but a fair one. I doubt India wouldn't of won the game without Sehwag's innings and it was a launching pad for Tendulkar's 100.

Man of the Match should be given to the player that influences the game the most, which is what Sehwag did.

 

[sohum]

Cricinfo had this to say "So where did England lose this Test after dominating so much of it? When they scored some 57 runs in a session yesterday.".

What a load of bull, they lost it when Sehwag smashed them all over the park to make a generous declaration look like a stupid one.

Hardly. You continue to fight a losing argument here. When you're pushing on for a declaration, you don't score at 2.5 runs an over. Ask anyone with half a cricketing mind... to successfully set a target, you want to keep the runs out of reach while leaving yourself enough time to bowl the opposition out. I completely agree with Cricinfo and all the expert former cricketers who have voiced their opinion during the game, that scoring 2 boundaries in a session of play where you are setting a target is completely unacceptable.

Strauss and Collingwood not going on after scoring tons was probably another key moment, another 50 or 60 runs scored at a decent rate between those two would have made a big difference.

That's the whole point, isn't it? These players simply weren't looking to score at a decent rate. Even 3-3.5 an over is not hard to achieve especially when the field is spread out (which it was, given both batsmen had a score under their belt), but Strauss and Collingwood were content with dead-batting everything that came their way. You cannot just "switch-on" hitting mode, especially on a slow track. You need to show intent to score quickly and play the shots when they are there (like Sachin and Yuvi did), and to be fair, Strauss and Collingwood just never looked like they wanted to do that.

England's attack was made to look toothless, but India can do that to anyone, I know I bashed KP unfairly earlier, but really India were just too good, they won it rather than England losing it, I am just annoyed because now it looks like England have no hope of beating Australia in the Ashes.

As an English supporter, you should be pleased that England have already performed better in a Test match in India than Australia did after playing here for almost 2 months. There are definitely positives as long as England get their line-up sorted out, and their captain gains experience.

 

[MasterBlaster76]

WTF : Sehwag got MOM : Strauss deserved more than anyone

Sehwag changed the course of the match, that's why he got it. Without that innings, I don't think India would've won.

 

[sohum]

Sorry, but that's ridiculous. He only scraped 9 in the first innings, and then fairly slogged his way to 83 in the 2nd. He may have somewhat changed the course of the game, but it was Tendulkar's hundred that won the game, and Strauss' 2 tons that set up the final chase. It's not often that a player hits 2 centuries in a game, and he deserved the MOTM award more than Sehwag. I wouldn't have minded if Sachin got it, because he played magnificently, and won the game for India. Bit of a strange decision.

He did not "fairly slog[ged] his way". He made the most of very poor bowling. I thought Sachin deserved it more than Sehwag, but that does not give anyone the right to decrease the worth of Sehwag's knock. I don't think India would have been going for the win if Sehwag didn't give India that start--it mentally dented the English confidence, and pumped the Indian side with positiveness.

 

[Slowcoach]

I think Sureshot is right about dropping Bell, he only seems to score test tons out of a total of 500+ when someone else has already done the hard work, it's not like they even need his runs when they score that many.

And I think Australia would prefer to see Bell in the England team than Shah during the Ashes.

Shah is a good player, he scores the hard runs in the middle order in ODIs when the fielders are all back on the fence, while Bell just takes advantage of the fielding restrictions early in the innings in the prime opening or number 3 spot.

Great to see a good game of cricket though, even if I was only just watching the progress on cricinfo, there is nothing like the ebb and flow of a Test to keep you interested in a sporting contest for days on end.

 

[sohum]

I actually think Strauss helped India's chances as much as he helped England's. His run-scoring cannot be faulted, but he and Colly really lacked the initiative on Day 4 to push England into a commanding position.