England's Bowlers

[Uppercut]

Lol, Cevno. England crushed and humiliated Australia in Australia, India scraped past them with the help of a blind umpire in their own backyard. They all count the same so I'm not sure it's relevant but it's pretty much a fact so find a way to deal with it. In your own time, not in this thread.

 

[Spark]

That's circular logic, the only evidence you have that Ponting was out of form is that England kept getting him out.

Nah after Brisbane he looked dreadful. Regardless of what Chappelli said, he didn't actually look like scoring any runs.

 

[Uppercut]

Nah after Brisbane he looked dreadful. Regardless of what Chappelli said, he didn't actually look like scoring any runs.

Yeah, he looked dreadful against the England attack that kept getting him out! It's no less circular!

 

[Spark]

Yeah, he looked dreadful against the England attack that kept getting him out! It's no less circular!

Haha true. I see your point and it wouldn't surprise me to see him (and Clarke for that matter) make some sizeable scores on much friendlier ODI decks against much friendlier ODI attacks.

 

[morgieb]

Nah after Brisbane he looked dreadful. Regardless of what Chappelli said, he didn't actually look like scoring any runs.

tbf to Ponting, most of his dismissals were out of good balls.

However, I do think that he is past it.

 

[Cevno]

Lol, Cevno. England crushed and humiliated Australia in Australia, India scraped past them with the help of a blind umpire in their own backyard. They all count the same so I'm not sure it's relevant but it's pretty much a fact so find a way to deal with it. In your own time, not in this thread.

?????

The same umpire who gave Ishant not out Wrongly first?

The second test was fairly comfortable too and India are really poor in the first test for a over of period of time now,so it was hardly scraping the "series" rather than the match.

Hell i am not comparing the relevance of the two series but just saying that it is unfair to compare a 2 match series to a 5 match series which was 1-1 after 3 tests with massive wins for both.

A bit like these series-

Results | Global | ESPN Cricinfo

Results | Global | ESPN Cricinfo

Would you say one was team crushed the other in this?
They well could have if it was 5 tests though.

But after 3 tests ,i would say they were level with the Ashes with both teams even,would you not?

 

[vcs]

Lol, Cevno. England crushed and humiliated Australia in Australia, India scraped past them with the help of a blind umpire in their own backyard. They all count the same so I'm not sure it's relevant but it's pretty much a fact so find a way to deal with it. In your own time, not in this thread.

Er, no. Saying it many times does not make it right.

Australia also performed a lot better against India than they did against England, it's far more satisfying to beat a team who actually put up a fight.

 

[Uppercut]

?????

The same umpire who gave Ishant not out Wrongly first?

The second test was fairly comfortable too and India are really poor in the first test for a over of period of time now,so it was hardly scraping the "series" rather than the match.

Hell i am not comparing the relevance of the two series but just saying that it is unfair to compare a 2 match series to a 5 match series which was 1-1 after 3 tests with massive wins for both.

A bit like these series-

Results | Global | ESPN Cricinfo

Results | Global | ESPN Cricinfo

Would you say one was team crushed the other in this?
They well could have if it was 5 tests though.

But after 3 tests ,i would say they were level with the Ashes with both teams even,would you not?

I'm sorry, you seem to be mistaking me telling you that you were wrong with me arguing with you.

 

[Spark]

You keep trying to compare results. I'm comparing the standard of cricket played.

And the second test was comfortable yes - on the last day. Before that it was really up for grabs. IIRC your first innings lead was tiny?

 

[Cevno]

I'm sorry, you seem to be mistaking me telling you that you were wrong with me arguing with you.

But you still responded.

And made some exaggerated statements,tbh. Does not make it the truth if you don't argue.

 

[Uppercut]

Er, no. Saying it many times does not make it right.

It's a fact, surely? I'm fully aware that it succeeded an equally poor decision for Ishant but the fact that one bad decision to give your number ten out wrongly should have cost India the game and series is pretty damn conclusive proof that said series was infinitely closer than this one. I'm not trying to project anything else from that. What's even your case?

 

[Uppercut]

But you still responded.

And made some exaggerated statements,tbh. Does not make it the truth if you don't argue.

Haha, sorry. I wasn't being especially serious.

 

[Spark]

I don't see for mine Hussey reverting to 08/9 horrors, simply because he isn't playing like that. He still knows where off stump is, for one.

 

[vcs]

It's a fact, surely? I'm fully aware that it succeeded an equally poor decision for Ishant but the fact that one bad decision to give your number ten out wrongly should have cost India the game and series is pretty damn conclusive proof that said series was infinitely closer than this one. I'm not trying to project anything else from that. What's even your case?

There was sufficient doubt that he might have hit it. There is a myth floating around these days that it was a plumb LBW that was completely missed for some inexplicable reason. The overthrows were given as runs off the bat. Not sure whether the TV network showed Snicko or Hotspot to confirm the edge, but looked pretty close to me.

 

[Spark]

There was sufficient doubt that he might have hit it. There is a myth floating around these days that it was a plumb LBW that was completely missed for some inexplicable reason. The overthrows were given as runs off the bat. Not sure whether the TV network showed Snicko or Hotspot to confirm the edge, but looked pretty close to me.

Missing his point tbh. That the result of the entire test hinged on that decision alone is proof that this was much much closer than the Ashes.

 

[Cevno]

You keep trying to compare results. I'm comparing the standard of cricket played.

And the second test was comfortable yes - on the last day. Before that it was really up for grabs. IIRC your first innings lead was tiny?

Over the 5 tests yes the gap was wider ,but over the first 3 tests it was not.
Infact,Australia were the better side at Perth.

I.e my point that it unfair to compare the two series and call one closer ,specially far closer than the other specially when at 3 tests it was probably more closer.

And i am over with this debate.

 

[Ruckus]

That's circular logic, the only evidence you have that Ponting was out of form is that England kept getting him out.

Just because a player gets out doesn't mean they are out of form. In form players can get out early as well, just as out of form players can sometimes still score centuries.

The evidence for Ponting being out of form is not that the English bowlers keep getting him out, it's the manner in which he is playing (which happens to be conducive to getting out) - i.e. his extremely fidgety style of batting these days.

 

[Uppercut]

There was sufficient doubt that he might have hit it. There is a myth floating around these days that it was a plumb LBW that was completely missed for some inexplicable reason. The overthrows were given as runs off the bat. Not sure whether the TV network showed Snicko or Hotspot to confirm the edge, but looked pretty close to me.

Not how I remember it- it's irrelevant anyway- in that case India were a couple of nanometres from losing the first test and my point still stands.

Haha, Spark got there first..

 

[vcs]

Missing his point tbh. That the result of the entire test hinged on that decision alone is proof that this was much much closer than the Ashes.

Yeah, that match and series was closer than any one Ashes game, because Australia did not do their "bat first and collapse on a benign track" thing.

 

[Cevno]

Missing his point tbh. That the result of the entire test hinged on that decision alone is proof that this was much much closer than the Ashes.

That is true.

But it still would not have been as big a win for the Aussies than at Perth against England,which is my point throughout.

I.e after 3 tests the Ashes would not have been a more comprehensive in one sides favour than one in India.

After 5 tests yes,but it is unfair to compare a series of 5 tests to a one of 2 tests which did not have the chance to become as comprehensive if not more.