-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
*Official* 3rd Test - England v India - Keep all Discussion Here Please!
- Thread starter James
- Start date
lord_of_darkness
Cricket Web XI Moderator
i havent seen Murali Kartik do that good a job outside india either , where all all the other billion spinners ??
luckyeddie
Cricket Web Staff Member
All-change from Trent Bridge.
No Harmison, No Chalky, No Corky.
Ashley Giles, Alex Tudor and Jug-ears all return.
Apparently Freddie passed a fitness test and plays.
If England can make use of a spinner at Headingley, I reckon India should use two.
No Harmison, No Chalky, No Corky.
Ashley Giles, Alex Tudor and Jug-ears all return.
Apparently Freddie passed a fitness test and plays.
If England can make use of a spinner at Headingley, I reckon India should use two.
Neil Pickup
Cricket Web Moderator
Still not convinced about our selection - yes, it's better than India's, could that be the worst seam attack in Test Cricket history. They won't be taking 20 wickets this time - but I cannot see how Tudor warrants a recall above Harmison.
Oh yeah, he plays for Surrey.
!
Oh yeah, he plays for Surrey.
!
luckyeddie
Cricket Web Staff Member
Patel in.
Harbhajan in.
Kumble in.
The Indians don't need a selection panel. Just ask LE to pick their team!
Regarding whether it is the worst new ball attack of all time, in 1971 the Indian seamers were Abid Ali and Eknath Solkar. Now that took some beating for lack of penetration, yet they did occasionally take a wicket or two. Their main job was to get the shine off the ball so Chandra, Venkat and Bedi could get to work.
The seam attack was 'strengthened' in 1974 with the addition af Madan Lal.
Harbhajan in.
Kumble in.
The Indians don't need a selection panel. Just ask LE to pick their team!
Regarding whether it is the worst new ball attack of all time, in 1971 the Indian seamers were Abid Ali and Eknath Solkar. Now that took some beating for lack of penetration, yet they did occasionally take a wicket or two. Their main job was to get the shine off the ball so Chandra, Venkat and Bedi could get to work.
The seam attack was 'strengthened' in 1974 with the addition af Madan Lal.
Neil & Marc
I would also agree that Harmision should have played for one extra reason, Cover.
Because we have now bought in Caddick/Tudor and still playing a half fit Flintoff. These players all could suffer a flar up of their injuries and be ruled out of the test...Then we would only have Hoggard left to bowl
I would also agree that Harmision should have played for one extra reason, Cover.
Because we have now bought in Caddick/Tudor and still playing a half fit Flintoff. These players all could suffer a flar up of their injuries and be ruled out of the test...Then we would only have Hoggard left to bowl
Anil
Hall of Fame Member
India is crawling along at 142-1, are the conditions that favourable to bowlers? That could be the only justification for a 2.2 run rate. One outcome of this crawl could be that the remaining Indians, in a bid to accelerate get out to indiscreet shots. Let's hope for India's sake that that doesn't happen.
Well, Fintoff has just put down a simple chance at 2nd slip
Well after 67 overs the Indians have taken the score to 160/1
Dravid 72*
Bangar 55*
The Indians are fighting hard, and now have a firm foundation to build a huge first innings score, espically with the caliber of players such as Tendulkar still to come
One worring fator is that Giles is getting turn at both ends and with India opting for both of their spinners, it might not seem such a silly decsion afterall
Well after 67 overs the Indians have taken the score to 160/1
Dravid 72*
Bangar 55*
The Indians are fighting hard, and now have a firm foundation to build a huge first innings score, espically with the caliber of players such as Tendulkar still to come
One worring fator is that Giles is getting turn at both ends and with India opting for both of their spinners, it might not seem such a silly decsion afterall
luckyeddie
Cricket Web Staff Member
Does anyone think that there is any future in banging the ball in back of a length in perfect swing and seam conditions?
Does anyone seriously consider that Alex Tudor is anything more than a plodder?
Will Flintoff ever be considered to be a main line bowler?
Has Hussain lost the plot? (over 100 runs behind square - and still no third man)
Does anyone seriously consider that Alex Tudor is anything more than a plodder?
Will Flintoff ever be considered to be a main line bowler?
Has Hussain lost the plot? (over 100 runs behind square - and still no third man)
Anil
Hall of Fame Member
Well....good job by India on the first day. Now, they have to consolidate on their gains or all the good work of today will come to nought. Extras accounted for 32 with 12 no balls, probably means that the English bowlers did not make sufficient use of helpful conditions.
luckyeddie
Cricket Web Staff Member
I definitely think that Hussain is a one-trick pony.
In the first test he suckered the Indians by bowling where they could hardly reach the ball. It worked once but will never work again.
The Indians aren't stupid, but I'm beginning to suspect that Nasser is.
Much as I think that Freddie is one of the few stars of the English game, he is never going to be a strike bowler. Tudor was given a glowing tribute today by Dermot Reeve - he said that he was bowling well because he 'hit the wicket'.
I always thought that the idea was to hit the stumps.
One of the more moronic statements today was by Simon Hughes ('the analyst') who suggested that the England bowlers' problems lay in the fact that they 'were not used to the conditions', i.e. the ball was swinging.
For crying out loud, I cannot think of MORE FAMILIAR (sorry about the shouting) conditions for an England cricketer.
In the first test he suckered the Indians by bowling where they could hardly reach the ball. It worked once but will never work again.
The Indians aren't stupid, but I'm beginning to suspect that Nasser is.
Much as I think that Freddie is one of the few stars of the English game, he is never going to be a strike bowler. Tudor was given a glowing tribute today by Dermot Reeve - he said that he was bowling well because he 'hit the wicket'.
I always thought that the idea was to hit the stumps.
One of the more moronic statements today was by Simon Hughes ('the analyst') who suggested that the England bowlers' problems lay in the fact that they 'were not used to the conditions', i.e. the ball was swinging.
For crying out loud, I cannot think of MORE FAMILIAR (sorry about the shouting) conditions for an England cricketer.
luckyeddie
Cricket Web Staff Member
I watched every ball (apart from the 10 minutes when Channel 4 went off the air on satellite) and if more than 6 of them would have actually hit the stumps, I must have blinked.
There's no doubt in my mind where the blame for the performance lies - captaincy, captaincy, captaincy.
The bowlers attempt to put the ball where they are told. Every time a half volley today was driven for a boundary (let's not kid ourselves - in swinging conditions, a half volley ain't always a bad thing - ask Hoggard, he got his wicket today with one), Nasser Hussain would come racing up to the bowler and the next delivery would be short and two feet outside off stick.
Ah well, there's always tomorrow.
There's no doubt in my mind where the blame for the performance lies - captaincy, captaincy, captaincy.
The bowlers attempt to put the ball where they are told. Every time a half volley today was driven for a boundary (let's not kid ourselves - in swinging conditions, a half volley ain't always a bad thing - ask Hoggard, he got his wicket today with one), Nasser Hussain would come racing up to the bowler and the next delivery would be short and two feet outside off stick.
Ah well, there's always tomorrow.
Well like you say being driven isn't a bad thing as it shows the batsman is playing a attacking shot, and any attacking shot can lead to a edge etc. Also all Nasser needs to do is put say a mid off and a long off in place and then the batsman will have to place the shot well to get a '4'.
It's like you said earlier the batsman wont fool for the same tricks again. So all they are going to do is duck under the short ball all day long, the thing is if the bowlers actuly bowled a bouncer in the right place (between rib cage and head) then it would be ok, but their bouncers are about two foot above the batsman's head so it never going to trouble high caliber players such as Dravid.
Oh well like you said there's always Day 2
It's like you said earlier the batsman wont fool for the same tricks again. So all they are going to do is duck under the short ball all day long, the thing is if the bowlers actuly bowled a bouncer in the right place (between rib cage and head) then it would be ok, but their bouncers are about two foot above the batsman's head so it never going to trouble high caliber players such as Dravid.
Oh well like you said there's always Day 2