.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.

posted by worma at 3:05 AM

61 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 Gaurav, 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 Gaurav, at 03:22  

  • 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 Gaurav, at 03:29  

  • 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 Gaurav, 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 Tyagi, 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 Gaurav, 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 Gaurav, at 03:46  

  • 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  

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

    By Blogger Gaurav, 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 Gaurav, at 03:53  

  • 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 Gaurav, at 03:56  

  • 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 Tyagi, at 03:59  

  • 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 Tyagi, at 04:01  

  • 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 Gaurav, at 04:03  

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

    By Blogger Gaurav, at 04:09  

  • 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 Gaurav, at 04:11  

  • sorry that last comment was addressed to sgbw not losing

    By Blogger Gaurav, 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 Gaurav, 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 Gaurav, at 04:15  

  • 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  

  • 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  

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

    By Blogger Gaurav, at 04:26  

  • 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 Gaurav, at 04:29  

  • 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  

  • 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  

  • 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 Gaurav, at 04:40  

  • losing: sure..will do.

    By Blogger worma, at 04:40  

  • sahir
    in fact im surprised it didnt happen

    By Blogger Gaurav, at 04:42  

  • 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  

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

    By Blogger worma, at 04:56  

  • meanwhile tresco and bell putting together a good stand

    By Blogger Gaurav, at 05:22  

  • what happened ?

    By Blogger Gaurav, at 05:31  

  • was it big ?

    By Blogger Gaurav, at 05:32  

  • 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: 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  

  • 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  

  • sahir: what did Afridi do?

    By Blogger worma, at 06:03  

  • 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  

  • 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  

  • 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  

  • 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  

  • hmm..not Mohd Akram?

    By Blogger worma, at 06:53  

  • 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  

  • 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: 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  

  • galli: cool..will do

    By Blogger worma, at 07:15  

  • what pup thread?

    By Blogger worma, at 07:17  

  • 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  

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

    By Blogger worma, at 07:24  

  • 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  

  • ..and fitness problems with Nz squad

    By Blogger worma, at 07:40  

Post a Comment

<< Home