• PlanetCricket has been upgraded to the latest version of the XenForo forum software, to find out more - including asking any questions or making any notes about any part of the forum that may be broken - see this discussion thread.

19th Match, Group F: West Indies v India at Bridgetown

P

pcfan123

Guest
So you think he did nothing wrong Sohum? Because Indian or not, that was dissent and it was ugly.
 

SaiSrini

ICC President
PlanetCricket Award Winner
Joined
Apr 26, 2003
Location
USA
They didnt show any video of Bowden raising his finger before Rohit hinted at his arm and asked for the replay. After Rohit did that, Bowden went to Simon Taufel to talk something and then came back to his position and signalled "OUT". If he had already signalled out, why should he go to Simon Taufel to talk? I too agree with sohum that Rohit did it before Bowden gave him out. But the replay thing was definitely not on.
 

sohum

Executive member
Joined
Aug 3, 2004
Location
San Francisco, CA
Profile Flag
India
So you think he did nothing wrong Sohum? Because Indian or not, that was dissent and it was ugly.
Did you bother to read what I wrote? If Bowden had not yet given the decision, then Rohit pointing to his arm was not any different from what Chanderpaul had done earlier. From the replays I saw, Bowden hadn't raised his finger and was expecting Rohit to walk. Rohit pointed to his arm, similar to how Chanderpaul had indicated that he hadn't hit the ball earlier that day. Hundreds of batsmen do it every year and that's not grounds for dissent.

The call for the third umpire was definitely out of the acceptable list of actions.

My point was targeted towards whoever suggested that Rohit pointing to his arm was awful, whereas in reality players from every country do it all the time. Until their is acceptable evidence provided that Bowden had ruled Rohit out before he gesticulated, his act of pointing cannot be marked as being any worse than what Shivnarine did earlier in the game.
 

Dare

Chairman of Selectors
Joined
May 29, 2006
Location
London, Canada
Online Cricket Games Owned
People point at their arm all the time. In fact, Chanderpaul pointed at his arm in that very match when there was an appeal for caught at slip off the bowling of Harbhajan (or maybe another spinner). Why don't you guys bash that as being awful and being dissentful? Just because Shiv isn't Indian.

Was Shiv given out or was he pointing to the umpire? Or did he pretend to be the umpire and order a referral?
They barely even showed that on TV so obviously it doesn't even compare to what Rohit did. No need to bash Shiv when he didn't do anything wrong, I would actually love to see this video where Shiv is standing his ground and pointing to his arm.
And no its not because he was Indian its because he acted like a complete ******.
O and the fact that the Indians weren't even confident when they appealed against Shiv makes a huge difference too. While the WI were confident they got their man.
 

War

Chairman of Selectors
Joined
Feb 10, 2010
Online Cricket Games Owned
We won in England last time we were there. We lost fairly close series' in South Africa (2-1) and Australia (2-1) when we were there last. With pretty much this bowling attack and Kumble. So your hypothesis is way off target since you are just taking into account the musings of your mind instead of pure, hard results:

India in England (Won 1-0)
Won the second test by 7 wickets

India in West Indies (Won 1-0)
Won the fourth test by 49 runs

India in South Africa (Lost 1-2)
Won the first test by 123 runs

India in Australia (Lost 1-2*)
Won the third test by 72 runs

So this pace attack has got us wins outside the subcontinent. We've ended up losing 2 of these 4 series', but the fact is the margin of loss has been 1 Test match. They haven't been whitewashes like these opponents have been dishing out to other opponents and, in some cases, each other.

That series win againts England was againts an England team where our enitre bowling attack was out injured at the time. No Flintoff, Hoggard, Harmison, Jones. The replacements at the time Sidebottom/Anderson/Tremlett at the time weren't prendtrative enough to bowl India out - thus they lost. So that series win in England doesn't mean anything & it proves why i saw the ranking system isn't needed in cricket. Since IND got maximum points for beating a weakened ENG team.

The ranking doesn't/didn't take into account that ENG where weakened during that 2007 series. Which is crap since in 05/06 when ENG took its full-stenght pace attack to India - they managed to draw the series by beating IND on a Mumbai greentop.

Finally so what if they won a few test in AUS & SA. The fact is they lost the series - thats the point. Plus back in 2007/08 during those tours to ENG, SA & AUS Khan, RP Singh, Sreesanth, Sharma where in some sort of form. Currently except for Zaheer that pace attack is utter trash & isn't capable of taking 20 wickets overseas.

Plus its clear that AUS & SA are much improved outfits from when India toured ther 06/07 & 07/08. While India have a ageing batting line-up, weakend poor pace attack & openers who are vulnerable againts pace. Can you seriously see India doing well in South Africa later this year againts the pace Steyn/Morkel/De Wet/McLaren/Kallis/Parnell in bowler friendly conditions??

Plus why are you including a overseas series win againts a poor Windies test team in 2006?. That aint no achievement.


Ganguly definitely preferred spin, as does Laxman.

Ganguly was probably the most vulnerable againts quality pace. But i remember his 144 vs AUS @ Brisbane 2003, where he sort of conquered his demonds vs pace to some degree. (Although it probably was never totally eradicated).

Laxman is equally good againts both pace & spin watching him bat all these years.

You also realize that you haven't seen any of these blokes in Test cricket? Would you not have said that the likes of Dravid, Laxman and Ganguly wouldn't live up to the legacy set by the Gavaskars, Vengsarkars and Amarnaths of the previous generation if you had first seen them in Twenty20 games? You see where your whole argument is flawed?

I dont need to see the current gerneration play tests. All of them since Yuvraj back in the early 2000s, everytime they are tested againts quality pace in test match like circumstances in ODIs or T20s. They struggle & dont look the same as when they are smoking it on flat tracks. So that is indeed a worrying sign looking ahead to the day they playe tests.

As far as i know Tendy, Dravid looked the part from very early on in their international careers facing pace. Which is clearly not the case with the current generation.
 

sohum

Executive member
Joined
Aug 3, 2004
Location
San Francisco, CA
Profile Flag
India
Was Shiv given out or was he pointing to the umpire? Or did he pretend to be the umpire and order a referral?
They barely even showed that on TV so obviously it doesn't even compare to what Rohit did. No need to bash Shiv when he didn't do anything wrong, I would actually love to see this video where Shiv is standing his ground and pointing to his arm.
And no its not because he was Indian its because he acted like a complete ******.
O and the fact that the Indians weren't even confident when they appealed against Shiv makes a huge difference too. While the WI were confident they got their man.
Do you even remember what my original post was about? Someone pointed out that Rohit gesturing that the ball hit his arm was awful in itself. I never argued that Rohit didn't show dissent during the whole event nor that he didn't deserve to be fined (which he has been, by the way). My point was only that batsmen point to their arms or indicate to the umpires ALL THE TIME. That is not worthy as singling out as being poor, and it was only done because it was Rohit Sharma. The Chanderpaul example was brought up to demonstrate that Chanderpaul indicated to the umpire as well that he hadn't hit the ball. The purpose of bringing that up was to show that batsmen do that ALL THE TIME. There was no conclusive video evidence that Bowden had given Rohit out before he gesticulated, which is what I was basing my point off. If he did, then there's no argument from my end.

I never even attempted to defend the "third umpire call". My position here is not that Rohit was innocent, it is that whoever posted that both his actions were awful was incorrect, because the gesturing to the arm happens all the time.
 

sohum

Executive member
Joined
Aug 3, 2004
Location
San Francisco, CA
Profile Flag
India
That series win againts England was againts an England team where our enitre bowling attack was out injured at the time. No Flintoff, Hoggard, Harmison, Jones. The replacements at the time Sidebottom/Anderson/Tremlett at the time weren't prendtrative enough to bowl India out - thus they lost. So that series win in England doesn't mean anything & it proves why i saw the ranking system isn't needed in cricket. Since IND got maximum points for beating a weakened ENG team.
Umm... Flintoff, Hoggard, Harmison and Jones haven't bowled together since the 2005 Ashes, so that point is moot. England has been a very good Test side for a while. Besides, the fact that you are ignoring is that we still had to take 20 wickets on pitches that we are supposedly not good at bowling on. Which means are pace bowlers DID the job. That was one of your points of argument, IIRC, that our pace bowlers are toothless overseas.

The series win in England was a series win. You can make up reasons for every series win but the fact of the matter is that India can make the same excuses for the other side of the coin (where we lost a series). "Sachin was injured" or "Anil was injured", etc. India, Australia, England, etc. are no Bangladesh or West Indies. A few players injured doesn't mean that they suddenly become pushovers. In fact, that 3 Test series ended up with 2 draws, which shows that it was pretty evenly contested. The first match, IIRC, went down to the last over.

The ranking doesn't/didn't take into account that ENG where weakened during that 2007 series. Which is crap since in 05/06 when ENG took its full-stenght pace attack to India - they managed to draw the series by beating IND on a Mumbai greentop.
A 2-test series, IIRC. Besides, notice that I did not make any points about the ranking system, so I'm not sure why you're bringing it up. I'm not a proponent of the ICC ranking system. I don't believe India is the best team in the world. I think the top spot in Tests right now is very much up for grabs, which is why Test cricket is so exciting right now.

The only points I have issue with is your claims that India have been pathetic outside India, which is completely false.

Finally so what if they won a few test in AUS & SA. The fact is they lost the series - thats the point.
How many teams have won a series in Australia over the last decade or so? I can remember one off the top of my head--South Africa, who promptly got destroyed at home right after. How many teams have even won a Test match in Australia over the years? It's not as if India has been winning only dead rubber matches in Australia, either. In fact, the wins we've got on our last couple of tours there have been in active matches.

Finally, and this is not from a scoreline perspective but the actual series perspective. Along with the renewed Ashes rivalry (except for that 5-0 whitewash), the India-Australia series has been the most keenly contested series over this decade. Both teams have won their fair share of Test matches, home and away. Highlighting away, this shows that India have the ability to win overseas.

Plus back in 2007/08 during those tours to ENG, SA & AUS Khan, RP Singh, Sreesanth, Sharma where in some sort of form. Currently except for Zaheer that pace attack is utter trash & isn't capable of taking 20 wickets overseas.
Okay, so we aren't allowed to count matches where our opponents were injured. And we aren't allowed to count matches where our bowlers were in form? So are we just basically counting matches that India lost? Smells pretty strange to me.

Your insinuation that our bowling attack cannot take 20 wickets overseas is disproved every instance that we have actually won a Test match overseas, and there are more than people give us credit for. It's no contest that our pace attack is poor at home, but that's more a byproduct of our pitches than our bowler's skills. If conditions assist our pace bowlers, they can hold their own. They may not do it day in and day out, but the fact that they have got results speaks for itself, really.

Plus its clear that AUS & SA are much improved outfits from when India toured ther 06/07 & 07/08. While India have a ageing batting line-up, weakend poor pace attack & openers who are vulnerable againts pace. Can you seriously see India doing well in South Africa later this year againts the pace Steyn/Morkel/De Wet/McLaren/Kallis/Parnell in bowler friendly conditions??
Geez, what an overreaction based on a glut of Twenty20 matches! I believe I have already addressed most of these points. Our batting lineup, though ageing, has been in some of the best form in Test cricket. Why don't we concentrate on the fact that Test cricket is a whole different game? Can I see India doing well in South Africa later this year? Yes. When we last went there, pace was still South Africa's strong suit and they were beating most of their opponents. We lost the series 2-1 but we were still in the series going into the last match. I really can't see what you're basing your predictions off except for Twenty20 performances. Our top-order consists of Sehwag, Gambhir, Dravid, Tendulkar and Laxman. Of these, I'd say Sehwag is the most vulnerable against the moving ball although at the same time he can also take the edge off the bowling attack in one session. Gambhir's short-ball shortcomings have been common knowledge for a while now yet he has been plundering runs at an alarming rate in Test cricket. Dravid, Tendulkar and Laxman are class and their records speak for themselves.

Plus why are you including a overseas series win againts a poor Windies test team in 2006?. That aint no achievement.
Because your original point was that we are pathetic in non-subcontinent conditions, which is obviously not true. Also the fact that we have struggled in the Windies in the recent past due to the extra bounce.

I dont need to see the current gerneration play tests. All of them since Yuvraj back in the early 2000s, everytime they are tested againts quality pace in test match like circumstances in ODIs or T20s. They struggle & dont look the same as when they are smoking it on flat tracks. So that is indeed a worrying sign looking ahead to the day they playe tests.
What is a "test match like circumstance in [...] T20s"? I contest that such a circumstance is in fact a figment of your imagination. I think you would struggle to find a batsman who plays better on a bowler-friendly pitch than on a flat track. That is quite contradictory--playing badly on a good pitch, isn't it?

And yes, you do need to see the current generation play Tests before making judgment calls on the death of Indian cricket. The flatness of our domestic tracks is not something that started yesterday... India has always been good for batsmen and spinners. Yet we have produced quality Test batsmen consistently.

As far as i know Tendy, Dravid looked the part from very early on in their international careers facing pace. Which is clearly not the case with the current generation.
But they never had to prove themselves in Twenty20 first, which requires you to attack short bowling. You make it sound like our batsmen can't play pace wherein it is only bounce that they cannot play. As I've said over and over again, you have the advantage in Test cricket if you have a major weakness in that if you have patience, you can tire the bowlers out. That's why it becomes a Test---it's a Test for the bowlers too because they can't just attack your weakness 90 overs a day. Sure, you will have a few awesome spells of bowling (such as Steyn's 6-for or Sreesanth's 6-for in that India-South Africa series) but the fact is that it's impossible to put up that sort of intensity for 5 straight days. As a fast bowler in a Twenty20 game, you can really bowl all out for all 4 overs without needing to save the energy for another day. That's the difference. In Test cricket you can wait out an intense spell of pace bowling as a Gambhir or Raina. In Twenty20 cricket, if you do that, you end up needing 2 runs a ball to win.
 

BKB1991

Panel of Selectors
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Location
Manchester
Online Cricket Games Owned
I think the point is, that we have been so used to seeing the way Australia dominate the last decade or so, that we believe that the no.1 team has to be PERFECT. India are not as good as Australia were, not even close, but compared to the other teams atm, they deserve the no 1 ranking Imo
 

sohum

Executive member
Joined
Aug 3, 2004
Location
San Francisco, CA
Profile Flag
India
I think the point is, that we have been so used to seeing the way Australia dominate the last decade or so, that we believe that the no.1 team has to be PERFECT. India are not as good as Australia were, not even close, but compared to the other teams atm, they deserve the no 1 ranking Imo
Well, that's just an incorrect assumption. No number 1 team in world sport dominates their sports like the Australians did through the last 2 decades. IIRC, they even won an ESPY for their domination of world cricket. That's an unfair expectation for a number 1 team.
 

BKB1991

Panel of Selectors
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Location
Manchester
Online Cricket Games Owned
Maybe you didnt get me, but I was saying that we have come to expect teams to be perfect if they are ranked No. 1. That shouldnt be the case though. India are the best TEST team in the world for me, and deserve the no 1 spot
 

SciD

Chairman of Selectors
Joined
Feb 11, 2006
Online Cricket Games Owned
Test cricket and T20 are like chalk and cheese or day and night. You cannot expect a test team to be world beater in format which no team has had supremacy.

For last few years no team can lay claim to be dominant force in any form of cricket. Even the Aussies.
 

McLOVIN

Chairman of Selectors
Joined
Aug 1, 2008
Online Cricket Games Owned
sohum is just making things awful here. IDK what he is trying to prove or what he is trying to cover. But there is no point in arguing. What Sharma did was wrong. End of story. I've seen many batsmen put their bat up when the fielders are shouting for LBW. And thats fine by the law. But if you are still given out, you cant just stand there and ask for a reply. Thats against the law, even if you're correct. Even that dumbass Harsha Bhoglallaay explained the whole thing while it was happening.

This "just because he is Indian your bashing him, if he was Oz or English, he would've got away with it" attitude is very annoyin. Just stop it

Rohit is always known for his arrogant character. So nothing to surprise of that incident :p
I thought that was Sehwag. So thats you people's excuse. He is arrogant and everything is fine.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top