• 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 ?

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
Mumbai is ONE city and IT RAINED there. Since it is ONE city BOTH the grounds can be expected to be WET. I CAN TYPE IN CAPS TOO!!!
I did also suggest the other grounds you know. If you where following this debate instead of cherry picking my post you would have seen this:

me said:
Thats wasn't Ponting problem. Ponting don't live in India he came to play cricket, if these reasons/conditons where soooo serious it was up to your local officials & the board to consider changing the venue (Mumbai has two test grounds after all, plus the famous Eden Gardens to my disappointment didn't get a test back then).
If it was such a problem weeks before the test...India has alot of grounds. Your administrators could have chosen alot of places..
 
Last edited:

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
And for rescheduling the match, you can only do that when you think the pitch is dangerous to be played on ( and it wasn't) and you can never tell how the pitch is playing unless both innings have been completed..
You are the ones arguing that the Mumbai pitch would have been affected by whatever rainfall for weeks & that preparing a good pitch would have been impossible. So clearly your LOCAL officials knowing this all that time, had the option of moving the test from the city.

Were they complaining when they went in with a winning situation at the end of day 2????????
You would have to check cricinfo too see if the report from day 2 if any AUS bastman was complaining about the surface after their first innings.


And I don't see at what point of the Chennai test they were "dominating"? Unless you mean being in with a chance is what is called domination in your book....... 8-)
I never the Chennai test in that post you melon. Learn to read & come again, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE 4TH TEST AT THE ****HEDE STADIUM, MUMBAIIIIIIIII :laugh:


But since you brought it up, no AUS never dominated the Chennai test. As you said they where in with a chance of winning..


And NO, they didn't conquer anything and they always were fallible on a turner..
Yooo WTF is wrong with you, AUS wont he ****ing series & they didn't conquer IND? :laugh:. The ball didn't stop turning in the first three test in Bangalore, Chennai & Nagpur 9 (although this was more seamer friendly than usual). Yoo catch ya self...catch ya blasted self :laugh:

As i said before those IND pitches weren't raging turners like what AUS had in SRI 04. So u oughta chill..



But yeah, they always were fallible on a track like that which was perfect for fastish spinners as the ball turning at really big angles at a quickish pace than normal is a real test for anyone... And no, I am not telling anyone would have scored 500 there but I think most of the subcontinent sides would have cracked 200 under similar circumstances there..
What utter BS i reading here this glorious sundady morning...:laugh:

It is juz that they were inept against the turning ball on such a track, esp. because they made their adjustments to technique BASING that all tracks will be slow and low turners..
Mumbai was always raging fast turner based on the test i have seen there:

- AUS 2001, SA 2000, ENG 06 along with Mumbai 04.


Mumabi 2004 was on a different level, that fact that Clarke took 6/9 bearly tweaking it, proves this.





Witness Martyn taking off stump guard there.. The technique proved a big hindrance against a quickish big turning ball as he does not have the time to get outside the line and defend and to slow down the speed at which his hands go at the ball...
It became a problem slighly in that final innings yes, but as i said above is because the pitch was turning outrageously. Its not as if IND would have done better, Clarke took 6/9 againts them FFS before AUS batted. So that alone discredits this ludicrous point.
 
Last edited:

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
And yet just a few posts back, you were arguing that Ponting's hundred in Bangalore somehow proves that he has conquered India. :laugh:
:laugh:. Like you are another one from the circus man...

Its clear you people know nothing about AUS cricket nor the dynamics of its players. So let me give you a lesson big man.

Gilchrist was a worst player of spin that Ponting always. If you have seen two of them bat againts spin thats is clear. Gilchrist on his two tours to IND 01 & 04 along with SRI 04, had one approach - ATTACK. He got away 3 times in 10 test with brillaint attacking hundreds. But overall he never improved techincally againts the spinners & was always average.

Note: The 49 he scored in the Chennai 04 second innings was the only time he ever really batted defensively in IND given the circumstances ATT.

After IND 2001 the talk in cricket world was that he cannot play spin not just in India but generally (always ignoring the fact he domianted Murali in SRI 99/00) & that he needed to score a hundred in India to be a complete batsman like other greats. He scores a hundred in 08 dominating his nemisis Harbhajan with a CLEAR improvement from the bunny he was in 2001 & now the new argument is that "he needs to score a hundred on a turning pitch" like if ****ing Bangalore was a greentop 8-) *sighs*...
 
Last edited:

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
I never the Chennai test in that post you melon. Learn to read & come again, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE ****HEDE STADIUM, MUMBAIIIIIIIII :laugh:



You will have to concede this to the melon.... This is what you posted above.


aussie said:
So give that AUS where dominating the tests up until that last innings collapse thanks to that pitch. I reckon if the series was still alive in Mumbai AUS mentally would have stepped up.


You said tests... Why would I think you were talking about the Mumbai test alone????? 8-)


Learn to type and come again.... :laugh:
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
I did also suggest the other grounds you know. If you where following this debate instead of cherry picking my post you would have seen this:



If it was such a problem weeks before the test...India has alot of grounds. Your administrators could have chosen alot of places..
Tests can't be rescheduled with few days notice... And yes, no one knew that the rain would not cease for so long.. Every day we expected it to settle down but it kept on pouring... At one point, it rained non stop for 3 whole days I think.. And yeah, it was the rain season in most of THOSE major cities you are talking about? No way to bank on one then... Got any idea of the North East and South West Monsoon winds here in India??? If we were to take away tests due to threats of rain, we really should not be playing in England or New Zealand..... :p
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
You are the ones arguing that the Mumbai pitch would have been affected by whatever rainfall for weeks & that preparing a good pitch would have been impossible. So clearly your LOCAL officials knowing this all that time, had the option of moving the test from the city.



You would have to check cricinfo too see if the report from day 2 if any AUS bastman was complaining about the surface after their first innings.




I never the Chennai test in that post you melon. Learn to read & come again, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE 4TH TEST AT THE ****HEDE STADIUM, MUMBAIIIIIIIII :laugh:


But since you brought it up, no AUS never dominated the Chennai test. As you said they where in with a chance of winning..




Yooo WTF is wrong with you, AUS wont he ****ing series & they didn't conquer IND? :laugh:. The ball didn't stop turning in the first three test in Bangalore, Chennai & Nagpur 9 (although this was more seamer friendly than usual). Yoo catch ya self...catch ya blasted self :laugh:

As i said before those IND pitches weren't raging turners like what AUS had in SRI 04. So u oughta chill..





What utter BS i reading here this glorious sundady morning...:laugh:



Mumbai was always raging fast turner based on the test i have seen there:

- AUS 2001, SA 2000, ENG 06 along with Mumbai 04.


Mumabi 2004 was on a different level, that fact that Clarke took 6/9 bearly tweaking it, proves this.







It became a problem slighly in that final innings yes, but as i said above is because the pitch was turning outrageously. Its not as if IND would have done better, Clarke took 6/9 againts them FFS before AUS batted. So that alone discredits this ludicrous point.
yeah a raging fast tuner in 2001... It turned, but it was not raging fast. IF it was, your boys would have been clueless just as they were in 2004.... And England 06, was it really turning that big? I am sure it was not...


And Clarke took 6/9 but we had 230+ on the board if I m not mistaken.. That is a score most teams get dismissed for on some seam and swing beauties around the world and they are always accepted as good wickets with an even contest........
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
Learn to type and come again.... :laugh:
And i said this before that

me said:
Plus AUS in the glory years had a proven habit of also losing dead rubber tests (WI 96/97, Ashes 97, SA 96/97, Ashes 98/99, WI 2003, SA 2002, Ashes 02/03). So give that AUS where dominating the tests up until that last innings collapse thanks to that pitch. I reckon if the series was still alive in Mumbai AUS mentally would have stepped up.
Add PAK 95/96 & SA 97/98 (i think slightly)


Thats not my opinion, those are FACTS about how AUS tended to play in dead rubbers during the glory years. Thats i why i felt at the time & still feel now that AUS would have stepped up if the series was ALIVE in Mumbai during that 4th innings batting performance.

Could they have also failed?. Very much so, but i just personally dont believe so. But of course you or i will never know. But thats my opinion i will go to grave with it...BULLET!!!
 
Last edited:

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
yeah a raging fast tuner in 2001... It turned, but it was not raging fast. IF it was, your boys would have been clueless just as they were in 2004
Errr...Mumbai 2001 was definately a fast raging turner when AUS batted, all of them excpet Hayden looked in trouble in AUS only full innings. Gilchrist just slogGED his way out of trouble, which is how he usually batted in all cricumstances. As we both know later in the series he was totally indept againts the spin.

.... And England 06, was it really turning that big? I am sure it was not...
He started out as a bit of road with & wasn't turning alot on the first couple days (although it was giving alot of seam movment - i remember Anderson get Tendy out with a beauty of an outswinger).

But when ENG & IND batted in there respective 2nd innings it was turning square as usual.


And Clarke took 6/9 but we had 230+ on the board if I m not mistaken.. That is a score most teams get dismissed for on some seam and swing beauties around the world and they are always accepted as good wickets with an even contest........
205 all out. Collapsing from 182/4 when Ponting gave Clarke the ball. So that clearly proves that the pitch was ****ing up before AUS 4th innings chase.
 
Last edited:

Furball

Evil Scotsman
205 all out. Collapsing from 182/4 when Ponting gave Clarke the ball. So that clearly proves that the pitch was ****ing up before AUS 4th innings chase.
Sydney pitch in 2007/08 a ****ed up pitch as well then, since the Indian tail collapsed to Clarke in that match as well?
 

Sanz

Hall of Fame Member
Ponting was just answering questions from the press (sounds like its a big shock to you) and whatever he said will all be forgotten by the time he pads up for the next net session. Why this seems to send people into a spin is not only comical but begs the question on why people hang on every word Ponting utters.
That can't be an excuse, the question had nothing to do with Drawn tests. Ponting is one of the greatest batsmen and captain of Australia, but his statements are generally ignorant and divisive and that's why people latch on it.
 
That can't be an excuse, the question had nothing to do with Drawn tests. Ponting is one of the greatest batsmen and captain of Australia, but his statements are generally ignorant and divisive and that's why people latch on it.
Simple solution is to just watch him bat.

Its a shame that your lot in life is to find fault with Pontings statements.
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
Sydney pitch in 2007/08 a ****ed up pitch as well then, since the Indian tail collapsed to Clarke in that match as well?
8-)

Well if you think there is comparison with those collapses. Then i struggle to believe you watching either test.

Sydney always turns on the last day/4th innings. AUS where always headed to a victory in the test (although Kumbe/Dhoni were battling away). When Clarke took his first wicket the score was 210 for 7. Clarke just got out tailenders via a combination of good bowling to tailenders who are always vunerable to spin - and trditional wearing sydeney pitch. Its absolutely ludicrous to compare the pitch conditions in Sydney 08 to Mumbai 04...Come onnnn
 
Last edited:

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
And I say that is wrong to suggest that Australia won because of their batsmen in 2004. Statistically Australia batted better in 2001.
WTFFF Excuse me?? :-O:laugh:

So you are saying Langer was better againts spin in 2001 than he was in 2004?

Gilchrist was better in 2001 than 2004?.

Katich in 2004 wasn't better than Slater in 2001?

Martyn wasn't a better # 4 in 2004 than M Waugh 2001??

Yall arguments get more & more foolish every post...MY GOD
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
Simple solution is to just watch him bat.

Its a shame that your lot in life is to find fault with Pontings statements.
Tell em mann. As i said why should us cricket fans care about a players personality or what he does off the cricket field??. Just watch them play, let them live & STFU...geez
 

Top