• 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.

Can any one tell me what the hell Ponting is talking about ?

Top_Cat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
For all practical purposes it is and that's how it is treated as.
Well, I'd guess Ponting really was only referring to OZ though.

That said, I don't really agree with him. The scores I would guess are higher in India but guys score them so quickly, a result is often still possible. Suspect Ponting is mixing up his arguments between numbers of draws and Tests which are bat-dominated.
 
Last edited:
Well, I'd guess Ponting really was only referring to OZ though.

That said, I don't really agree with him. The scores I would guess are higher in India but guys score them so quickly, a result is often still possible. Suspect Ponting is mixing up his arguments between numbers of draws and Tests which are bat-dominated.
Or Ponting could be responding to a question on why only 7% of Indians prefer test cricket.
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
You confirm my statement that you are here to engage in buffoonery and not any serious discussion. I will try to make it easy one more time :-
:laugh: :lol:. This is indeed buffoonery since this is easily the most idiotic cricket debate i can remember having on this site. But lets gooooooo..


Here are some of things that should be commonly known :-

1. Soil soaks up water, Even if the pitch was not exposed directly to the water, if the nearby areas were, the inner surfaces will become soft, even more so since the city had seen heavy rains in the previous season.
Right & this lasted only on DAY 1 right???. Days 2 & 3 the sun came out & they where full days play right?

So then any of that dampness which affected the square along with the slight dampess which would have gotten on the pitch on day 1. It is definately in the reals of possibility that with sunshine present on the next two days the dampness on the pitch - the square & outfield would have evaporated right???. (Although i slightly remember days 2 & 3 being slightly overcast).

But i know for a fact no bowler on either side during day's 2 & 3 ever complained about the run ups at any point during that test. So there goes your crap argument..

2. It is evident that the covers were not on until after five minutes after the second drizzle started, which means the pitch was exposed to the rain for longer than five minutes (keep in mind the inner layers are already soft).

Oh right so 5 minutes of pitch exposure to rain changed the ENTIRE pitch conditions for the next 3 days:laugh:. GTFOH maynnnn...


The point is this it doesn't matter if rainfall affected pitch preparation before the test & ground conditions slightly intially during the match (the first day). The FACT is the pitch PLAYED HORRIBLE FOR 3 DAYS. (the only time batsmen look in any degree of control was the Laxman/Tendy partnership in IND second innings). SIMPLEEEE...
 
Last edited:

Sanz

Hall of Fame Member
Right & this lasted only on DAY 1 right???. Days 2 & 3 the sun came out & they where full days play right?.
Yes but Day 2&3 of a test match come immediately after the first day of a test match not after 6 months of summer.

Soil was already soft because of the extreme rain that reason, 1st day rain made it softer, delay in covering the pitches made it worse. Then play began and pitch could not stand firm. Matter became worse next day after a dose of Heavy Roller at the end of the play.
 

Sanz

Hall of Fame Member
The point is this it doesn't matter if rainfall affected pitch preparation before the test & ground conditions slightly intially during the match (the first day). The PATCH is the pitch PLAYED HORRIBLE FOR 3 DAYS. (the only time batsmen look in any degree of control was the Laxman/Tendy partnership in IND second innings). SIMPLEEEE...
No one is denying that the pitch played horrible. Just questioning the assertion that pitch was under prepared deliberately.
 

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
If Australia fail to beat WI in the third test Ponting will look like a nice big douche.
 

Top_Cat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Or Ponting could be responding to a question on why only 7% of Indians prefer test cricket.
If you lived in India, would you go to the grounds during the day? It's a more complicated issue than games being bat-dominated.
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
No one is denying that the pitch played horrible. Just questioning the assertion that pitch was under prepared deliberately.
Well Ponting never said that. See here


cricinfo said:
Ricky Ponting

On the pitch

Disappointing. It's fair to say that the wicket was nowhere near even being close to Test-match standard: that's pretty obvious given what we've seen over the last two days. 40 wickets falling in just over two days of a Test is pretty much unheard of. It's disappointing that the series has ended this way. It's been such a fantastic series, from the first ball bowled till the start of this match. It puts a bit of a sour taste in the mouth

On whether the ICC will have an enquiry over the pitch

I'm not sure if there'll be an enquiry, but I know that lots of questions will be asked and lots of reports will be written. I guess the match referee will write a report about this wicket, and obviously that'll be sent to the ICC. Let's hope there is an enquiry, just because it's so disappointing. As a player you want to be tested under different conditions and in different countries, but that's just going a little bit too far. We have played in three venues other than this one in this Test series, and the conditions have been different in each one, which is the beauty of playing cricket in India. But in all the matches other than Nagpur the match was going into a fifth day, which is what you want. Unfortunately this one didn't even finish two.
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Or Ponting could be responding to a question on why only 7% of Indians prefer test cricket.
why the hell does it matter? Are you saying it will go up because of results??? I honestly don't see too many of the casual cricket fans in India liking test cricket at all... They are brought up in the age of batting heroes and they will always enjoy a Sehwag six more than a Zaheer yorker...
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
That answer to the second question shows he did indeed question that the groundsmen under prepared the wicket and that deliberately... Aussie, can you read English properly? 8-)
:laugh:. This has gone beyond ridiculous now. Ponting never said the word "I believe the Mumbai test wicket was under prepared by THE GROUNDSMEN DELIBERATELY" MY GOD WTF. He just questioned the preparation of the wicket - by saying "it was not close to test standard" which he clearly was in his rights to say after what happened.

Haha. whats really up with you Indian cats & the dumb Ponting hate. Yall need to take a chill pill & back up yo..
 
Last edited:

Top