[thefreak]

Ah! Dhoni doesn't know anything about cricket does he? All the bulla that he gave about seniors is unjustified. And so too are the other blokes who write articles in major newspapers/magazines/websites.

Keeping wickets important was crucial mate. Refer McLarens post above.

In the last match when the seniors got out cheaply (Sachin made 41) what did the famed youngsters do? Uthappa 0 - Knock him off the team - he failed in a match and it is not allowed by the demanding populace of India. Gambhir - 6 - second consecutive failure and umpteenth missed opportunity - send him to ICL cancel contract with BCCI. Rohit Sharma - Out of the team young man. That is not the way to play the game or choose the team (IMHO)

[rks]

Originally Posted by thefreak

Ah! Dhoni doesn't know anything about cricket does he? All the bulla that he gave about seniors is unjustified. And so too are the other blokes who write articles in major newspapers/magazines/websites.

Keeping wickets important was crucial mate. Refer McLarens post above.

Dhoni knows his cricket very well and he knows a thing or two about diplomacy and playing politics.

Keeping wickets in hand is *always* important. What is being missed here is that those who score slowly to keep wickets in hand are also responsible for accelerating the run rate; otherwise the effect on the incoming, unset batsmen is demoralizing, given that many overs have already been played out at a slow run rate and they need to accelerate without any time to play themselves in. If they get out in that situation, they will get the blame while Sachin and Saurav will still get praise for their slow batting. Totally illogical.

[mclaren1885]

Originally Posted by rks

Many batsmen can play the defensive role that Sachin and Saurav are playing and you don't need "seniors" for that purpose.

I would not quite agree on this one. If you look at the world over, most inexperienced batsmen or those who are known to play big shots seeing that the ball is swinging so much and they are not being able to connect, out of sheer frustration swing the bat at every ball & most often than not get out. As I said earlier, after the blues of the first 10 overs I have seen most batsmen throw their wicket away very soon, which is what Sachin didn't. I think this is where an uncluttered mind & experience comes in. You get a hang of your head over your emotions/frustration.

The logic of keeping wickets in hand to justify slow scoring only makes sense if the set batsmen accelerate. But that doesn't happen with Sachin and Saurav.

I don't think we can quite generalize it like this. In a game not all things go as planned. Its not everytime that you see a set batsmen go onto make a century. If not Inzi would have had 83 more 100's to his account, Rahul would have had 81 100's & Sachin would have had 84 more to his total.

In a game, you can FALTER or lose concentration and your wicket. Much like what happened with Yuvraj as well yesterday (but why aren't fingers pointing at him?). And maybe the match at Cochin as well. He was well set & could have easily upped the ante yesterday but he got out at an untimely moment (as he did at Cochin as well). Same holds true for Sachin & Saurav as well. Saurav's dismissal was quite unlucky. Most times such catches bobble out or they just stick in the gloves. Today it got sucked into the gloves, on another day it would have kissed the edge of the gloves and rocketed to the fence.

After all the lives that Sachin got, the only he seemed to get out is in the form of run out . LBW decisions were going against the bowlers, caught behinds were being turned down too, heck if someone managed a catch of his bat I bet umpires would have signalled a no ball as well the way he was going. Sadly towards the end of that innings I saw some brilliant shots being played. But, he ran himself out. Sadly, such things happen. Remember he got horrendous decisions in England when he was set to wallop the bowlers? No one said anything back then.

Logicaly it is the set batsmen who are expected and better-suited to accelerate (thereby justifying their slow start)

Not a thumb rule again. I'll tell you why? Once you take the danger off the new swinging ball, the other batsmen can come and free their arms (fearlessly). Because they know how the pitch behaves after watching them on TV. Much like what Robin & Dhoni did in the last match. Had they come in at around the 10-15 overs just imagine what might have happened? The way they would have batted would have been entirely different. So there are two sides to this coin. Mostly its dependent on luck & playing conditions.

[normally_crazy]

Consider the same scenario *IF* Aussies had batted first and got off to the same start that we got - what score would they have finished with ?

291 or 350 ?

[mclaren1885]

There is a certain amount of truth in what Tony Greg says in this. Forget the part where he thinks that Australia will not loose to India. What is more important to note is that he mentions WHY Indians are "likely" not to beat them. Interesting audio clip.

Cricinfo - 'The challenge is to stretch Australia'

[mclaren1885]

Originally Posted by normally_crazy

Consider the same scenario *IF* Aussies had batted first and got off to the same start that we got - what score would they have finished with ?

291 or 350 ?

Good question. But like I mentioned before most of the Australian batsmen would have tried to "hit" their way out of and in the process lost some quick wickets. But still I think the game is played by two sides. And a "lot" would depend on "how" we bowled in the middle & death overs. The question about how much the Aussies would have scored would also depend on how well we bowled. Like I mentioned before if it is anything then its our bowling that has let us down in the prior 3 matches. So I think the Aussie would scored more because of "our bad bowling". Not so necessarily because they have a better batting line-up thats consistent.

[khaadu75]

Originally Posted by rks

Dhoni knows his cricket very well and he knows a thing or two about diplomacy and playing politics.

Keeping wickets in hand is *always* important. What is being missed here is that those who score slowly to keep wickets in hand are also responsible for accelerating the run rate; otherwise the effect on the incoming, unset batsmen is demoralizing, given that many overs have already been played out at a slow run rate and they need to accelerate without any time to play themselves in. If they get out in that situation, they will get the blame while Sachin and Saurav will still get praise for their slow batting. Totally illogical.

U ever played any form of sport ever .... do you understand what happens iout there is very different to what you and me perceive it as or do you have the habit of mouthing of from what you read in magazines and apply that funda to the real matches ???

rks @ at times you really seem to baffle half this forum with your comments ... nothing wrong as you have the right to post as much as we do but somehow your posts wouldn't make sense to someone who has played the game in real life . Pressure is something that can turn the strongest into the weakest , and Brett Lee's 6 hitting capabilities is known but that doesn't mean he hits them everytime he walks in , nor does it mean that every teams opener has to go out and get 50 in 30 ***** . You need to realise that they are the ones in the middle and know what shoudl be done and what shudn't be done . And I had posted before even Dhoni made the remarks about the seniors and said that the openers did well not to lose any wickets when the ball was SWINGING and the bounce was uneven . And don't start comparing India with Aus , for eg Aus were 20/3 and went on to mkae 300+ in the previous game and stuff because every team has its own strengths and weaknesses and maybe Indians can't handle coming out of a 20/3 situation -- but that doesn't classify them as a bad team .

Another point where seniors came to Dhoni's help was in getting Gilchrist out . I dunno how many of you noticed but it was Ganguly who said something to Dhoni and the bowler -- Dhoni plants Zaheer on the fence - 1st ball after that move Gilli sends the ball right into Zaheers hands . Experience does matter after all !!!

The other thing is that you just anti the seniors in the team ... due to some crazy reasoning of yours !!!

[finneyp]

Thanks to the good & cautious start by the proven openers (Sachin & Sourav), India managed to score a competitive total & won the match!

Those who question the ability of seniors, they either don't know anything about Cricket or they don't value experience in their lives!

If the T20 team were pitted against the Aussies, am sure Aussies would have shamelessly thrashed India by 7-0!

[mclaren1885]

Originally Posted by khaadu75

Another point where seniors came to Dhoni's help was in getting Gilchrist out . I dunno how many of you noticed but it was Ganguly who said something to Dhoni and the bowler -- Dhoni plants Zaheer on the fence - 1st ball after that move Gilli sends the ball right into Zaheers hands . Experience does matter after all !!!

I already pointed this out. I think you were too lazy to read up on it mountain boy . Infact, Ganguly didn't "tell". It was more like threatening Dhoni to put the fielder out there. He seemed mighty disappointed when Dhoni said no, but that look on Ganguly's face might have just made him do it. Thankfully for the team it WORKED of the very next ball. Like I said this is where experience matters.

Ponting has gone on record & announced that they have ways to get the fab 3 out because they have played a lot against them. Sadly, same applies to the Indian's as well. But is Dhoni willing to listen to some of these experienced players is the question. But after that Gilly incident I am sure he will .

[normally_crazy]

Originally Posted by khaadu75

And don't start comparing India with Aus , for eg Aus were 20/3 and went on to mkae 300+ in the previous game and stuff because every team has its own strengths and weaknesses and maybe Indians can't handle coming out of a 20/3 situation -- but that doesn't classify them as a bad team .

Why can't we compare them to the Aussies ? Infact the board and the team are aiming to be like or maybe even better Australia to be called as World Champions !

Thats a confusing statement Khaadu.

[khaadu75]

Originally Posted by normally_crazy

Why can't we compare them to the Aussies ? Infact the board and the team are aiming to be like or maybe even better Australia to be called as World Champions !

Thats a confusing statement Khaadu.

NC , each team has its own strengths and weaknesses and maybe we have to accept that after early set backs we may not have it in us to post huge totals regularly . Our strength lies in keeping wickets and then hitting big shots in the last 20 overs ( T20 champs afterall ) .

Nothing confusing in that .... or is there ?

[mclaren1885]

Originally Posted by normally_crazy

Why can't we compare them to the Aussies?

Another simple question with another simple answer. Because:

1. We are not as professional as the Aussies.
2. Our selection process is not as transparent as the Aussies.
3. We are not as consistent as the Aussies.
4. Our players cannot play as free as the Aussies because of the added burden from fans around the country. Not to mention the media.
5. Because the state of the game at the root levels is not as good as the Aussies.
6. Because unlike the Aussies we don't "execute" our plans as well or as consistently.

[normally_crazy]

Originally Posted by khaadu75

Our strength lies in keeping wickets and then hitting big shots in the last 20 overs ( T20 champs afterall ) .

Nothing confusing in that .... or is there ?

Suppose Aussies had the same cautious start that we had yesterday - would they have finished at 291 or 340+ ?

[khaadu75]

Originally Posted by normally_crazy

Suppose Aussies had the same cautious start that we had yesterday - would they have finished at 291 or 340+ ?

Neither ... they would have been around the 300 mark !!

[mclaren1885]

There is another way to look at this. Once you get a quick start or a big score you normally tend to get complacent & in the process lose the match. I can certainly think of cases like the Natwest Trophy final, Ind-Pak QF 1996 WC, this match, world record chasing match between Aus-SA, match between Aus-NZ where NZ chased and won a target of 350 set by Aus, in the previous match NZ chased a total 336 and won again.

The trend here is either the team batting first were over-confident that they had enough score or the team batting second had got a blazing start which made them feel they WILL win the match. Sadly, it turned the other way for them. Like I mentioned earlier, complacency, over-confidence, with some bad luck, timely striking of opposition batsmen/bowlers/fielders plays a major factor in such losses as well.