Gambhir really not convincing me with his selections and general tactical approach that he's an average coach. A lot of India's issues this game were caused/exacerbated by how he setup the team with not providing enough bowling support for Bumrah just for some extra runs that never really materialized. Therefore Gill keeps going to his best bowlers a lot and so tiring them out when he could've indulged in more rotation if he had an extra bowler he could trust, which helps England build more partnerships lower down the order. This means more runs for England, which means more runs to overhaul for India, and they have to do it batting second and against a better attack which was more consistent and had better lines of attack. Then, some luck going England's way and Indian batters indulging in their worst instincts just made things really difficult in the end for India to win.
-
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.
3rd Test (Lord’s) - 10 July to 14 July
- Thread starter silentstriker
- Start date
Spark
Global Moderator
SkyBlue
International 12th Man
[
Screw Asia cup. A test series win in SENA countries is bigger than any of those puny competitions. I probably rate only the ODI World cup higher than a test series win in England or Australia or even SA for that matter.Iam heart broken. Hopefully we will win asia cup to lessen this pain
Johan
Hall of Fame Member
Stokes was barely justifying his place as a player minus captaincy tbh, until like the last test, he really came well here
SkyBlue
International 12th Man
He won you the game yesterday. You can say all you want about his consistency but he steps up massively in big games/big series.
I don't think they had a good 4th pace option, and of the spinners only Washington really contributed with the ball and that was later on in the match. What's wrong with this really? They got a lot more help from the conditions than in previous games and still let England build up runs when they should've run through the tail in the first innings. England at least could rotate around the pacers, even when Woakes was basically showing his age for large parts of the game, compared to Reddy's usage this game.
Victor Ian
International Coach
It's Shami's fault, really. Just as he became a favourite for me, he goes and gets some hair and has hardly been seen since. He was a reverse Sampson. Needs to lose the hair again.
cnerd123
likes this
you're definitely not actually watching the game and just agendaposting
All 4 of India's seamers this Test did perfectly fine. Akashdeep struggled with the slope, but at least he wasn't going at 6.5 like Prasidh, and he bounced back with some good spells in the 3rd innings. NKR overdelivered, Bumrah and Siraj were both mostly good. The ball change on Day 2 hurt us more, new ball didn't do much and Carse cashed in.
We should have done better in our first innings and gotten a lead. And our top order should have done better at the end of Day 4. We actually bowled really well this Test, they are not to blame.
The fact that you're saying Reddy overachieved is the issue here with him. India shouldn't have a 4th pace option who's overachieving by taking 3 wickets in the game if they want to win here. And compared to the other pacers in this game, Akash in the 1st innings/Reddy in the 3rd innings overs going at 4 was a problem. Even with the ball change, there shouldn't be that much leakage from the pacers when the spinners weren't really worthwhile options until the second half of the game.
I don't disagree with the batting issues, but the bowling issues do exist all the same. They don't have enough pace options to compete with England in the XI, and they don't want to risk losing runs for more wicket taking options. How is this a winning strategy? As it stands, with England all 4 pace options bar Tongue (who's still a threat vs the tail) and Woakes (who's showing his age) can threaten consistently in a way India's pace options can't. Reddy can't be trusted at the moment, and you've pointed out the issue with Prasidh's economy vs his strengths as someone with more pace and extra bounce.
I don't think there's any doubt about India's heart and determination. No doubt they have shown everyone that they have the metal to play this format, even in this relatively younger side. But they need to go back to the drawing board and fix some of the basics:
- Losing a wicket before the end of session is completely unacceptable. Absolutely no patience for that, because it's all down to concentration discipline. It should be treated like a crime.
- The lower order has to contribute more like the resistance we saw in the 2nd innings. No expectation of 50s or tons, but wouldn't it be great if at least 1 or 2 of batters 9-11 were capable of scoring at least 10-20 runs? Even Bashir and Archer made 10 runs between them. The tail not contributing wouldn't have been an issue in bygone years. But the batting coach now needs to include this as a priority. When England are getting 116 runs off the last 3 wickets, India getting less than 15 for the last 3 in the 1st innings is pathetic.
- Dropped catches. Better than Leeds for sure, but a costly miss or two can add up. Jamie Smith was dropped on single digits, and he went on to make more than 70.
- The top/middle order needs to understand their role. Some of those dismissals were terrible, especially Jaiswal, Nair, Pant, and Rahul. They needed a good start, and yet they are losing 4 wickets by the end of Day 4.
- I'm told there were almost 30 extras. How is that possible at this level? It's proved to be the difference here.
Ultimately it's fine to chest pump, as Sundar did in his interview with Ian Ward. But if you can't back up the talk, it's meaningless. Give it back to the other side in the form of winning a game instead of useless bravado. Finally, the guys have to understand the importance of putting the team first over individual performances. No one will remember KL's ton. Everyone will talk about Ben Stokes's lionhearted spell even as he was running out of petrol. Because one performance contributed to the team's victory.
- Losing a wicket before the end of session is completely unacceptable. Absolutely no patience for that, because it's all down to concentration discipline. It should be treated like a crime.
- The lower order has to contribute more like the resistance we saw in the 2nd innings. No expectation of 50s or tons, but wouldn't it be great if at least 1 or 2 of batters 9-11 were capable of scoring at least 10-20 runs? Even Bashir and Archer made 10 runs between them. The tail not contributing wouldn't have been an issue in bygone years. But the batting coach now needs to include this as a priority. When England are getting 116 runs off the last 3 wickets, India getting less than 15 for the last 3 in the 1st innings is pathetic.
- Dropped catches. Better than Leeds for sure, but a costly miss or two can add up. Jamie Smith was dropped on single digits, and he went on to make more than 70.
- The top/middle order needs to understand their role. Some of those dismissals were terrible, especially Jaiswal, Nair, Pant, and Rahul. They needed a good start, and yet they are losing 4 wickets by the end of Day 4.
- I'm told there were almost 30 extras. How is that possible at this level? It's proved to be the difference here.
Ultimately it's fine to chest pump, as Sundar did in his interview with Ian Ward. But if you can't back up the talk, it's meaningless. Give it back to the other side in the form of winning a game instead of useless bravado. Finally, the guys have to understand the importance of putting the team first over individual performances. No one will remember KL's ton. Everyone will talk about Ben Stokes's lionhearted spell even as he was running out of petrol. Because one performance contributed to the team's victory.
Last edited:
England generally had a batter with the tail in those instances in Jamie Smith. As good as Jadeja has been and Washington can be, neither of them are as good as him at the moment.
sayon basak
International Coach
Asia Cup? lol lol.Iam heart broken
But we can't ignore some of the late hitting from Carse as well. Almost 15-20 more runs were added through that. Why can't we trust some of the Indian tailenders to, if needed, do what Rabada and Jansen did against PAK last winter, or what Cummins and Lyon did at Edgbaston 2 years ago during the Ashes? Of course, it isn't expected that the tail has to fire every time. It isn't even their role. But greater stability not only provides the team with some bonus runs, it frustrates the opposition, while releasing the pressure from the top and middle order batters.
devisreeprasadmahesh
Cricket Spectator
THE ULTIMATE TRUTH
These fellows have some serious mental issues. They badly need sports psychologists. Just look at the World Cup final in your own backyard: timid and frightened. Only Pant, Bumrah, or Jaiswal look Australian in this team. The rest are sheeps. Nitish Reddy looks like a tailender with the bat—subdued and terrified.
Many of them simply lack the mental toughness required for competitive sports. No shortage of talent, but psychological issues. Just facts.
These fellows have some serious mental issues. They badly need sports psychologists. Just look at the World Cup final in your own backyard: timid and frightened. Only Pant, Bumrah, or Jaiswal look Australian in this team. The rest are sheeps. Nitish Reddy looks like a tailender with the bat—subdued and terrified.
Many of them simply lack the mental toughness required for competitive sports. No shortage of talent, but psychological issues. Just facts.
Burgey
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Let's be honest, that is the benchmark for cricketing excellence.
Kirkut
International Regular
Brings me back to those days when fickle minded cricket fans would accuse Sachin of scoring centuries and losing the game for the team.
The thing is you shouldn't be thinking of runs from any tailenders, regardless of how talented they might be with the bat. Rabada/Jansen/Cummins/Lyon/Carse/etc all are being picked to bowl more than they are to bat. You accept that they won't make 10-15 runs consistently in exchange for taking wickets consistently. The lower order batting in this game from India (Jadeja/Reddy/Sundar) was rendered moot anyway because of England's better pace bowling depth. It's hard to score runs even against the older ball when you have to keep going up against Carse/Woakes/Stokes/Archer compared to more Reddy/Jadeja/Sundar overs.
Silver Silva
International Vice-Captain
India's all rounders kept India in the game , Jadeja/Reddy/Sundar took 8/173 combined with the ball and scored 199/5 combined with the bat . That's like an average of 21 with ball , and nearly 40 with the bat that's more than enough for a 6/7/8 combo.
The problem for India was that the top order let them down in the match, Jaiswal , Nair and Gill not good enough , Rahul should have kicked on from 100 and that silly Pant run out cost India alot of runs first innings . Deep did not take enough wickets. Gambhir all rounder ploy was justified the specialists failed in this game