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.So you think he did nothing wrong Sohum? Because Indian or not, that was dissent and it was ugly.
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.
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.
Ganguly definitely preferred spin, as does Laxman.
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?
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.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.
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.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.
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 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.
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 so what if they won a few test in AUS & SA. The fact is they lost the series - thats the point.
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.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.
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 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??
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.Plus why are you including a overseas series win againts a poor Windies test team in 2006?. That aint no achievement.
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?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.
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.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.
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.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
I thought that was Sehwag. So thats you people's excuse. He is arrogant and everything is fine.Rohit is always known for his arrogant character. So nothing to surprise of that incident