.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Sight Screen

Monday, November 21, 2005

Strike 2?(-worma)

England, at the mid point of day 2 of the test, seem to be staring down the barrel. With Pakistan crossing the 450 mark, to me it looks highly unlikely that Eng can win or even draw this one. They may be able to match, or even surpass Pakistan in this innings(although they would really have to play out of their skins for it), but chasing anything above 150 on the final day of this track, with Afridi giving company to Kaneria, would be next to impossible for them.

Their only chance...pile up a huge mountain of runs today and tomorrow. Anyway...sort of open thread for discussion...mainly around the match...but also anything else cricket.

198 Comments:

  • worma
    indeed. it is going to be difficult for england but not impossible. i wud say if they had restricted pak to 400 on that wicket that wud have been a good job - 60 runs extra well - still in with an outside chance. i hope tho that england win this one just becoz i wanna see the series go down to the wire

    By Blogger GK, at 03:16  

  • yep..outside chance...should be absolutely clear by end of day today. Vaughan may be in good form, and KP can come to party if he survives early on. Let see...exiciting indeed.

    By Blogger worma, at 03:19  

  • yep ... also will be a crucial examination of really how far this english team has come from the depths of 2000 - how do they respond to an absolutely backs-to-the wall situation

    By Blogger GK, at 03:22  

  • worma: all 3 - yousuf, afridi and inzy were clearly not out. This was collective shoddy umpiring and some strange gamesmanship (cheating in my book) by English. where is the spirit of cricket? Vaughn should have called Inzy back and taken the appeal back.

    By Blogger losing now, at 03:26  

  • losing: wasn't watching today. Know about Yousuf..saw that and commented in the post also. Can you please tell a bit more about Afridi and Inzy's case today??

    By Blogger worma, at 03:27  

  • yeah, what abt afridi ? as i see on the scorebook he was caught at slip. dodgy catch ?

    By Blogger GK, at 03:29  

  • worma:

    Afridi 'catch' : trescothick fingers are pointing down perpendicular to the ground..and they claimed the catch ..stating that the fingers were under the ball. you can clearly see the ball bouncing into the hand on the tracker/trekker.

    Inzy 'run out' : he plays the ball back to harmy. he is in the crease. harmy takes a shy at the stumps. inzy takes evasive action and jumps. when the ball hits the stumps his feet are in the air. decision referred to 3rd ump by hair on ground. technically he is not in. but law 38.2.a says you cannot be out if you are in and then to avoid injury take evasive action and the wicket is broken. Clearly, the umps either do not know the law or screwed up or both.

    By Blogger losing now, at 03:32  

  • yeah well, pak need to put that behind and get on with the job now. they cannot relax and belive that england will self-destruct

    By Blogger GK, at 03:34  

  • Whatever has happened to Afridi? He seems to have had the sort of transformation that Flintoff has about 2 years ago... from a perpetually "potential star", he seems to have graduated to the level of greatness..

    maybe not greatness.. and maybe not quite the level of Flintoff.. but its amazing to see the change in his performances surely. How I wish we see such a transformation in any of our own "perpetual potential stars", eg Agarkar!

    By Blogger Rahul, at 03:38  

  • losing: thx for the udpate...just checked...tv umpire is Nadeem Ghauri!...so its their own ump who messed up..hmm..sometimes even the Indian umpire are too anxious to 'appear' neutral..maybe that was the case. Anyway Vaughan couldn't have know the situation.

    And Tresco's catch for Afridi..again ruled by third ump? Then not his fault...they should have given benefit of doubt to batsman.

    Although Bell's catch yesterday wasn't referred and that was a mistake. And infact that clearly looked wrong. Infact, to me, Bells' appeal also looked unconvincing, as if he was expecting to be referred (and then celebrated when umpire gave out).

    By Blogger worma, at 03:38  

  • rahul: Woolmer 'happened' to Afridi :-)

    By Blogger worma, at 03:39  

  • rahul
    indeed i was surprised to see that in fact afridi averaged 36 in test cricket which is by all standards pretty decent. with his game and destructive ability it is in fact very good.

    abt agarkar i think under GC and RD he will be given the necessary backing and he will come good maybe not as a batsman as yet but definitely as a bowler

    By Blogger GK, at 03:41  

  • gk..if you check Afridi's test average since Woolmer's arrival..I'm sure he would fall into a pretty good allrounder category both with his batting abd bowling stats.

    By Blogger worma, at 03:44  

  • meanwhile a nice steady start for england

    By Blogger GK, at 03:46  

  • someone wrote vaughan shud have called inzi back..
    btw did pakis do that when tendulkar was run out in that culcutta test?
    dont blame england saying they are cheats.. even pakis cheats..
    imo the lankans are the greatest cheats

    By Blogger idli vade, at 03:47  

  • neither of the 'catches' were referred, the umpires decided it themselves.
    that it not the point. while Bell may or may not have known if the ball made contact with the ground, trescothick CERTAINLY did. that amounts to cheating. let's see if the icc have the balls to ban a gora.
    the inzy runout was ridiculous. he wasn't trying for a run, he was certainly in his crease, and he gets runout because harmison throws it hard right at his nuts, and he has to get out of the way. seems more like dodgeball than cricket to me.

    By Blogger Dhruv Deepak, at 03:47  

  • worma: remember, i mentioned during first tes. in my book, afridi always plays for pakistan...both odi and tests. he is a talented, good cricketer who is match winner. you always play match winners.

    By Blogger losing now, at 03:48  

  • someone wrote vaughan shud have called inzi back..
    btw did pakis do that when tendulkar was run out in that culcutta test?
    dont blame england saying they are cheats.. even pakis cheats..
    imo the lankans are the greatest cheats

    By Blogger idli vade, at 03:48  

  • dont praise the pakis for 460 runs. i have seen the pitch from close (on tv). not even a single grass. and it dint assist spin too. (i admit gile and udal are not good though)
    its a very flat wicket..
    as flat as ______ (dont know what to write in the dash. may be some sidhisam)

    By Blogger idli vade, at 03:50  

  • dhruv :exactly my point. The spirit of cricket clearly says that you do not appeal, if you know the bat is not out. it is plain, simple cheating. I also hold Vaughn (who as a captain has ultimate accountability for upholding the spirit of cricket) responsible. he should have retracted the appeal. this whole bs argument that pak did not call back therefore eng should not.. is silly. 2 wrongs never make a right.

    By Blogger losing now, at 03:51  

  • hmmm .. anyone watching the match is there a hue and cry over the controversial dismissals ? or is it pretty quiet ?

    By Blogger GK, at 03:51  

  • it is really interesting. was it decided before the series that the fielders word wud be accepted ? i remember ponting had tried that with vaughan in the ashes and vaughan had refused

    By Blogger GK, at 03:53  

  • dhruv: about time the ICC show some balls and put a stop to this garbage. It is after all a gentleman's game. Remember, how Michelle wie was recently dqed for an honest mistake. That is the standard ICC has to establish.

    By Blogger losing now, at 03:53  

  • guys, why are u sp upset abt the contreveries in this match? after all its helping england..
    please look back and how pakis cheated india by running tendulkar out in culcutta test..
    and how paki umpires cheated indians when there were no neurtal umpires..
    and how the crowd cheated indias in the 1990 odi series in pak..

    By Blogger idli vade, at 03:54  

  • losing: yeah Afridi should play, especially in current form (recently he's done great for them since the India series). But problem with his kind of batting approach (and also KP's style of play) is that it can be afforded only when the others around him are doing well. We know his game is chancy...but Pak, as a team, can take those chances when they have a decent cushion. As yesterday was the case. Had he gotten out early (Vaughan could have ensured that at 34) then Pak could have reverted to more cautious play with Inzy and Akmal and still ensured a decent total. Yousuf's innings had ensured that.

    Afridi was not a good option to have instead of someone like Akmal(or Raza) when Pak's batting was struggling a bit more. Since Younis Khan's maturity as a test batsman in recent times, and Akmal's recent development as well....they can 'afford' Afridi more

    By Blogger worma, at 03:54  

  • OUT strauss gone big blow

    By Blogger GK, at 03:56  

  • Afridi will fail on a boncy or seamer friendly attacks..
    dont read too much into this match. its as flat as glass

    By Blogger idli vade, at 03:56  

  • guys, why are u so upset abt the contreveries in this match? after all its helping england..
    please look back and how pakis cheated india by running tendulkar out in culcutta test..
    and how paki umpires cheated indians when there were no neurtal umpires..
    and how the crowd cheated indias in the 1990 odi series in pak..

    By Blogger idli vade, at 03:58  

  • st gilly, I don't think you need to fill the blank there... that dash is as flat as anything sidhu could've come up with... :P

    By Blogger Rahul, at 03:59  

  • gk: in the lunch show they discussed it. not in the commentary. so sad. mohammad akram and bob (i am blind when it comes to England mistakes) willis claim that afridi catch was legal. The only way that is possible is if the hands are a magnet and the ball is made of iron. they need a lesson in physics.

    By Blogger losing now, at 04:01  

  • lol rahul.
    rana naveed ul hassan is a club level boler.
    he gets wickets by sheer luck.

    By Blogger idli vade, at 04:01  

  • st gilly, you really do need to go back and look at afridi's scores... no one is talking about him just because of this innings.. he has been consistently destructive over last year, against various teams, in various countries... A bit too consistent to be dismissed as just another Weak Attack/Flat Track bully...

    By Blogger Rahul, at 04:01  

  • st gilly: it is ok for england to cheat because it is against pak. Geez.

    By Blogger losing now, at 04:02  

  • yah losing now,
    pakis are legendary cheaters.
    so why wud all people here mind they getting cheated?

    By Blogger idli vade, at 04:03  

  • losing,
    who the hell is this mohd akram ?

    sgbw,
    i disagree with u on rana. the way he troubled all our top batsmen in the spring was really amazing

    By Blogger GK, at 04:03  

  • Afridi was out...Tresco's fingers were under the ball and it lodged in there...Bell had clearly grounded the ball from replays.

    Inzi was not out.... but again, why blame Harmy for attempting a runout and appealing for it...they cannot be certain if he was inside the crease to begin with, in which case it would not matter if he was trying to evade the ball.

    By Blogger Jiet, at 04:05  

  • BOWLED HIM!!!

    By Blogger losing now, at 04:06  

  • Worma,

    Re: Inzy Decision/Nadeem Ghauri

    It's not the 3rd Ump's fault. Once it has been referred to the 3rd ump, all he can do is see whether the batsman is in or out at the time the stumps are broken. Ghauri did just that.

    This is obvious and gross incompetence from Hair to have refered it in the first place. There is no room for argument here, because it wasn't an error in judgement...it was a lack of understanding of the rules.

    I think Pak should appeal to have him taken off the Elite panel of umpires.

    As for Vaughan's reaction or lack of it, once Inzy was referred by Hair and declared out by the 3rd umpire, it obviated the need for Vaughan to do anything. If the umpires gave him out, then he has (presumably) been given out within the realm of the ICC Rule Book -- and there is no question of Vaughan calling Inzy back.

    By Blogger Arunabh, at 04:06  

  • VAughn gone to a peach of a yorker from Naved. Middle stump gone.

    By Blogger losing now, at 04:07  

  • mohd akram is a former paki pacer migrated to england and hoping to play for england national side..

    yah. rana did trouble indians.. but that doesnt make him a great bowler..
    even kayne mills troubled indias. didnt he?
    and recently in the 5 th odi, parveez mahacrap troubled indians..

    u may want to look at rana naveed's test records.. pathetic

    By Blogger idli vade, at 04:07  

  • gk: Mohd Akram is the studio expert on sky with bob willis. he supposedly played for Pak.

    By Blogger losing now, at 04:09  

  • aha vaughan out, rana again 2 wickets both clean bowled, this one was an unplayable it seems

    By Blogger GK, at 04:09  

  • arunabh: Agree Hair to blame among umpires. but Vaughn should never have allowed that appeal. he knows the rules!

    By Blogger losing now, at 04:10  

  • I think Mohd. Akram played in the WC96 game against India and bowled pretty well...10 overs for 40 odd and a wicket.

    By Blogger Jiet, at 04:11  

  • losing
    ranas test record is pathetic becoz he has got very feww opps. he has a lot to prove at test level but i believe he has some talent

    By Blogger GK, at 04:11  

  • England getting a real reality check; that's what Botham gets for constantly saying England are the best Test team in the world. After just winning a home Test series against Australia? If that was the criteria, India have done it several times. Furthermore, India have drawn a series in Australia. But, in all that time never could the Indians lay claim to being the best in the world. However, England despite being well behind Australia in the rankings, often make such claims. Looks to me like a comprehensive victory is on the cards in this Test. Say around a 200 run thumping.

    By Blogger Sahir, at 04:11  

  • sorry that last comment was addressed to sgbw not losing

    By Blogger GK, at 04:12  

  • hair is not the worst umpire..
    we have buckner and a v jayaprakash still asround

    By Blogger idli vade, at 04:12  

  • losing now...Vaugham would not have known if Inzi had been inside the crease to begin with or not....if he had been out side the crease when Harmy through, it would have been out no questions.

    By Blogger Jiet, at 04:12  

  • arunabh: yeah..you're right. Third ump doesnt take those rules into consideration. Hair should not have referred. And yes, I agree not much for Vaughan to do there.

    And not much for him to do in the middle either. This match is fast slipping away from Eng. And what an improved bowler Rana Naved is these days! India should sit up and take notice of this Pak performance. And be wary. Its not going to be like last time.

    By Blogger worma, at 04:14  

  • sgbw
    agree with u on the umpires

    By Blogger GK, at 04:14  

  • worma
    ever since the home series against pak ive believed rana has some talent with the ball. glad to see he has got a chance at test level as well

    By Blogger GK, at 04:15  

  • In this discussion regarding the Inzi dismissal, I don't see mention of the third umpire (is it Asad Rauf?) not knowing the rules! It was very evident Inzi was taking evasive action.

    By Blogger Sahir, at 04:16  

  • Spirit of cricket..refresher.. read the 'responsibility of the captains' and 5(a): appealing knowing when the batsman is not out!

    ---
    Preamble to the Laws

    Cricket is a game that owes much of its unique appeal to the fact that it should be played not only within its Laws but also within the Spirit of the Game. Any action which is seen to abuse this spirit causes injury to the game itself. The major responsbility for ensuring the spirit of fair play rests with the captains.

    1. There are two Laws which place responsibility for the team's conduct firmly on the captain.

    Responsibility of captains

    The captains are responsible at all times for ensuring that play is conducted within the Spirit of the Game as well as within the Laws.

    Player's conduct

    In the event of a player failing to comply with instructions by an umpire, or criticising by word or action the decision of an umpire, or showing dissent, or generally behaving in a manner which might bring the game into disrepute, the umpire concerned shall in the first place report the matter to the other umpire and to the player's captain, and instruct the latter to take action.

    2. Fair and unfair play

    According to the Laws the umpires are the sole judges of fair and unfair play.

    The umpires may intervene at any time and it is the responsibility of the captain to take action where required.

    3. The umpires are authorised to intervene in cases of:

    * Time wasting
    * Damaging the pitch
    * Dangerous or unfair bowling
    * Tampering with the ball
    * Any other action that they consider to be unfair

    4. The Spirit of the Game involves RESPECT for:

    * Your opponents
    * Your own captain
    * The roles of the umpires
    * The game's traditional values

    5. It is against the Spirit of the Game:

    * To dispute an umpire's decision by word, action or gesture
    * To direct abusive language towards an opponent or umpire
    * To indulge in cheating or any sharp practice, for instance:
    (a) to appeal knowing that the batsman is not out
    (b) to advance towards an umpire in an aggressive manner when appealing
    (c) to seek to distract an opponent either verbally or by harassment with persistent clapping or unnecessary noise under the guise of enthusiasm and motivation of one's own side

    6. Violence

    There is no place for any act of violence on the field of play.

    7. Players

    Captains and umpires together set the tone for the conduct of a cricket match. Every player is expected to make an important contribution towards this.

    By Blogger losing now, at 04:17  

  • gk: infact Rana's revival started from the Pak tour down under. And yes his earlier chances in test were scattered..and probably he wasn't as good a bowler then. We should forget that and look at him now. Surely dangerous. He has the best swing amongst all Pak bowlers...has even picked up pace.

    sahir, I mentioned the third ump, check above. But arunabh rightly pointed out third ump is there to check on the batsman's position from the crease...not on application of rule that its a fair appeal or not

    By Blogger worma, at 04:19  

  • sahir: Nadeem Ghauri is the TV umpire.

    By Blogger losing now, at 04:19  

  • I can't believe people can actually argue that Rana does not have any talent. If you can swing the ball both ways and bowl at 90mph, bowling consistent long spells-- you've got plenty of talent! Just a matter of converting that talent into good bowling figures. And just think, he is yet to realize his potential as a batsman. Rana is an allrounder that bats at 7 in first-class cricket. In fact, I believe he had an innings of 139 of less than a 100 balls in a first-class game in England this past summer, on a seaming wicket where the top order had been scuppered.

    By Blogger Sahir, at 04:22  

  • losing: you are not getting the point mate. As jiet pointed out above...Vaughan might not have known if Inzy was in the crease to begin with(and stepped out as evasive action). In that case Vaughan was right to appeal. Haven't you seen batsmen play the shot to forward shotleg and the fielder flicking it on to the stumps? It was the on-field umpires' duty to ascertain the cause of Inzy leaving the crease.

    By Blogger worma, at 04:23  

  • worma....exactly

    ...since inzi had been inside the crease when Harmy threw the ball he should have been not out as it would have meant that he went out of the crease in an atteempt to avoid injury.

    however if inzi was outside the crease when harmy attempted the runout, he would have been out as per rules

    By Blogger Jiet, at 04:23  

  • naved just bowled an incredible off-spinning slow one from the back of his hand in the same action .. amazing bowler this guy is developing into.

    By Blogger losing now, at 04:23  

  • losing now,
    I never enjoy being a cynic, but the more punishment I see meted out by match referees, the more I believe punishment for violating the "spirit of cricket" laws applies only to non-goras. The goras, of course, are just playing good hard-nosed competitive cricket. Sheesh...

    By Blogger Sahir, at 04:25  

  • anyone here from chennai ? how is the weather holding up there ? how much of a threat to the game tomorrow ?

    By Blogger GK, at 04:26  

  • Wow did anybody notice that first delivery from Afridi swing? Was that actually drift or more reverse swing? It actually came in a considerable amount before pitching and straightening. Would be a handy delivery to repeat, if he could.

    By Blogger Sahir, at 04:27  

  • sahir..Afridi..swing?!!..is he bowling pace? Or was it spin and 'drift' ?

    By Blogger worma, at 04:28  

  • hmmm ... getting afridi in a good move the type of bowler that can trouble bell early ... the slider can get him lbw

    By Blogger GK, at 04:29  

  • worma: i agree that it is Hair's fault man. No question. Vaughn (unless he was fielding in the outfield, which i suspect he was not) would have clearly seen that it was a frustration throw from harmy. Inzy was clearly inside the crease and jumped to avoid being hurt. I do not think - he is as clean as you are making him out to be ...so that he can hide behind the umpire's error. I know present day cricket is about gamesmanship..but we are seeing a very rapid decline in standards...and unfortunately it is the Aussies/English/NZ/SFans who are brining the decline as opposed to the "meek" Indians ;-)

    By Blogger losing now, at 04:29  

  • worma,
    It was drift-- but the amount of drift was incredible. Made me question whether the ball actually reversed considering the pace at which he bowls his spiiners and the very abrasive nature of the surface.

    By Blogger Sahir, at 04:31  

  • losing: I don't know where Vaughan was fielding..but yes, if he was in a position to judge what exactly happened at Inzy's crease...then he's to blame, but only on moral ground (and he can be punished for that, but Inzy's decision is purely for ump to make, and blame).

    But do remember that 'frustration throw' or not, if Inzy stepped out while playing the shot, he's out by all accounts. But since I don't know what happened, having not watched it, so let me shut up on this one ;-)

    By Blogger worma, at 04:31  

  • to the guys drooling over Afridi's bowling

    I just saw the replay. This is waht happened...

    The ball swung one way and sped in the air and reversed only to kick up of a good length and sharply spin back the other way and orbit the batsman twice before hitting the stumps...

    yeah....useful ball indeed.

    By Blogger Jiet, at 04:31  

  • "...and unfortunately it is the Aussies/English/NZ/SFans who are brining the decline as opposed to the "meek" Indians ;-) "

    Hmmm.. the biggest decline is caused by the lankans.. nothing hurts more than the legendary chucker chuckletharan cheating the whole world infront of the so called umpires..
    that is height if cheating..

    By Blogger idli vade, at 04:32  

  • sahir: drift is actually a phenomenon similar to swing(or rather reverse swing) but caused by the revvs on the ball...not sure if the roughness of ball helps, but understandable. Anyone knows?

    By Blogger worma, at 04:33  

  • Rana putting on a slower ball clinic here

    By Blogger Sahir, at 04:33  

  • losing...

    inzi had his back foot just inside the line...it was not have been clear to Vuaghan unless he was at square leg or point

    By Blogger Jiet, at 04:34  

  • sahir: you dont need to convince me about ICC's/umpires racism. Even in the B'lore game, Nel was constantly needling GG and when he hit him for 2 incredible 4s..and gave a stare back..Nel went crying to harper and the first thing the ump did was 'asked GG to smile'. Who started the issue? My point always is..just because there is one wrong, we can allow another one to happen. we gotta keep raising the issue and make noise so that it gets fixed. I hate JD, but in this aspect i like what he has done to raise the profile of Asian cricket

    By Blogger losing now, at 04:34  

  • Does Kamran Akmal's yelps remind anybody else of Parthiv Patel?

    By Blogger Sahir, at 04:35  

  • JD did something to raise the profile of Asian Cricket? I dont remember ?
    I think u r referring to allowing some of the asian chuckers to bowl..

    By Blogger idli vade, at 04:37  

  • worma: see the highlights..when u get a chance. then we will discuss.

    By Blogger losing now, at 04:37  

  • Dalmiya ruined cricket by allowing asian chuckers to go on till they retire or die

    By Blogger idli vade, at 04:39  

  • ppl
    btw i "expected" GG to be punished after nel abused him yesterday. in fact i also expected nel to be given an award. that didn't happen ?

    By Blogger GK, at 04:40  

  • losing: sure..will do.

    By Blogger worma, at 04:40  

  • gk,
    LOL!
    Sad thing is, you wouldn't be too surprised if that did actually happen.

    By Blogger Sahir, at 04:41  

  • sahir
    in fact im surprised it didnt happen

    By Blogger GK, at 04:42  

  • i think there never was a match in which nel didnt sledge..
    wonder how he gets away withought getting punished..

    By Blogger idli vade, at 04:42  

  • st: JD's support of Indian cricketers during the Mike Denness affair. Do you think, 30 years ago, it would have been possible. The Chinnaswamys would have 'laid prostrate' to the English 'chiefs' at the ICC.

    By Blogger losing now, at 04:43  

  • gk: LOL!!

    By Blogger losing now, at 04:44  

  • This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    By Blogger Arunabh, at 04:44  

  • st gilly,
    "i think there never was a match in which nel didnt sledge..
    wonder how he gets away withought getting punished.. "

    He is gora...

    By Blogger Sahir, at 04:45  

  • sambit gets stuck into Taufel and Hair (and botham) --

    here

    and also, a picture is worth a thousand blogs--

    here

    By Blogger Arunabh, at 04:48  

  • Arunabh: Thanks for the post. Looks like Sambit is reading these posts.. "two wrongs do not make a right". That is MY LINE ;-)

    By Blogger losing now, at 04:49  

  • In fact, Nel is constantly encouraged to sledge by the RSA team management. He, along with Graeme Smith need to both be suspended. Furthermore, don't Indian cricketers always get warned not to charge the umpire in an appeal? Anybody notice the way Smith and Ponting appeal. Yesterday, Smith charged from slip to past the stumps appealing. Ponting downright gets into a debate with the umpire over the decision. I can only imagine what would happen if Ganguly or Inzi ever did such a thing-- you'd certainly see a long suspension.

    By Blogger Sahir, at 04:49  

  • Arunabh: The comment about Botham is right. As a matter of fact, Sanjay Manjrekar during live comm, immediately mentioned the law and Botham incredulously said "you learn something new each day". Ha ha ha!

    By Blogger losing now, at 04:51  

  • arunab: thx..good article by Sambit. And reading that Woolmer was waiting at the sidelines angrily...I think we will hear more of this matter later in the evening and tomorrow, it hasn't ended yet.

    By Blogger worma, at 04:53  

  • sahir: why are the so-called 'spineless' indian journos doing the press conferences not asking this q to the match referee.

    By Blogger losing now, at 04:54  

  • yeah...Woolmer is not one to keep quiet, even when he should be. Although, in this situation, he'd be completely justified in throwing a fit.

    By Blogger Sahir, at 04:55  

  • losing: none of the match officials is supposed to interact with the press, as far as I know.

    By Blogger worma, at 04:56  

  • losing now,
    I firmly believe it has to do with a "kiss the gora's ass" mentality that is seemingly so hard to be rid of. Be completely uncritical of the gora cricketers, and when it comes to your own cricketers, crucify them whenever the slightest opportunity presents itself, and sometimes, even when it does not.

    By Blogger Sahir, at 04:59  

  • worma: well when there is a controversy or issue..are they not supposed to address the media. If that is the policy, i think it is wrong and not spectator friendly. The fans of the game deserve that from the administrators

    By Blogger losing now, at 04:59  

  • worma/Sahir :I cant wait to hear from Woolmer. The umpiring and gamesmanship has been appalling in this game.

    By Blogger losing now, at 05:00  

  • guys,
    andy nel has persistently appealed and sledged like a zombie throughout his career. he was once offered money by jennings to try and hit donald in their domestic level games. he, at that popint apparently began crying on seeing his hero flat on the ground. now if he has so much ympathy he shouldnt have been aiming at donalds nogin to begin with. also i feel he gets away withh it thanks to his sly smile. comes across as the " oh i am so nice. see i even smile when i beat the batsmen with a good ball. its just when my shit balls get canned that i throw a little hissy fit and remind the batsmen of the romps he has had with his mom etc.."
    what a fart faced monkey he is. please somebody in the indian team. i have an appeal. please please pretty please thrash him. just once. say 70 runs in 10 overs? that will make me happy?
    anyone here think that might be a bad idea?

    By Blogger K-Slice, at 05:02  

  • sahir: agree, as they say, 'angrez chale gaye aur inko chod gaye'. Well, i think it will change soon...as those 'older' journos slowly retire and some of the aggressive ones like Prem develop more clout.

    By Blogger losing now, at 05:02  

  • Kaneria getting turn!

    By Blogger losing now, at 05:06  

  • lol k-slice :)

    By Blogger idli vade, at 05:13  

  • Response to various comments.

    The Inzy dismissal was clearly an error. Vaughan couldn't possibly have known that Inzy was in his crease before the throw, Inzy was barely over the line. I think the error is the third umpire's error. It was a close call - Hair referred - it needed two elements of line call and a knowledge of the laws by the 3rd umpire. Was Inzy behind the line in the first place (yes he was), was he behind the line when the stumps were broken (no he wasn't) - evasive action was being taken, not an attempted run, therefore not out. 3rd umpire error. Don't blame Hair. Don't blame Vaughan.

    I thought both disputed catches looked legit. Bell loosened his grip on the ball momentarily but you can see clearly from the replay that the ball did not descend during that moment, therefore could not have been grounded.

    The Trescothick catch also looked fine to me. In 2003 Channel 4 did many experiments that showed that catches viewed from that sort of camera angle can look a little dodgy when in fact they are completely clean. Tres's catch today, in my view, did not even look dodgy - the ball enters Tres's hand well above his verically pointing figers - the judder you see is the reflex of the fingers catching the ball, not the ball hitting the ground. You experts on the laws of physics need to concentrate more on optics!!

    To call any of this cheating is back to the realms of shoulder chips, to which I have alluded elsewhere. Any team anywhere would have behaved similarly.

    Rana Naved is a much improved player - he made mincemeat of Middlesex this year at Lord's with both bat and ball. His batting looks poor against hostile pace bowling - but he looks solid and dangerous against all other forms of bowling. His bowling is much improved in the last year or so and I would rate him higher than Shabbir however many degrees of flexion Shabbir might be using.

    England still have an outside chance in this match, but with 2 down it really is an outside chance. I think England can afford to lose no more than one or two more wickets until the second new ball. England need a decent 1st innings lead to stand a good chance, although near parity still would give them an outside chance.

    I'll remind you all of two matches.

    Oval 2003. SA 484, England 604/9 dec (after being 78/2), SA 229, England 110/1 - win by 9 wickets. No world class spinners in that game though.

    Karatchi 2000. Pakistan 405, England 388, Pakistan 158, England 176/4 win by 6 wickets (seeing off Saqlain in his prime plus undercooked Kaneria and Afridi).

    Odds against, I grant you, but it ain't over till it's over.

    By Blogger Ged, at 05:19  

  • losing,worma: Sambit's written the article well. I have often thought that cricinfo was gutless with their reporting -- hopefully this is a sign of change (they should hire prem,or at least invite him to Wicket-to-Wicket, Amit Varma are you reading this?)

    As far as Nel is concerned: An ardent plea to all Chennai dwellers. Please try and go to the Match, and if you do, please bring banners with Nel-bashing-ammo.

    All this is, of course, if the match happens. It seems the rain in Chennia is set to last a week.

    By Blogger Arunabh, at 05:20  

  • Good day everyone..

    here is what I cam across on the guardian web site.. they have a over by over commentary of the england-Pak game

    WICKET! Inzamam-ul-Haq run out (Harmison) 109 (369-6) Well, that really is incredible! Inzamam defends the ball back to Harmison, who hurls the ball at the stumps and scores a direct hit. At first Inzy looks as if he's in his crease, but replays reveal that his back foot lifted at precisely the moment the ball hit the wicket. And with his front foot in front of the line, the third umpire gives him out after several replays! That really is a stupid way to lose a wicket. What a gift for England.

    96th over: Pakistan 373-6 (Akmal 8, Naved 4) The only question about that dismissal is: was Inzamam taking evasive action to avoid Harmison's throw? If he was, then he should not have been given out (see Law 38). I think Inzy was unlucky there: his back foot was definitely raised because he flinched as a result of Harmison's throw. Technically, that was not out, as Rana Naved-ul-Hasan tickles Harmison fine for four.

    By Blogger galli_cricket, at 05:22  

  • meanwhile tresco and bell putting together a good stand

    By Blogger GK, at 05:22  

  • wow ...what is that??

    By Blogger Jiet, at 05:29  

  • What's going on? Explosion?

    By Blogger Sahir, at 05:29  

  • omigod!!

    this is NOT good...looks like an explosive just went off.

    By Blogger Jiet, at 05:30  

  • Gotta get outta there immediately

    By Blogger Sahir, at 05:30  

  • Explosion!! Wow.

    By Blogger losing now, at 05:30  

  • not good for Pak cricket!

    By Blogger losing now, at 05:31  

  • what happened ?

    By Blogger GK, at 05:31  

  • Will play continue?

    By Blogger Sahir, at 05:32  

  • was it big ?

    By Blogger GK, at 05:32  

  • lol...the commentator said that it shook the box. Very loud report...gas tank exploded it seems

    By Blogger Jiet, at 05:33  

  • gas tank?

    By Blogger losing now, at 05:33  

  • A gas tank blew up. BUT, was it deliberately planted?

    By Blogger Sahir, at 05:33  

  • pepsi!

    By Blogger losing now, at 05:33  

  • I am afraid that it is not an impressive by the security....I don't understand how they could have a gas cylinder in a dangerous area.

    By Blogger Jiet, at 05:34  

  • What are gas tanks doing on the field? For all the security present, isn't that completely daft?

    By Blogger Sahir, at 05:35  

  • Ridiculous...that sounded like something out of a movie in the replay

    By Blogger Jiet, at 05:36  

  • LMAO..cricinfo thought it was "some kind of cracker"....good one!

    By Blogger Jiet, at 05:38  

  • Rameez says explosion "causing a little bit of concern to both camps"

    The Pakistani camp seemed very relaxed, even chuckling-- just another explosion

    The English on the other hand-- might be a few stains in the pants

    By Blogger Sahir, at 05:39  

  • Well...I dare say the English have had a lot more experience in this courtesy the IRA

    By Blogger Jiet, at 05:40  

  • jiet,
    The English do have plenty of experience-- not more though. But, westerners, in general, don't feel safe even when they are. Easterners feel very safe even when they aren't!

    By Blogger Sahir, at 05:42  

  • losing: sorry for late reply..no the officials are not supposed to talk to press in any case..controversy or not. Remember Dennis didn't communicate anything throughout that event.

    By Blogger worma, at 05:44  

  • sahir,
    ...illuminating.

    Gotta run now though...enjoy folks.

    By Blogger Jiet, at 05:45  

  • The Pakistani security guy claims there was nobody injured. Then what was the guy grabbing on the ground his face doing? He was clearly hurt. The security guy went on to say it was caused by a short circuit. Why is a gas cylinder anywhere near electrical wiring on the ground? Absolutely idiotic.

    By Blogger Sahir, at 05:50  

  • Sahir:

    you seem to be able to stereotype the neuroses and/or recklessness of most of the world's population. Are you absolutely sure about this? ;-)

    By Blogger Ged, at 05:52  

  • sahir: come on...you know the subcontinent arrangements! Probably some halwai in some shamiana preparing samosas for tea-time. Hey thats how the arrangements are....even in Prime Minister's parties here ;-)

    By Blogger worma, at 05:52  

  • How many consider Vaughn a liability in the lineup? I'm not entirely convinced he would still be in the side if he was not captain of a team with a great bowling lineup.

    By Blogger Sahir, at 05:53  

  • worma,
    LOL! I don't know why I keep expecting a modicum of common sense.

    By Blogger Sahir, at 05:55  

  • sahir: not a liability..but definitely under-performing for a while. Even in Ashes there were noises..then he had that splendid 160 to shut them out. Anyway if he doesnt do well on these two subcontinental tours, and if Eng also doesnt do well...I think he would go. Especially as a captain so that he doesnt become an automatic choice in the team.

    Its the same principle as in other teams...as long as they're winning some of the faultlines are hidden/ignored/carried

    By Blogger worma, at 05:56  

  • ged,
    Absolutely sure-- gospel truth, I tell you :-)

    Just an opinion, feel free to disagree

    By Blogger Sahir, at 05:56  

  • Afridi cheating now!

    By Blogger Sahir, at 05:57  

  • GONE!

    By Blogger Sahir, at 05:57  

  • Very good low take by Akmal; England in deep trouble now-- getting a serious dose of reality post-Ashes

    By Blogger Sahir, at 06:00  

  • 29th over England 95-2 (Trescothick 42, Bell 28) As Shoaib steams into bowl to Trescothick there's a loud, unidentified, bang somewhere in the ground. Immediately guards, holding machine guns, charge on to the pitch. There's briefly talk of a bomb, and the players look understandably worried, but it seems to have come from an exploding drinks cylinder. There's a 10 minute break, before play gets underway again, and both batsmen seem to have kept their concentration admirably.

    By Blogger galli_cricket, at 06:00  

  • courtesy the Guardian

    By Blogger galli_cricket, at 06:01  

  • sahir: what did Afridi do?

    By Blogger worma, at 06:03  

  • Tres dismissal - very similar low take to the Yousuf and Afridi dismissals. Same decision by the umpires. I think all three disissals are valid.

    By Blogger Ged, at 06:04  

  • Tres dismissal - very similar low take to the Yousuf and Afridi dismissals. Same decision by the umpires. I think all three disissals are valid.

    By Blogger Ged, at 06:04  

  • worma,
    Afridi quietly walked down the middle of the pitch-- good length area-- in between overs. I say walked, but it was evident he was digging his spikes in as much as he possibly could. Hair spotted it and went straight up to the pitch and visibly saw the damage done. He called Inzi over to show it to him. I would he very surprised if Afridi did not receive a severe reprimand. Unfortunately, I think he will only be fined. IMHO, such deliberate cheating demands a suspension.

    By Blogger Sahir, at 06:06  

  • ged,
    I agree that Trescothick and Afridi decisions were valid, but Yousuf's? That was completely different-- after the ball was taken, the fingers opened and there was a distinct fumble. Furthermore, the lack of conviction in Bell's appeal ought to have mandated the matter be sent to the third umpire in that situation.

    By Blogger Sahir, at 06:08  

  • ged: umm...I watched quite a few replays of Bell catch...couldnt make up my mind...to me it looked like his fingers opened up for a fraction when made contact with the ground. There wasn't a zoom available. I think it should have been referred, and I also think third ump would have given benefit of doubt to the batsman.

    Didn't see the other dismissals.

    sahir: ahh...Afridi the oversmart ;-)...he's always been like that. But I dont think it should attract suspension. Anyway ICC have their level thingy...so he will automatically be upgraded next time he attempts something

    By Blogger worma, at 06:09  

  • Afridi on to bowl now-- can he exploit the damge he created in the wicket?

    By Blogger Sahir, at 06:09  

  • sahir: re Afridi spikes - and in a situation where Pakistan really can and should win the match fair and square. And indeed to no small extent as a result of Afridi's own legitiate efforts.

    Not that such things are any more acceptable when losing teams do it!

    By Blogger Ged, at 06:10  

  • worma,
    I simply cannot let someone get away with changing the condition of the pitch with a slap on the wrist. Doing such a thing can really affect the outcome of the game. I have seen things of this nature done occasionally before, but not this overtly or extravagantly.

    By Blogger Sahir, at 06:13  

  • Bell looking comfortable out there? and hows my man kev playing?

    By Blogger galli_cricket, at 06:14  

  • bad light stops play... darn

    By Blogger galli_cricket, at 06:15  

  • yeah so don't let him get away with it. Two (or x) such moves and you suspend him. Suspension is a big thing boss...and altering the state of ball/pitch (or attempting to, coz a single step onto pitch is hardly going to change the nature of the track?) is not *that* big a deal. IMO.

    By Blogger worma, at 06:15  

  • a single step?

    He rubbed his foot in-- literally twisting his ankle back and forth in the rough

    By Blogger Sahir, at 06:17  

  • Mohammad Akram says "he's never seen a fielder do anything like this" (referring to Afridi's antics)

    By Blogger Sahir, at 06:20  

  • sahir LOL..what the heck was he thinking!!?...marking his runup or what ;-)..anyway..still not serious enough to be suspended right away. Its an *attempt* to cheat(someone still has to use that rough) unlike a false claim on a catch (if done knowingly).

    By Blogger worma, at 06:20  

  • In county cricket this year, Surrey had 8 points deducted for ball tampering as a result of being caught - warned - caught again. No-one owned up to it, although many people suspect one particular player (who I shall not name). On paper those 8 points cost Surrey relegation.

    I think that one warning "if it happens again you'll be suspended" followed by suspension if it does happen again is about right.

    By Blogger Ged, at 06:20  

  • faisalabad and controversy go together dont they esp when england is playing..

    By Blogger galli_cricket, at 06:22  

  • ged,
    Ball tampering using sweets is rampant in county cricket-- either that or the players love to have dozens of sweets.

    By Blogger Sahir, at 06:23  

  • The Surrey incident was about heavily picking at the seam, not sweets.

    And don't I remember an ODI a few years ago when India were bowling -a half-sucked sweet or lozenge was actually seen stuck to the side of the ball while Kumble was bowling?

    By Blogger Ged, at 06:28  

  • ged: ohh please....who was the player??...because there wasn't even a hint dropped in the reports emerging (atleast the ones I saw!). Since it was seam-picking....has to be one of the quicks. And has to be someone who can reverse. Umm...am I getting somewhere? ;-)

    By Blogger worma, at 06:29  

  • ged: the Indian incident was Rahul Dravid..and he was caught on camera applying the lozenge...actually it appeared he was trying to apply saliva with the lozenge still there in his mouth...and it sort of...came out. Anyway...similar case to what Bracken mentioned about the county happenings. Must be a common knowledge in cricketing circles, this trick.

    By Blogger worma, at 06:31  

  • Bicknell
    Azhar mehmood
    Ricky Clarke
    M Akram
    Sampson
    Ormand

    By Blogger galli_cricket, at 06:32  

  • ged,
    You seem to take every comment as some sort of a personal attack on English cricket; that's not how it was meant. I was not saying that nobody else has ever tampered with the ball-- every country has. However, with the advent of technology, it has greatly reduced since everything get caught. However, the new age tampering involves using "sweet saliva"-- something the camera cannot catch since it just looks like applying regular salive. But, it is mixed with a foreign substance particularly helpful in swing-friendly English conditions. The ICC needs to crack down on the number of sweets a player can have on the field. I distinctly remember Warne pulling dozens out of his socks during the Ashes (coincidnetally happens to be the team shiner of the ball).

    By Blogger Sahir, at 06:44  

  • worma,
    I believe it was Azhar Mahmood

    By Blogger Sahir, at 06:46  

  • galli-cricket: thanks for the list. The incident happened in the Surrey v Notts game this year:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/counties/4525393.stm

    So the seamers that match were Bicknell, Clarke, Ormond and Mo Akram.

    Well, Worma, as we know from this morning's broadcast, Mo Akram claims to have never seen anything like the Afridi incident in his life, so one can assume that butter wouldn't melt in his mouth. Nor would lozenges presumably. And nor would a quarter seam ever be lifted discernably, twice in one day.

    Guess it must be one of the other three, then, or perhaps one of the fielders, or perhaps that batch of Duke balls had dodgy seams.

    By Blogger Ged, at 06:52  

  • hmm..not Mohd Akram?

    By Blogger worma, at 06:53  

  • http://us.rediff.com/cricket/2005/nov/21gang.htm?q=tp&file=.htm

    dont shoot the messenger please if you dont like the message

    By Blogger galli_cricket, at 06:54  

  • LOL ged. My take was also Akram...if only because he got bucketful of wickets. Ok not enough grounds...still..

    and don't saying nothing to those duke balls man...those are all made in India ;-)

    By Blogger worma, at 06:55  

  • no worries ged...

    By Blogger galli_cricket, at 06:55  

  • Duke balls are made in India? I thought we manufactured the SG balls... maybe I am wrong

    By Blogger galli_cricket, at 06:56  

  • galli_cricket: from what I read...almost all cricket equipment is made in India :-)..dont remember specifically about duke balls, so can be wrong..and yes except the kookaburra balls in Pak, I think those are made there only.

    By Blogger worma, at 06:58  

  • galli_cricket,
    We manufacture both, but use SG balls in India.

    By Blogger Sahir, at 06:59  

  • Mohammad Akram-- gotta love how inncently he played the incident. Initially he claimed he was not sure what Afridi was trying to do. Yeah, right, what do you think he was trying to do rubbing his foot in the rough?

    By Blogger Sahir, at 07:02  

  • Worma.. is it possible to create an open thread at the end of your working day so that all issues cricket can be discussed ? Between the time of your last update and Ruchirs first update, there are issues that crop up which cannot be categorised in any of the existing threads.. And so the discussion becomes convoluted and does not pertain to the thread after a while.. also becomes huge and difficult to load...

    I hope I am not asking for much

    By Blogger galli_cricket, at 07:03  

  • Mo Akram most certainly did not get bucketsful of wickets in the match in question. Notts scored 692/7 dec winning by an inningsand, Akram 1/155.

    I was at the crucial first day of the Surrey v Middlesex relegation cliffhanger and the umpires inspected the ball about every 10 minutes or so, something I ahve never seen before in County cricket.

    Here is a link to Mo Akram's Wikipedia article BTW, an interesting piece for a "butter wouldn't melt" TV summariser.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Akram

    sahir: certainly don't take comments personally or as an attack on England - merely seek to balance the debate. It would be realy hard to place firm rules around sweets, hair care products, sun screens, material in trousers etc. etc. - all items that have been debated at one time or another as having a significant effect on swing/shine/etc.

    By Blogger Ged, at 07:07  

  • thanks for the link ged.. pretty enlightening... ball tampering while playing for sussex.. interesting..

    By Blogger galli_cricket, at 07:10  

  • galli_cricket: no mate...not asking to much :-)...actually this thread was more of an open thread in that sense only. Not just for Eng match.

    But I can do this more often, if thats what you mean.

    ged: no I didn't mean that match...I meant he got lots of wkts in the season in general. Didn't he get 8 wkts in an innings in some match?

    By Blogger worma, at 07:10  

  • would much appreciate it if you did Worma..

    By Blogger galli_cricket, at 07:13  

  • galli: cool..will do

    By Blogger worma, at 07:15  

  • btw.. no updates on the pup thread...btw did u read the new martin johnson article on the telegraph website (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/main.jhtml?xml=/sport/2005/11/21/scjohn21.xml&sSheet=/sport/2005/11/21/ixsporttop.html)

    By Blogger galli_cricket, at 07:15  

  • what pup thread?

    By Blogger worma, at 07:17  

  • Mo Akram's best 2005 CC haul was 5-41 according to Cricinfo. 43 CC wickets at c35 each, strike rate c51. Ordinary season I would say. I would see his England hopes as fanciful, with due respect to him.

    By Blogger Ged, at 07:20  

  • Here's a parting thought from me, or more of a philosophical question often asked:
    Is it cheating if you don't get caught?

    I mean we've all sone something or another in our lives, or is it just me? :-)

    By Blogger Sahir, at 07:20  

  • the thread on Miechal Clarke being dropped from the Aussie squad.. believe his nick name is Pup

    By Blogger galli_cricket, at 07:21  

  • hmm..must be thinking of someone else then. Maybe Rana had an 8 wkt haul?..maybe no-one did ;-)

    gall: nice article by Johnson. thx

    By Blogger worma, at 07:22  

  • ohh *that* thread...hmm...well it seems everyone was expecting it so it doesnt evoke much response :-)

    By Blogger worma, at 07:22  

  • ged,
    Plus, Mohammad "no, I'm not Wasim" Akram has been tried and tested in interantional cricket during his prime. He was a colossal failure:
    9 tests- average 50.52
    23 ODIs- average 41.57

    By Blogger Sahir, at 07:24  

  • sahir: that sounds like a variation of the 'tree in the forest' quote :-))

    By Blogger worma, at 07:24  

  • worma,
    I remember Rana with an 8 wicket haul

    By Blogger Sahir, at 07:24  

  • worma,
    yeah... what are your thoughts on that?

    By Blogger Sahir, at 07:25  

  • thoughts on tree and forest?...oooh...its too early in the day...monday morning...lemme get back to you in a better frame of mind :-))

    By Blogger worma, at 07:27  

  • anytime mate...

    ganguly may/may not get back into the test team. may captain/may not captain.
    The youngest bloke in the aussue side gets dropped.. and no, dont call the aussies "Dad's Army"
    Pakistan and England at faisalabad and more controversies on day 2.
    ECB snubs the BCCI who snubs back....


    to summarize.. alls well in the cricketing world :)

    By Blogger galli_cricket, at 07:30  

  • galli cricket,
    Yes, all we need now is some more news about political unrest in Zimbabwe and contractual problems in the West Indies. :-)

    By Blogger Sahir, at 07:37  

  • ..and fitness problems with Nz squad

    By Blogger worma, at 07:40  

  • Sahir.. sorry mate but looks like the contractual problems in the west indies is either resolved/about to be resolved... and those damn zims have signed new player contracts.. and the kiwis will send the all blacks on the field the next time they play...

    did I say all was well in the cricketing wrld :(

    By Blogger galli_cricket, at 07:43  

  • Free pepsi distributd at faisalabad.. http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/pakveng/content/story/226683.html

    By Blogger galli_cricket, at 07:46  

  • st gilly bowled warney, Dalmia may not be involved in this one but the great Aussie chucker is thriving too...how about Brett Lee??

    By Blogger Caught & Bowled, at 10:35  

  • Sahir/Losing now, our great journo Sir Prem also insists that we must refer to Viv Richards, Richard Hadlee, Gary Sobers etc. as "Sir'' whoever, the logic being that its a universally accepted convention and more importantly, if we dont do so, its impolite. WOW!! So if I mention their names without the Sir, I am impolite and they are insulted!! What did one of you call this ?? -- Gora ass licking mentality?? Come one, its an universally accepted convention so we Indians are also bound by it......never mind if these same Sirs screwed us for 200 years , looted out our country, divided it in parts and left us with the problems we still have to deal with.

    By Blogger Caught & Bowled, at 13:20  

Post a Comment

<< Home