91Èȱ¬

bbc.co.uk Navigation

Jonathan Agnew

Change of emphasis boosts India (105)

Jonathan AgnewA chilly, damp day at Headingley with a howling gale did little to encourage good cricket, but in a match littered with fielding errors to keep their interest in the series alive.

Both teams were guilty of missing chances, largely because the white ball dipped and swung on its way to the slip fielders, while Yuvraj Singh received a crucial reprieve on 10 when umpire Nigel Llong failed to detect an edge to the wicket-keeper off the bowling of Monty Panesar.

Yuvraj then played some magnificent shots to reach 72 off only 57 balls which pushed India's total beyond 300.

Ian Bell and Matt Prior got England away to a flying start in reply before both fell to Sourav Ganguly, but Kevin Pietersen’s poor trot continued with a third ball duck and England quickly slipped to 104-4.

Only Paul Collingwood, with a superb unbeaten 91 kept England even remotely in the hunt while Mahendra Singh Dhoni equalled the record number of dismissals - six - in a limited overs international.

Ganguly takes a wicket for IndiaBoth teams were forced into making changes. India decided on a change of balance by dropping RP Singh, who has bowled superbly on this tour, and replacing him with a top order batsman, Gautam Gambhir. This was an inevitable decision reached because India simply couldn’t continue with their tail starting at seven.

Of course, it could be argued that the front line batsmen should be scoring the runs, and I wonder if it was merely a coincidence that with the comfort of an extra batsman in the team, Sachin Tendulkar, Ganguly, Yuvraj and Gambhir all passed 50.

England, meanwhile, must be sweating over the with his left ankle. He has now had three operations, and it was clear watching him bowl at Old Trafford on Thursday that he was struggling.

I know that Flintoff, himself, is starting to have nagging worries about his future, and he will be desperately hoping that the medical opinion he sought today offers some measure of reassurance. If that is not the case, Flintoff’s winter plans, starting with the Twenty20 championship in South Africa in nine days’ time - will be thrown into confusion.

Flintoff’s obvious replacement, Ravi Bopara, meanwhile, has dislocated and fractured his right thumb. He was able to bat, but fielding and bowling will be a different proposition, and faces a race against the clock to return to fitness.


Comments  Post your comment

  • 1.
  • At 06:45 PM on 02 Sep 2007,
  • amar wrote:

Got to admit the series has been exciting..hadnt had much faith in englands abilities to play one dayers..and had been thinking of a through spanking of england by india.

its good to see sachin back to his old self and england improving in the one-day game..the new bunch are definitely a better lot!!

  • 2.
  • At 07:03 PM on 02 Sep 2007,
  • Freddie Pilditch wrote:

When is the ECB going to drop Pietersen - it is not a question of poor form but more a matter of impatience; he doesn't give himself time to judge the pace of the ball but is trying to score immediately. Hismissal today was pathetic - waving his bat at a ball way outside his offstump.

Pietersen needs the shock treatment of being dropped !

  • 3.
  • At 07:20 PM on 02 Sep 2007,
  • Dr. Cajetan Coelho wrote:

Saurav Ganguly is a born leader. He lured the charismatic Prior and later silenced the well performing Bell. Two important wickets that put pressure on England for the rest of the evening. His two for 26 from 7 overs was outstanding indeed.

Ganguly played his 300th ODI in style. A hundred runs partnership for the first wicket with Sachin provided a fine platform for the the rest of the match. His 70th half century in an ODI with sweetly timed boundaries and massive sixers was gorgeous. He has brought back Team India into the reckoning. Sachin too has been in top form. What a commitment by these two dynamic and experienced world class cricketers ! They keep playing, hitting fours, sixes, bowling their stuff and sending younger batsmen back to the pavilion.

It was nice to watch Yuvraj and Gambhir playing important innings and adding valuable runs to the total.

For England Paul Collingwood was outstanding with the bat and the ball.

Congratulations to Team India for keeping the ODI series alive.

  • 4.
  • At 07:22 PM on 02 Sep 2007,
  • Tom wrote:

"When is the ECB going to drop Pietersen..."

Don't be ridiculous. Pietersen is one of the best batsmen in world cricket. He has had a poor series but history shows that his slumps in form are very short-lived. Dropping our best batsman is a ludicrous suggestion.

  • 5.
  • At 07:23 PM on 02 Sep 2007,
  • John Macdiarmid wrote:

Today's result (5th ODI) reveals the absurdity of the D/L method. How on earth could England's target be reduced by a mere 14 runs in 5 less overs (yes 5 overs less !).
When rain stopped play, England needed 83 runs in 11 overs, to get the original target - easily achievable, with Collingwood set.
I try to teach kids Maths - what sort of mathematicians were, (are ?), Duckworth & Lewis ? The match should've been void ! John Macdiarmid

  • 6.
  • At 07:24 PM on 02 Sep 2007,
  • Luke wrote:

Dropping Pietersen would be silly.
Form is temporary, class is permanant, it now means he's due runs.

Shock treatment works with some, with others, it will destroy them.

  • 7.
  • At 07:29 PM on 02 Sep 2007,
  • Simon wrote:

Is it only me or would England's batting order look more balanced with Pietersen dropping down to 5 and Collingwood batting one position higher at 4.

Many critics believe that your best player needs to bat the most overs, I don't particularly agree with that in Pietersen's case because he is the one player that can hit balls in areas other players would dream of and KP is a man who enjoys the pressure of the last ten overs and losing him early like we have done over the course of this series is both a waste of his talent and unfair on the weaker lower order who could do with the brashness of Pietersen to make their own games flourish

Simon

  • 8.
  • At 07:44 PM on 02 Sep 2007,
  • Nick wrote:

Flintoff's injury problems are looking increasingly serious. With this ankle, it is hard to see how he could hold down a place in the test team as a bowler - batting at no.7 or 8. And if he wants to reinvent himnself as a batsmen then that is looking rather difficult given his present form. Maybe the Ashes 2005 really was as good as it got for Freddie.

  • 9.
  • At 07:50 PM on 02 Sep 2007,
  • Theodogdinho wrote:

Pietersen's dismissal today was entirely forgivable. He got a cracking ball that would have troubled him if he'd been at the crease for a couple of hours, and, of course, he'd only been there 2 minutes. It was excellent bowling again by the underrated Zaheer Khan.

Earlier in the series Pieteresen has got out against the spinners, once getting bogged down for several balls trying to fiddle the ball to square leg and twice misjudging Chawla's leg spin variations.

He might have moved his feet a little more to counter the ball from Zaheer but batsmen to get stuck on the crease early in their innings, especially when they've been short of runs.

The man still averages 50 in ODI's despite a thus far disappointing series. Collingwood, by comparison - who was extremely effectively late in the game when the writing was, however, already on the wall - has an average well short of 40, although it is improving.

This is not to completely excuse Pietersen, though. A few slaps to mid-on, quick singles etc and instead of trying to settle himself with perfect shots he could just get down the other end and accumulate himself back into some form. I wonder if there might have been a single available from his second ball today and, if so, he wouldn't have been facing the jaffa that ended his innings...

But once he get's to 30 you'd back him to go on and start putting together match-winning innings again.

Drop him? Load of rubbish! That's the sort of selection policy that made England rubbish in the late 1980s and the 1990s.

Great series, let's hope for 2 more close games. ODI's have been getting predictable recently so it's good to have had some that have gone to the wire and 2 others where England have kept trying right until the end to chase down scores that ultimately were out of reach. England are showing more self-belief in this series than I've seen in ODIs for a long long time and that's making a big difference.

The series scoreline hinges on decisions made by the captain who has won the toss. India lost twice when inserting England, decisions that were a little negative. And England lost today by inserting India, a more attacking decision which was easier to understand given the conditions but which, with the benefit of hindsight, was wrong. 3 games effectively decided by the coin and the scoreboard pressure of chasing.

  • 10.
  • At 07:50 PM on 02 Sep 2007,
  • Markymark wrote:

The D/L method uses all the variables, most importantly wickets lost to work out what a team would need to be on in order to get to the 50 over target. England needed to be ahead of were India were because they had lost more wickets and therefore were less likely to be able to score quick runs.

(Not sure I explained that well but basically the small reduction in the total England needed was due to the fact they had lost plenty of wickets)

  • 11.
  • At 08:03 PM on 02 Sep 2007,
  • TejPatri wrote:

India deserved to win as they showed lot of commitment,batting first. The final 2 games will be very interesting to watch. Piterson seems to have a mental problem with his approach. He looks dangerously suscptble while playing good balls and he is defnetly not out of form. England has been waiting for a big innings from him and alas it is not coming. The indian bowlers have sorted him out and they seem to know his weaknesses. It was beautiful ball bowled by Zaheer a la Wasim Akram. It just did enough to confuse Pieterson to commit into a shot and moved a bit. Way to go Zaheer and India.....

  • 12.
  • At 08:05 PM on 02 Sep 2007,
  • Cityharbour wrote:

Well played India!

Great batting performance - All the batsman made good contributions. I'd think about bringing in Uthappa for Kartick though.

Bowling and fielding still an issue - India seriously miss an all rounder like Pathan and a livewire fielder like Kaif. Powar and Chawla continue to impress but Agarjer is way to erratic.

England made a slight error in bowling first (though it could have gone either way)

I'd bring in RP Singh for agarkar at the oval.

  • 13.
  • At 08:27 PM on 02 Sep 2007,
  • English Indian wrote:

Normally for an England v India series I would be neutral, but after the World Cup and a series of adject and ridiculous performances by India, I did not want to support a bunch of players with not committment to the cause. Today was different and should be a blueprint for future games. Players like Dhoni are finally realising that they are not all that and are grinding out performances. Zaheer still needs to sort out his attitude but it was good.

The D/L method is ridiculous and completely ruined the runchase (same with CWC final in barbados). Perhaps a fairer method would have been tell Eng, you have 45 overs and now chase what India got after 45 overs.

Oh well, Oval should be a cracker and I wish I had a ticket. Come on England.

PS - umpiring is still poor like the caught behind not given when india were batting but unlike Indian fans on Thurs, I glad the English are congratulating the opposition on winning instead of crying like babies

  • 14.
  • At 08:31 PM on 02 Sep 2007,
  • Mihir wrote:

India played superbly today to make the series 3-2. It shows that they still can play after being demoralised becos the series cud easily have been 3-2 to India, sans the magnificent partnership of Broad and Bopara.

I haven't seen the top order play this well in a long time. Maybe the comfort of having an extra batsman allowed tendulkar and ganguly to play their natural game. Tendulkar deserves a century!!!

The spinners were flawless and didnt lose their mind wen Collingwood was smacking the ball to all parts of the ground. However, I think Agarkar is still a waste of space and that the Indian team are virtually playing with 10 men as Agarkar hasnt contributed with the bat, the ball and not even fielding in this match as he dropped a relatively simple catch of jon lewis.

Anywayz India for 4-3!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • 15.
  • At 08:52 PM on 02 Sep 2007,
  • Harry Jethwa wrote:

team selection should be done on performance not on past recods i think peterson should be given a rest and make way for good one day bats man..let kevin get his form back for srilanka.this odis means nothing who ever wins the series means nothing.

  • 17.
  • At 09:09 PM on 02 Sep 2007,
  • Ravi Bala wrote:

Agarkar is a vegsarkar protege, and a Mumbai forced error. We have to live with it, we Indians, as long as BCCI is run by Mumbai and Punjab.

We have kaif and Pathan rotting in India, while Agarkar, with his wastrel spell, gross fielding and exaggerated all-rounder status is masquerading as his better part.

Pathan with the bat will hammer a few and field well in outfield, and can also bowl at Mohinder Amarnath pace to take wickets in ODI.

Kaif is a batsmen in disguise, as his fielding saves 30 runs, which is his default contribution. Any batting from him is a bonus.

So, there's room ofr improvement. If Harbhajan can improve his temparament then, we have an addl. bowler as well.

Good tidings India
Ruava Buleskywitz

  • 18.
  • At 09:16 PM on 02 Sep 2007,
  • Roger wrote:

I have to say India have made this England team look a lot better than it actually is.

If India had a captain that could read pitch conditions better ie win the toss 4 times and bat 1st 4 times then the series could be 3-2 or even 4-1 to India right now.

The Indians have done everything possibly unprofessional to lose this series by dropping so many catches, fielding badly , running poorly between wickets and mind bogglingly keep selecting Ajit Agarkar !

Yet they are only 3-2 down really explains why England is only above Zimbabwe and Bangladesh in the ODI rankings.

  • 19.
  • At 09:41 PM on 02 Sep 2007,
  • zopist wrote:

Mr. Ravi Bala, please keep your cricketing knowledge to yourself. You seem to have very short memory. I am not a big fan of Agarkar but dont forget his bowling from the 4th match. Dont even talk about including Kaif in the team. He saves maximum of 10 runs but doesnt score at all. Pathan should be back in side if he is in form.

  • 20.
  • At 09:45 PM on 02 Sep 2007,
  • Rick wrote:

England has a wobble but will win the series well in the end. England to win the series 5-2!

  • 21.
  • At 09:57 PM on 02 Sep 2007,
  • cricket fan wrote:

Ahh Duckworth and Lewis, those famous Indian Mathematicians !

  • 22.
  • At 10:01 PM on 02 Sep 2007,
  • Neil Hewitt wrote:

Fitness is a post on which I have commented before.

Players are getting regularly 'crocked', is it more so now? I think it is. Is it that people are less fit or not fit enough? Or are the demands of the modern game too high? Footballers do not have the same intensity (frequency), but they too are suffering. The problem is that to raise a relatively localised sport (cricket), in world terms, new and more inovative forms need to be invented by the marketing people to stimulate a wider public interest, and thus generate more revenue. Unfortunately the downside of this is extremely punishing schedules at the top level. I guess the 'players league (union)', needs to know when to say 'no more'. Is there one?

With the advent of the modern game, what chance the Ten/10? Just tongue in cheek!

We/you speak of commitment of the current crop of players, viz a vie comments about Indian commitments in the field, and also English batting.

However maybe Ravi Bopra went for something he would not have gone for in the longer and historically more lengthy and laid back version of the game. It is all well and good saying that teams now consider strike rates far in excess of those previously accepted, when does the point come when we are demanding more commitment and performance than the human body can regularly accept even in committed professionals, which I understand from everything I have heard Ravi Bopra certainly is.

Conversely Paul Collingwood/ Belly do not seem to have injury problems. Your views on air would be appreciated, for me and many others, I suspect also. I used to play at club level so do not have the experience of county and country level, and in a very different era. I understand your comments on 'too much cricket', I suspect the argument needs much more 'focus' for 'the powers that be, money makers', to start listening. They are wasting and burning out tomorrows money makers, for them and them.

It would be interesting for someone in the know to produce statistics about the amount of time spent per annum in career, competion and training by international sportsmen/women in all the major disciplines. This would provide a realistic comparison of the associated pressures, and whether complaints within each sport are justified. I am also beginning to wonder about the effectiveness of 'Central Contracts' although I was a great believer to start with. I wonder whether it is destructive because it 'elevates' players beyond 'normal commercial pressures'. Thus they become unrealistic about their abilities, aspirations, capabilities and their 'position' in the world. It would seem the biggest egos descend very quickly if they loose touch with reality. It is, as the Moody Blues' used to say, a 'Question of Balance'. For example Pieterson has not performed since he became a 'natural selection'. The guy is a mental oaf. His suggestion in the press saying England are unbeatable is the sign of an ignorant, arrogant, innarticulate child buffoon. Good PR is one thing, bad PR is embarassing and completely negative, he can not see the difference. Apart from which it will wind up the opposition, make them want to prove him wrong.

Colley needs to manage these egos. Colley looks as though he can be a Ricky Ponting, however he needs to be much more assertive over his colleagues, I know it early days yet for him, however he needs to progressively assert himself, step by step, match by match.

Drop the ones with attitude problems who are incapable of doing what they are requested. Easy, it is called management, something the PC world has forgotten.

The answer is somewhere between Fletcher and Moores. I suggest a steadier hand on the 'tiller'.

Contracted players should have any 'press release vetted and vetoed', if they are something is wrong. I agree that we are going in the right direction, however more control needs to be exercised. I think Colley is doing a good job, he is growing into the job, he does not seem to be influenced adversely by his elevation, I was concerned that he lacked charisma, but he seems to thrive on the challenge. His performances seem to improve with each match where predecessors didn't. He enthuses people with his quality and work ethic and commitment, but I supect he lacks charisma. England seem to have more 'fire in their belly' when Flintoff plays, even if he currently does not know what a bat is for, likewise Pierterson. These guys need telling and dropping.

Maybe some top level cricketers are too interested in 'partying', no names no pack drill!

It is a fine dividing line between being an international star and being an embarrassing idiot, I suggest keeping your head down until you are a national icon, with a regular history, like Sachin Tandulkar, even now he does not shout his mouth off, he has nothing to prove, he is judged on his performances, not his mouth. Please publish some of this stuff, even under your name. Pietersen is in danger of going the same way as Graham Hick, for different reasons, why? Is it the English system?

Their total commitment is crucial, some don't seem fully committed 'cake and eat it', comes to mind.

Regards

  • 40.
  • At 05:25 AM on 03 Sep 2007,
  • Sunny wrote:

Good game once again. I for one do not complain about umpiring, because in international cricket, the umpiring mistakes mostly even out. Secondly, teams winning the toss and putting the other team in and then losing the game, is also a load of rubbish. At Bristol, England managed to lose and at Old Trafford, India couldn't force the win. These are but two instances, the remaining are very much one sided contests...like today.

I think it is the absence of Flintoff that lifted India up more than having another batsman. He was the only bowler who was constantly troubling batsmen. Also, having him in the eleven works as a catalyst on other English players and you can see the difference in attitudes. That attitude is sadly missing today in England players. And the results showed. Unfortunately, young Broad suffered his first real thrashing at world class batsmen. I sincerely hope and pray that he looks at this as a learning experience.

Having said that, time and again, I keep reminding people that the Indians are a class apart when they are in form. No other batsman in the world can provide so much joy of watching one bat, than (save for Lara) when Sachin/Saurav/Dravid are in full flow. You can see other batsmen clubbing the ball than the majestic caresses these gentlemen conjure up for the best of the balls. Sachin's straight drive, ondrive, Dravid's six off Broad kneeling down, and Ganguly's off drives....yummm!

It was a great treat for pure cricket lovers. Young English bowlers, hopefully, learned something today..i.e. when bowling to a great batsman/batsmen, just say a prayer before you bowl a ball and let things happen. There is nothing anyone can do really, when these gentlemen decide that enough's enough.

I read some calls for dropping KP. Why? Who are you going to replace him with? Do you think Sachin/Dravid/Saurav became such great batsmen because they kept scoring in all of their 300+ ODI innings? Ups and downs are but natural.

Dropping KP is the most ridiculous thing I heard so far. His batting order also should not be tampered with. Let him continue batting at 2nd down. The big innings is just around the corner. Opposing teams always pay special attention to the best batsman of your team. So, no wonder Indians seem to be charged up and are working on different plans to unsettle him the moment he walks in. For example, one would have thought that Dravid would bring on Piyush, the moment KP walks in to bat, just to score a psychological point. But, surprisingly, Dravid kept him waiting for Piyush and had his medium pacers take KP out. I call it good Captaincy rather than KP's mistake. Also, the ball(s) he got in these two games were real beauties. They would have gotten any one out.

Fielding...even considering the windy conditions, Indian fielding is pathetic at best. I have never seen a bunch of international cricketers trying to stop a ball with their feet. That shows their mental state. They are afraid to dive (so as to not look foolish on the big screen TVs?) and are unwilling to bend (that is genetical...I think.). Unfortunately England seemed to catch this misfielding bug too, today. However, I did see some good stops by Indians today. Definite fours stopped by diving fielders. Good sign.

About Agaarkar, I agree he is an enigma. Also calling him an all rounder is like insulting the specialists that go by the tag of all rounders. Considering the options left for India (RP - economical, but not pentrative. Munaf - I will be surprised if he plays another game without being a fill in for an injured player), India are better off to stick with him. He does bowl a wicket taking balls every so often. He almost had Bell with an absolute beauty. Cook's dismisaal was very well set up too.

If anyone needs a talking to, it should be Ian Bell. His role needs to be to buckle down (especially coming in at 6-1) and graft the innings than throwing everythign he has, at the first ball he faces. He is riding a high this ODI series so far, and seemed to think all he has to do is to throw his bat at the ball. England cannot affort that, as it was shown in these two games, after him, the batting can crash.

Looking forward to the next two games. Oval will be a nightmare game for the bowlers. Very high scoring game. I just can't wait.

  • 41.
  • At 06:48 AM on 03 Sep 2007,
  • Vinny wrote:

An important breakthrough for Panesar, taking out 2 top order batsmen.

Or at least it would have been if the umpire hadn't been daydreaming.

  • 42.
  • At 07:43 AM on 03 Sep 2007,
  • Pete Porchos wrote:

Some puzzling things about this match.

1. Why did India resume their innings after the first rain break? Is the policy to give one team fifty overs and then adjust the other team's target by DL? I would have thought it was more sensible to give both teams a fair shot by having the same number of overs.

2. On the subject of DL. 14 fewer runs in five fewer overs as a target seems ridiculous. I remember a similar 'adjustment' in the world cup. I forget the match, but one team had an adjusted target of exactly the same number of runs in two fewer overs. (or something like that)

However, the result was the correct one in the end. India deserved their win.

  • 43.
  • At 08:10 AM on 03 Sep 2007,
  • Rajesh wrote:

So India are playing five specialist batsmen, one wicket-keeper, four specialist bowlers and one specialist fielder who is not that special in the field. I'd really like to know Dravid's explanation of why he is persisting with Karthik in stead of playing Uthappa or RP Singh who can fill a role.

What can you say about Agarkar? I'd like to see his birth chart as to how the stars are aligned. That must be a real lucky chart.

Powar has bowled well and should play the next match. However, in my opinion, it is not wise for the long term to have a player in today's game who is such a liability in the field. We need to find someone with better potential or bring Harbhajan Singh back.

Good win for India. If we bat to our potential, there is a good chance of winning this series. Good to see Gambhir making some runs too along with the usual suspects.

There was a time when Prior and Bell were batting, the Indian fielding looked scared. Credit must be given to Dhoni to keep his composure and make some good plays. Made the difference in the field.

  • 44.
  • At 08:20 AM on 03 Sep 2007,
  • Peter Crabb wrote:

It was noticable that the England batsmen walked when they edged to the keeper, whilst the same cannot be said of Yuvraj. Surely he knew he edged it??

  • 45.
  • At 08:28 AM on 03 Sep 2007,
  • Peter Cohen wrote:

No comment that England lost five overs, but only
12 runs were knocked off required score.
Quite barmy.

  • 46.
  • At 09:07 AM on 03 Sep 2007,
  • Mits wrote:

I can't believe people on this forum are complaining that Agarker is a poor fielder. He was outstanding in the 2004 series against Australia and has one of the strongest arms in the indian team. You people are so narrow minded, obviously you people don't follow indian cricket as religiously as I do hence the you judge players on the basis of 1 or 2 games. India will come back and win the series and that will shut all the critics of the "supposed weak links" in the indian team up!

  • 47.
  • At 10:13 AM on 03 Sep 2007,
  • Tom Burridge wrote:

Another problem with English cricket is the scheduling. The ODI series with India finishes on 8th September, and then the players bearly have time to breathe before flying to SA for the Twenty20 - Our first game there is on the 13th, so there's less than a week to recover, acclimatise, and train for a different type of cricket and challenge. It's a farce, and yet another reason why English cricket is suffering. It would have been better to extend the test series, and reduce the ODIs, say 3 ODIs and an extra Test - would have been far more entertaining than this worthless charade - 7 matches in a series? Foolish to say the least.

  • 48.
  • At 10:29 AM on 03 Sep 2007,
  • Sam Marks wrote:

Am a indian fan.. however all this talk of dropping pieterson... trust me.. as a fan of the opposition, I get a chill down my spine seeing kp come out to bat.. he is easily the best batsmen england have and without him.. they have a very medioacre line up.

  • 49.
  • At 10:29 AM on 03 Sep 2007,
  • Bob Patel wrote:

I watch most cricket as a cricketer from past.Indian team has selection problem.it is going on from long time,there filding is very poor,they could have won edgbaston match easily as well as oldtraford if they hold all the catches and field,some time i think tere fielding is wors then normal park player,if they wants to compet they have to improve their fileding and image.there is a quite a number of goog youngster in different state of india but they are not getting threr chances.if they do then indian team could be far better then what it is now.

  • 50.
  • At 11:00 AM on 03 Sep 2007,
  • bajarkar wrote:

For once an umpiring error has gone in India's favour and not England's--- Yuvraj's reprieve.
England need not moan Flintoff's absence through injury. They must find replacement.
It is amazing that India won the game inspite of shoddy ground fielding and poor catching.

  • 51.
  • At 11:02 AM on 03 Sep 2007,
  • Kitsunegari wrote:

Lewis short of international class?? he didn't bowl as well as he could BUT got Tendulkar out and his 10 overs went for 20 runs less than Broads!!

  • 52.
  • At 11:36 AM on 03 Sep 2007,
  • Steve wrote:

Maybe it's time Andrew Flintoff took the time he seems to need to allow his injury(ies) to heal completely. Perhaps he should forget about tss="singleline" /> Required (not displayed)  

showHide(2524896); end of complaint form commented out see xscript as well -->
  • 60.
  • At 01:52 PM on 03 Sep 2007,
  • Milind Rajput wrote:

Many people came out quickly pointing to me that the D/L was not around in 1992 and it did not come to rescue of England. Exactly the reaction I wanted. It was rule after all was it not just like D/L is.
I wanted to get that reaction becasue I just wanted to make a point that no law/rule in any game is perfect especially if it affects the normal flow of game.
Every rule to achieve a result is flawed and we have to accept it.Sometimes the rules work in our favour ,sometimes they dont. Thats luck.
For eg in FIFA WC I remmber France played very good in the final but lost in the penalty shhotout. The whole of Italy rejoiced and the penaly shootout seemed a good idea to Italians.
But when Italy lost in shootouts in 1994 final ,the same law seemed so unfair to the same Italians.
To overcome this so called unfair means of deciding a game,FIFA came out with sudden death concept ,wherein again many teams played excellent soccer for 90 min +extra time and lost because of one mistake in sudden death.
What I am trying to say is nothing in life is perfect unless it goes our way.
So Dont you think ,those complaining about howD/L robbed Eng ov victory stop complaining because it may be quite possible the D/L comes to English rescue in next game.
Be sporting guys and accept what happened.

  • 61.
  • At 02:17 PM on 03 Sep 2007,
  • mark wrote:

milind has made an excellent case for D/L and as a neutral my view point was that england were never going to get that target either way. However I must also say that this continuing suggestion of umpiring mistakes favouring one side is plainly ridiculous. I've seen plenty of English batsmen given out this summer when hawkeye suggested that the ball was missing the stumps. Clearly Indians are only remembering those that have gone against them. Equally there have been two decisions that have been plainly false, without the need to refer to technology. The first was when Ganguly was given out lbw when he hit it, and the second was yuvraj yesterday. So in that regard it is also even. Please stop complaining about umpiring, it does not mask the failings of your side. Two great batsman does not make a great side

  • 62.
  • At 02:33 PM on 03 Sep 2007,
  • Gavin wrote:

Milind

how can you say that SA would have won that game rather than England when they required around 11 runs an over for 2 overs? thats still a challenging score.

I don't like the D/L method at all but i can't think of a better way of doing things really, its luck umpireing decissions sometimes it goes your way and sometimes it doesn't so i can't complain (i didn't really think we were going to win that match anyway after seeing how well Sachin and Saurav started it off)

congratulations on the win, hopefully England can get one of the last 2, should be exciting either way

  • 63.
  • At 03:01 PM on 03 Sep 2007,
  • Doug wrote:

I think England players such as Pietersen should stop making silly comments about England being "able to beat anyone" just because they have won a couple of one day games. In fact it would be much better if Peitersen (and others)shut up and try to do what he used to do best i.e. batting, if he still can. I don't want to see his face on my TV screen if at all possible.

I am also sick and tied of "taking positives" from games we lose and "putting the ball in the right areas" and "getting it in unusual places". In fact it would be much better if England players kept their inane PC comments to themselves or everytime they come out with this rubbish a pie is automatically thrust into their faces.

  • 64.
  • At 03:34 PM on 03 Sep 2007,
  • KS wrote:

"Clearly Indians are only remembering those that have gone against them."

Actually, it would be more accurate for you to say that both some of the Indians and some of the English are only remembering those that have gone against them and conveniently forgetting the reprieves their respective teams have benefited from. It's just that the English fans whined ad nauseum about luck, toss, weather, umpires the whole Test series and claimed that was justified. Fair enough. But then it's annoying that when some Indian fans choose to whine about their own perceived bad luck, poor decisions etc, the English fans then turn around and trot out trite phrases like "swings and roundabouts" and "part and parcel of the game."

The truth is both sides have fans who go on ad nauseum about umpiring decisions etc. It was the Indian fans during the last two matches when both Collingwood and Broad received reprieves and now the English fans are complaining about Yuvraj and D/L, and they complained about losing the toss the first couple of ODIs.

And to the guy who said the English players walked while Yuvraj didn't. Check the Test series. On at least a couple of occasions, the English players did not walk, unlike Karthik who did :) What was that annoying phrase again? Oh yes, swings and roundabouts. :)

  • 65.
  • At 03:44 PM on 03 Sep 2007,
  • Tom wrote:

It's time Duckworth-Lewis was abandoned. According to reports here, in the recent match England needed less than 8 runs an over off 11 overs before rain struck. After the rain, under D-L, England required 13 runs an over off 6 overs. This is because the D-L method gives too much weight to wickets lost compared with overs remaining. I know, on average, D-L is reasonable. But cricket followers don't care about averages, we care about the result of the match we are watching. D-L can be so ludicrous that it no longer has any credibility with me, and I'm a statistician with respect for both D and L!

  • 66.
  • At 03:49 PM on 03 Sep 2007,
  • sunny wrote:

Aggers, yesterday, when Powar was catching Bopara, one could clearly see Collingwood trying his best to block the fielder.

Hypothetically, if that catch was dropped, because of Collingwood's antics, would India appealing for batsman obstructing the field...out of place?

I wonder how English fans would have reacted to that. Also, all the English fans keep pointing at their players walking and Yuvraj not walking. Well, with Collingwood's stupid act, I guess that is balanced too eh?

  • 67.
  • At 04:11 PM on 03 Sep 2007,
  • mark wrote:

re ks
couldn't agree with you more, there has been too much whinging on both sides of the equation. The English fans seem to have concentrated on weather and injuries, whilst Indians have focused on umpiring. Both sets of fans should acknowledge that there will always be small elements of fortune in cricket, but the test series saw a fair result, and the odi series score is a fair reflection of what has happened so far.

I felt i had to defend the umpires though, as it seemed as if they were being labelled as bias. That is a personal insult against guys like Taufel and bucknor who have been doing a good job for a long time. Neither had their best summer, but allegations of bias are totally unfair.

  • 68.
  • At 04:47 PM on 03 Sep 2007,
  • KS wrote:

"I felt i had to defend the umpires though, as it seemed as if they were being labelled as bias. That is a personal insult against guys like Taufel and bucknor who have been doing a good job for a long time. Neither had their best summer, but allegations of bias are totally unfair."

Mark, I agree.

  • 69.
  • At 04:48 PM on 03 Sep 2007,
  • Poor Old Edgar Derby wrote:

sunny wrote: "Aggers, yesterday, when Powar was catching Bopara, one could clearly see Collingwood trying his best to block the fielder"

Colly was trying to get back into his crease. He neither blocked, or attempted to block the fielder. The only reason why this is being mentioned at all is because the fielder reacted in a such an infantile manner.

As a matter of fact, far too many Indian players have been guilty of similar childish, over-reactions throughout the test and odi series.

There were at least three such incidents during yesterday's game. One which I have already mentioned, one where the bowler childishly kicked the ball away and another occasion when several Indian fielders ranted at an English batsman because they thought he was taking too long to get ready.

I always associated these kind of temper tantrums with Australia and Pakistan but it seems like they're creeping into the Indian team now.

  • 97.
  • At 04:56 PM on 04 Sep 2007,
  • neil wrote:

From this series and taking into consideration that Flintoff is now injured, this would be my ideal 11.

1. Ganguly
2. Tendulkar
3. Bell
4. Yuvraj Singh
5. Rahul Dravid
6. Paul Collingwood
7. Dhoni
8. Broad
9. Khan
10. Powar
11. Anderson

I suppose it seems harsh to leave Pieterson out but i am basing this on the form of this serie.

neil

  • 98.
  • At 06:04 PM on 04 Sep 2007,
  • sri wrote:

This series overall tests and one dayers have proved India does not need any coach. Even with a coach I dont see the series scorecard improving. Its only that on a given day if India wants to win they win... nothing to do with the coach. Especially when you have a host of senior players in dressing room.

Instead they can use the salary of the coach to improve fielding standards and outfields in the country which will help the budding players.

I think they need a good coach for the "A" team instead of senior team. NOt that "A" team is doing bad but emerging players will get the right tonic before international exposure.

  • 100.
  • At 09:09 PM on 04 Sep 2007,
  • Mohit Mandiratta wrote:

people need to back off agarkar....admittedly hes inconsistant but between 2005 and 2007 he was our best ODI bowler...fact. You dent get 290 odd wickets at an average of 27 without having some talent. whenever the indian team loses, hes the one who is dropped, how do you expect a man to get confidence and consistency unless faith is shown and he isnt culled and blamed for batting weaknesses. are you guys forgetting that he almost single handedly got india back into the game when we had posted a measly 212 at old trafford. it doesnt matter how, but he does get wickets, his record proves that. and compared to the rest of the bowlers hes a bloody good fielder...cant remember when he last dropped a catch before the one at headingley. and its not like no one else dropped anything. he could have had bell first ball if ganguly had held onto a regulation snick so you cant blame his head dropping. and as for all rounder....hes never called himself that...hes been branded that. hes useful down the order...fastest indian to fifty, test match centurion etc...hes no kallis but hes a darnsight better than munaf or rp or powar for that matter with the bat. Give the guy a break, hes done a good job all his career.

  • 101.
  • At 04:01 AM on 05 Sep 2007,
  • Nishit wrote:

It's easier to chase 140 off 20 overs than it is to chase 350 off 50.
This has to be considered while reducing the number of overs remaining. The numbers almost never look fair on the chasing team but anybody with sufficient knowledge would agree it isn't that bad either.
If you think the D/L method's bad, consider the predecessor which docked 3 overs and 1 run in an Indian run chase against Australia in the '92 WC, or even better, do you remember 22 runs required off 1 ball when SA seemed to be cruising to a victory?

  • 102.
  • At 04:54 AM on 05 Sep 2007,
  • wrote:

England will never be one day "kings" unless the cricket education is chnaged at grass roots level.

Learn to smash the ball first then how to play more "classic strokes".

Nick

  • 103.
  • At 06:02 AM on 05 Sep 2007,
  • wrote:

Although Flintoff and Bopara are injured, I think that england have the depth in personnel. And the win here for India has certainly kept this series alive. Just what cricket needed - a closely fought series.

  • 104.
  • At 06:50 AM on 05 Sep 2007,
  • pradeep wrote:

A bowler is only as good as his fielders. People are criticizing Agarkar as if he lost the game for India. He was terribly unlucky when the MoM hero Sourav Ganguly dropped an easy chance at slip when Bell was on 0. No wonder he was the one who punished Agarkar and added insult to injury.
You can have Glenn McGrath in ur team but with our fielders he will be made to look ridiculously poor. A bowler can only create chances and its upto the fielders to grab them. In a high scoring contest wickets are very important and that is the only thing that can slow down the RR.

And about the umpiring, well its 3-1 to England still. So there is no reason to complain. They cant even complain if it becomes 3-3 at the end of the series and India wins 4-3. Because India had 3 poor decisions and England had 3 poor decisions and it has in fact evened out as they say.

  • 105.
  • At 10:21 AM on 05 Sep 2007,
  • John Bramall wrote:

I cannot understand why Kevin Petersn seems to get out by a careless shot early in his innings often when England need him to get his head down and concentrate on building a partnership.Do I detect an air of arrogance if so he must be a nightmare to captain, although I have no idea how he is with hie culleagues in the dressing room

Post a comment

Please note Name and E-mail are required.

Comments are moderated, and will not appear on this weblog until the author has approved them. Please note that submitting a comment is not the same as making a formal complaint - see this page for more details.

Required
Required (not displayed)
 
    

The 91Èȱ¬ is not responsible for the content of external internet sites