A very sensible and insightful post, until your penultimate sentence, when I nearly choked with laughter. I know there are a few guys like Pandya and Bumrah who are relatively new to the set up, but I've seen India play on several occasions in England, and their fielding doesn't even compare to what I've seen from South Africa, New Zealand, Australia and Sri Lanka.
ICC World T20 India 2016 - March/April 2016
- Thread starter AliB
- Start date
- Status
A very sensible and insightful post, until your penultimate sentence, when I nearly choked with laughter. I know there are a few guys like Pandya and Bumrah who are relatively new to the set up, but I've seen India play on several occasions in England, and their fielding doesn't even compare to what I've seen from South Africa, New Zealand, Australia and Sri Lanka.
Another one to add to the IND pak WC clashes, tight and nail biting as usual, no rivalry in cricket can match this, Top stuff from kohli and yuvi, MSD certainly didnt do many favors to the team by not bowling ashwin and yuvi!
Also a big toash to those PitchWHiners, as long as batsman play well this was a 140-160 pitch. I would take these pitches anyday than belters were average batsman keep chasing 200+.
Also a big toash to those PitchWHiners, as long as batsman play well this was a 140-160 pitch. I would take these pitches anyday than belters were average batsman keep chasing 200+.
Cricket_god
Associate Cricketer
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2005
- Location
- heaven
Then watch some cricket matches involving india.They have outfielded aus and sa in the last 2 t20 series they played against them.
Pinch hitter
Smash… Smash… Smash!
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2013
Good win for India, must need for us to keep ourselves live in world cup... I blame Pakistan openers for there lose, they played really slow in power play...
A good post to read! I too dream of the day when I can watch a live game in the stadium when India plays. Two of my dream places to watch them is - one in my hometown Chennai (at the Chepauk - I actually dreamt to see Sachin play there as its his favorite ground, but that wish will remain unfulfilled) and the other one would have to be the MCG.
Nice to see you also agree that Dhoni's captaincy was very average yesterday. He gave his excused post match, but this is not a one off thing with him. He seems predictable in recent times. He is being helped on the top order's rollicking form in recent times. When the top order (especially Kohli fails), Dhoni's captaincy seems exposed.
Watching highlights again (even though I watched it all live - who doesn't like to re-watch their team win a high profile match). Sachin's reactions were so amazing and joyful. And the way he waved at the team and looked at them from the stands, his eyes showed that he missed being amongst them. And Kohli's gesture to Sachin after his 50 and after the win were just graceful and utmost respect. You diss Sachin all you want (call him "the guy who failed under pressure", "the guy who was selfish" etc.), but the love and respect he has from his previous generation, his current and his future generation tells you he is the big daddy of Indian cricket and will remain so. He might not be the greatest allround cricketer, but the most respected and loved of all time - he takes the cake! And that's priceless to have for any sportsperson, I would say.
Last edited:
abhi_jacko
National Board President
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2008
- Location
- India
- Profile Flag
- India
- Online Cricket Games Owned
- Don Bradman Cricket 14 - PS4
I am not surprised that people are hating so much on the rank turners that have been dished out for the India games
I personally loved them. Have preferred these low scoring games a lot more to the "almost obscene" run fest that happened during SAF v Eng. The bowlers did not stand a chance. Atleast in the rank turner games, if you were skilled enough you could battle it out like Kohli did and score a quick and brilliant 50
And on that note, as amazing as Kohli was and as awesome as this win was, it is hard to ignore the major chinks in our batting - we are overly dependent on Kohli to control things on challenging wickets. Rahane should be drafted in
I personally loved them. Have preferred these low scoring games a lot more to the "almost obscene" run fest that happened during SAF v Eng. The bowlers did not stand a chance. Atleast in the rank turner games, if you were skilled enough you could battle it out like Kohli did and score a quick and brilliant 50
And on that note, as amazing as Kohli was and as awesome as this win was, it is hard to ignore the major chinks in our batting - we are overly dependent on Kohli to control things on challenging wickets. Rahane should be drafted in
Saroj padhy
International Coach
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2015
- Profile Flag
- Australia
I found this on FB from Mustafizur Rehman Khan , Not the bowler, He is a lawyer.
"Generally, I do not give posts about my professional
work, but since this issue concerns Taskin and the
Tigers, I feel constrained to share this.
Since Taskin and Sunny were reported, I have been
consulted by BCB regarding its response. Initially,
ICC was insisting that they be tested immediately,
i.e. on 9 March. I helped BCB draft correspondence
pointing out that the testing could be deferred
under the Regulations until after the preliminary
matches. ICC concurred, and Taskin could play
against Ireland and Oman.
I have now gone through Taskin's Independent
Assessment Report, which BCB forwarded to me. I
also revisited the ICC Regulations for the Review of
Bowlers Reported with Suspected Illegal Bowling
Actions, and also Taskin's initial Match Officials'
Report which I saw earlier.
The Assessment did not find anything illegal with
Taskin's stock and yorker deliveries. With respect
to the 9 bouncers he was asked to bowl, they found
that 3 were bowled using an illegal bowling action.
Here is where it gets interesting:
First, Regulation 2.2.6 provides that "(d)uring the
Independent Assessment, the Player shall be
required to replicate the specific bowling action for
which he/she was reported." The footage of his
bowling in the match where he was reported is
available. It shows that during the course of the
match, he did not bowl any bouncer. Not even one.
So, he could not have been reported for bowling a
bouncer. The Match Officials' Report from the
Netherlands match did not specify any particular
delivery/type of delivery. Indeed, it simply stated
that they were "concerned with the legality of the
action". Be that as it may, he was not reported for
his bouncer.
It appears that during the Independent Assessment,
Taskin was asked to bowl 9 bouncers. Even
accounting for the fact that the ICC Standard
Analysis Protocols contained in Annexure I of the
Regulations allow for Taskin to be asked to bowl,
among others, a minimum of 6 bouncers,on a proper
reading of Regulation 2.2.6, such bouncers cannot
be taken into account in his assessment, as he has
not been reported for bowling a bouncer. In this
regard, to the extent there would appear to be a
conflict between Regulation 2.2.6 and the
Protocols, the Regulation will prevail, as the
Protocols cannot override, and shall be regarded as
supplemental to, the Regulations.
Taskin's action insofar as his good length (stock)
delivery and yorker being found legal, and these
being the only deliveries bowled during the course of
the match for which he was reported, it is clear
that he did not employ an Illegal Bowling Action
during the match in issue. Therefore, he cannot be
suspended and his reporting by the Match Officials
was wrong. The Regulations are designed to
ascertain whether the Player bowled any illegal
delivery during the match: the Regulations do not
contemplate suspending a bowler for delivering an
illegal delivery in test conditions, when that delivery
was not bowled during the match.
It should be noted here that Taskin was asked to
bowl the bouncers in quick succession during the
Assessment (9 in 3 minutes!), something which he
would not be doing in match situations, as in T20, a
bowler can bowl only one bouncer an over. The
report shows that only 3 of his 9 bouncers were
bowled with an illegal action; these were the
deliveries which were also the slowest. Before the
Assessment, Taskin had traveled a lot and went
through preparation for and playing 3 international
matches in a short period of time; it's natural that
he was suffering from fatigue, and his technique on
the odd delivery fell away when asked to bowl 9
bouncers in quick succession .
Secondly, according to Regulation 2.1.1, the Match
Officials' Report should detail "their concerns about
the bowling action of the relevant Player, including,
where relevant, whether those concerns relate to
the Player's bowling action generally or whether
they relate to one or more specific types of
delivery." For Taskin, the Report simply stated that
the Match Officials were "concerned about the
legality of the bowling action". If one goes through
the form for the Report, it also requires the Match
Officials to state the reasons why they are so
concerned; in Taskin's case, no such reason was
given. Hence, to begin with, there is also an issue
of whether the Match Officials' Report was a
competent/compliant one, on the basis of which
there could have been an Assessment in the first
place.
Thirdly, Regulation 2.2.13 provides that "where the
Independent Assessment concludes that the Player
employed an Illegal Bowling Action during the
Independent Assessment in respect of a specific
type of delivery only, other than his stock delivery,
the Player will be allowed to continue bowling in
International Cricket but subject to the warning
that should he continue to bowl any of the specific
type(s) of delivery for which he has been found to
have an Illegal Bowling Action, he will run the risk
of being cited a second time". Since Taskin's stock
delivery has been found legal, and only 3 of his 9
bouncers illegal, he can, at best, be warned, and
not suspended.
In short, Taskin is the victim of a miscarriage of
justice.
I have advised BCB to use the above to seek a
review under Regulation 2.3.1, and later escalate it
in arbitration up to the Court of Arbitration for
Sports in Switzerland.
There is a limit to such farce. Faizlamir ekta shima acche."[DOUBLEPOST=1458451659][/DOUBLEPOST]I am not a Bangladesh fan . Its good that they wont play against Australia.
But if ICC doing something like this then they are ruining so many cricketers career.
Already few superstars are suspended.[DOUBLEPOST=1458451703][/DOUBLEPOST]I am not a Bangladesh fan . Its good that they wont play against Australia.
But if ICC doing something like this then they are ruining so many cricketers career.
Already few superstars are suspended.
"Generally, I do not give posts about my professional
work, but since this issue concerns Taskin and the
Tigers, I feel constrained to share this.
Since Taskin and Sunny were reported, I have been
consulted by BCB regarding its response. Initially,
ICC was insisting that they be tested immediately,
i.e. on 9 March. I helped BCB draft correspondence
pointing out that the testing could be deferred
under the Regulations until after the preliminary
matches. ICC concurred, and Taskin could play
against Ireland and Oman.
I have now gone through Taskin's Independent
Assessment Report, which BCB forwarded to me. I
also revisited the ICC Regulations for the Review of
Bowlers Reported with Suspected Illegal Bowling
Actions, and also Taskin's initial Match Officials'
Report which I saw earlier.
The Assessment did not find anything illegal with
Taskin's stock and yorker deliveries. With respect
to the 9 bouncers he was asked to bowl, they found
that 3 were bowled using an illegal bowling action.
Here is where it gets interesting:
First, Regulation 2.2.6 provides that "(d)uring the
Independent Assessment, the Player shall be
required to replicate the specific bowling action for
which he/she was reported." The footage of his
bowling in the match where he was reported is
available. It shows that during the course of the
match, he did not bowl any bouncer. Not even one.
So, he could not have been reported for bowling a
bouncer. The Match Officials' Report from the
Netherlands match did not specify any particular
delivery/type of delivery. Indeed, it simply stated
that they were "concerned with the legality of the
action". Be that as it may, he was not reported for
his bouncer.
It appears that during the Independent Assessment,
Taskin was asked to bowl 9 bouncers. Even
accounting for the fact that the ICC Standard
Analysis Protocols contained in Annexure I of the
Regulations allow for Taskin to be asked to bowl,
among others, a minimum of 6 bouncers,on a proper
reading of Regulation 2.2.6, such bouncers cannot
be taken into account in his assessment, as he has
not been reported for bowling a bouncer. In this
regard, to the extent there would appear to be a
conflict between Regulation 2.2.6 and the
Protocols, the Regulation will prevail, as the
Protocols cannot override, and shall be regarded as
supplemental to, the Regulations.
Taskin's action insofar as his good length (stock)
delivery and yorker being found legal, and these
being the only deliveries bowled during the course of
the match for which he was reported, it is clear
that he did not employ an Illegal Bowling Action
during the match in issue. Therefore, he cannot be
suspended and his reporting by the Match Officials
was wrong. The Regulations are designed to
ascertain whether the Player bowled any illegal
delivery during the match: the Regulations do not
contemplate suspending a bowler for delivering an
illegal delivery in test conditions, when that delivery
was not bowled during the match.
It should be noted here that Taskin was asked to
bowl the bouncers in quick succession during the
Assessment (9 in 3 minutes!), something which he
would not be doing in match situations, as in T20, a
bowler can bowl only one bouncer an over. The
report shows that only 3 of his 9 bouncers were
bowled with an illegal action; these were the
deliveries which were also the slowest. Before the
Assessment, Taskin had traveled a lot and went
through preparation for and playing 3 international
matches in a short period of time; it's natural that
he was suffering from fatigue, and his technique on
the odd delivery fell away when asked to bowl 9
bouncers in quick succession .
Secondly, according to Regulation 2.1.1, the Match
Officials' Report should detail "their concerns about
the bowling action of the relevant Player, including,
where relevant, whether those concerns relate to
the Player's bowling action generally or whether
they relate to one or more specific types of
delivery." For Taskin, the Report simply stated that
the Match Officials were "concerned about the
legality of the bowling action". If one goes through
the form for the Report, it also requires the Match
Officials to state the reasons why they are so
concerned; in Taskin's case, no such reason was
given. Hence, to begin with, there is also an issue
of whether the Match Officials' Report was a
competent/compliant one, on the basis of which
there could have been an Assessment in the first
place.
Thirdly, Regulation 2.2.13 provides that "where the
Independent Assessment concludes that the Player
employed an Illegal Bowling Action during the
Independent Assessment in respect of a specific
type of delivery only, other than his stock delivery,
the Player will be allowed to continue bowling in
International Cricket but subject to the warning
that should he continue to bowl any of the specific
type(s) of delivery for which he has been found to
have an Illegal Bowling Action, he will run the risk
of being cited a second time". Since Taskin's stock
delivery has been found legal, and only 3 of his 9
bouncers illegal, he can, at best, be warned, and
not suspended.
In short, Taskin is the victim of a miscarriage of
justice.
I have advised BCB to use the above to seek a
review under Regulation 2.3.1, and later escalate it
in arbitration up to the Court of Arbitration for
Sports in Switzerland.
There is a limit to such farce. Faizlamir ekta shima acche."[DOUBLEPOST=1458451659][/DOUBLEPOST]I am not a Bangladesh fan . Its good that they wont play against Australia.
But if ICC doing something like this then they are ruining so many cricketers career.
Already few superstars are suspended.[DOUBLEPOST=1458451703][/DOUBLEPOST]I am not a Bangladesh fan . Its good that they wont play against Australia.
But if ICC doing something like this then they are ruining so many cricketers career.
Already few superstars are suspended.
Perfect Square
No Corners
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2014
- Profile Flag
- Pakistan
I already knew it, and I posted it yesterday night.
AliB
ICC President
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2014
- Online Cricket Games Owned
- Don Bradman Cricket 14 - Steam PC
6 wickets and 13 balls.
[DOUBLEPOST=1458456786][/DOUBLEPOST]We are out to beat South Africa - Asghar Stanikzai | Cricket | ESPN CricinfoStanikzai confident of giving SA a tough time and hopefully upsetting them.
Perfect Square
No Corners
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2014
- Profile Flag
- Pakistan
6 wickets and 13 balls.
I said they will loss 2-3 wickets, and they lost 4 wickets and I was close though.
How many times have you actually seen India play live at the ground? I have done so 10-15 times. I can tell you that they're not in the world's top three fielding sides.
CerealKiller
Staff Member
That's really an amateurish mistake by Faf. Looked set for a big one.
- Status
