India were considerable favourites. 200 is not a particularly tough chase. Even if Sehwag had been out cheaply,India were the likely victors.
200 one a last day pitch that was going to really help warne & the fact that other than Sehwag the entire Indian batting line-up was owned (Tendulkar out of touch because of the tennis-elbow). There is no way India where likely victors.
50/50 all the way, with Sehwag being dismissed early swinging the game likely back in Australia's favour.
Haha, "such trivial things". No, sorry, the pitch in a Test in India isn't trivial, it's vital.
Yes the surface in an Indian test match is vital. But my point is that even if the Nagpur pitch was a traditional Indian test match pitch, it wouldn't have made a difference to the outcome of the series.
I don't need to get it. It's an irrelevance. I couldn't care less that no-one had worked him out - they didn't need to. Gilchrist was simply not playing very well..
Ha, but you are one that is saying that Gilchrist's "Career Slump" had begun in 2003/04. If you now agree that he wasn't worked out then he wasn't in a career slump during that period.
His play from IND 03 to IND 04 as i say again wasn't even in a dip, as i showed you already vs IND 03/04 he got some good balls mixed with not getting hold of India, those things happen to batsmen and for the 1 millionth time his play in the sub-continent was the best of his ability.
You don't seem to understand that being temporarily out-of-form (or having declined perminantly) and being worked-out are actually opposite things.
Clearly it is you who don't know this since you have brought up this stupid point about Gilchrist.
One has to do with the batsman, the other has to do with what's being bowled at him. Gilchrist had declined by the start of the 2003/04 season. He was not the same batsman he had once been. So no-one needed to work him out..
Ha, look up..
Clearly weren't? Ponting was patently obviously out-of-form, though not horribly so, from the SL series in 2003/04 to the NZ series in 2004/05. He was quite obviously, to anyone, not playing anywhere near as well as he had between Headingley 2001 and MCG 2003/04. Possibly that was due to captaincy, possibly he simply couldn't go on like he had 2001-2003/04 forever. However, just like Gilchrist, he wasn't scoring as well as previously because he wasn't playing as well. He didn't need to have been worked-out for this to happen..
Exactly, Ponting just wasn't getting runs, looked good in a fair few innigns & just got out. No career form slump was occuring in 04 with Punter. Same thing applies for Gilchrist
from IND 03 to IND 04.
Martyn, though, he had 4 bad Tests - including 2 bad decisions. Any fool can do that, it means very little.
Exactly again. But based on your logic Martyn was in a career from slump as well.
I shall end this topic since i fear you still won't get it. If you still believe Gilly's slump began from IND 03/04 & not the 05 Ashes, i'm just have to let you run along with it & add to your many other stubborn & foolish beliefs that you have.
