3RD TEST EG + UMPIRES V INDIA

[jackpot jim]

MAL, U Cant winum all. Just accept Defeat in this debate Graciously and move on.

I concede defeat until the next gutless skipper declares 500 in front

When a team makes 500 batting last I will start a apology post

Its been done 13 times in 1st class cricket, a few examples below.

Sth Australia V Queensland at Adelaide Oval (1991-92) 6/506 WON.
Central Province v Southern Province at Kandy (2003-4) 9/513 WON
England v Sth Africa at Durban (1938-39) 5/654 chasing696 Match Drawn.

[jackpot jim]

AS HAS BEEN pointed out MAL

India had led the series going into the final test, all they needed was a draw - they got what they want and winners are

if England were any good they would have ATTACKED ATTACKED ATTACKED

Exactly Right mt79. What a PATHETIC Effort by England in the 3rd Test. With the Series on the Line, England were satisfied with a Draw When a Win should have been their only Aim. Another example why England will NEVER be No 1 Rated Test team again. Whats the Difference losing the series 0-1 or 0-2??? A loss is a Loss.
On the last Day, England had a chance to show the cricketing world that they would follow in the footsteps of Australias Game strtedgy of ATTACK, ATTACK, ATTACK, Playing for a Win at all Times and would Rather Lose Tests than Playing for a Draw But NO, England were WEAK AS PISS and were content to play out a Boring Draw and more content looking after their averages.

[mal]

MAL, U Cant winum all. Just accept Defeat in this debate Graciously and move on.

I concede defeat until the next gutless skipper declares 500 in front

When a team makes 500 batting last I will start a apology post

Its been done 13 times in 1st class cricket, a few examples below.

Sth Australia V Queensland at Adelaide Oval (1991-92) 6/506 WON.
Central Province v Southern Province at Kandy (2003-4) 9/513 WON
England v Sth Africa at Durban (1938-39) 5/654 chasing696 Match Drawn.

Very good Jackpot Jim
Can you list all the teams that were set 450 or greater in TEST matches that didnt make the runs ?

[Rik E Boy]

This test was boring as bat shit. India weren't interested in winning from the start and England didn't have the attack to foce the win anyhow. The umpiring was bogus and the deck was a road. A forgettable match all round.

In the wash up England were bloody unlucky not to win that Lords match but as Vaughan pointed out, they were outplayed in the last two test matches. You need your best attack to beat India, even away. This is especially the case on flat decks.

When India comes to Australia we need to prepare bouncy tracks because it is twenty wickets that wins test matches, not 1700 runs. We don't have Warney and McGrath to make roads talk anymore and home tracks will be crucial in this next chapter in Australian cricket history.

regards,

REB

[Rik E Boy]

Exactly Right mt79. What a PATHETIC Effort by England in the 3rd Test. With the Series on the Line, England were satisfied with a Draw When a Win should have been their only Aim. Another example why England will NEVER be No 1 Rated Test team again. Whats the Difference losing the series 0-1 or 0-2??? A loss is a Loss.
On the last Day, England had a chance to show the cricketing world that they would follow in the footsteps of Australias Game strtedgy of ATTACK, ATTACK, ATTACK, Playing for a Win at all Times and would Rather Lose Tests than Playing for a Draw But NO, England were WEAK AS PISS and were content to play out a Boring Draw and more content looking after their averages.

Jimbo. How TF are you supposed to win a test match without Harmison, Hoggard and Flintoff? They lost the toss and India made a zillion runs. Game over my friend. England DID attack early on and India got off to a flyer. What exactly would have done in Vaughan's shoes?

The only thing I would have thought of was maybe alter the attack but that would have made it a third string attack in a match that had to be won. It's not so easy when you are the skipper my friend.

regards,

REB

[mal]

MAY Z you have made a puzzling post
You say Indias batting line up is a very good one
Then you mention thier run sprees v EG + AU a couple of times
AND then mention both attacks were depleted

India are frontrunning batsman
They make runs in the comfort of thier home decks on flat pitches
They play well at home because the fast bowlers cant get the ball
to bounce above the stumps
Away from home they make runs on flat decks
As soon as there is PRESSURE or a deck that offers anything the batsman go missing

GANGIRLY + LAXATIVEMAN are frontrunners
DREARYVID bats for himself and is suspect away from home
SHEWAG is hit or miss
TENDULKAR is an exception, but he struggles these days away from home

We all saw how good these frontrunningfigjams were in NZ a couple of years ago
With a bit of spunk in the pitch these over-rated guys hardly got to 200 runs in the series.

FREMANTLE /SOUTH ADELAIDE/INDIA are all the same

FOR ROD ROOSTER/REB/TASSIE/JJ/ADELAIDE HAWK and others

I

W
U
Z

W
R
O
N
G

I have to apologise about my comment on Dravid
He is not suspect away from home, he actually has performed
as well if not better away from home and is a very fine batsman
He MIGHT be the only player in history to have made a century
against all the 10 test playing nations
BUT
The 12 off 96 balls is still a contentious issue in my opinion

Still think they as a team are flat track superstars

As for EG yep they should have attacked 100% and hoped for the best
JJ /MT79 might have been joking but perhaps as pointed out why
not be ALLOUT aggressive

[RustyCage]

Exactly Right mt79. What a PATHETIC Effort by England in the 3rd Test. With the Series on the Line, England were satisfied with a Draw When a Win should have been their only Aim. Another example why England will NEVER be No 1 Rated Test team again. Whats the Difference losing the series 0-1 or 0-2??? A loss is a Loss.
On the last Day, England had a chance to show the cricketing world that they would follow in the footsteps of Australias Game strtedgy of ATTACK, ATTACK, ATTACK, Playing for a Win at all Times and would Rather Lose Tests than Playing for a Draw But NO, England were WEAK AS PISS and were content to play out a Boring Draw and more content looking after their averages.

Jimbo. How TF are you supposed to win a test match without Harmison, Hoggard and Flintoff? They lost the toss and India made a zillion runs. Game over my friend. England DID attack early on and India got off to a flyer. What exactly would have done in Vaughan's shoes?

The only thing I would have thought of was maybe alter the attack but that would have made it a third string attack in a match that had to be won. It's not so easy when you are the skipper my friend.

regards,

REB

Im sure Australia would have no trouble at least attempting to win a test match without McGrath, Lee and Warne in it. Even with Englands second rate bowling line up, it is no excuse for inept fielding, poor field placements and poor batting.

I dont know why people are bagging India for going for the draw. Any team would have done that.

[mal]

Exactly Right mt79. What a PATHETIC Effort by England in the 3rd Test. With the Series on the Line, England were satisfied with a Draw When a Win should have been their only Aim. Another example why England will NEVER be No 1 Rated Test team again. Whats the Difference losing the series 0-1 or 0-2??? A loss is a Loss.
On the last Day, England had a chance to show the cricketing world that they would follow in the footsteps of Australias Game strtedgy of ATTACK, ATTACK, ATTACK, Playing for a Win at all Times and would Rather Lose Tests than Playing for a Draw But NO, England were WEAK AS PISS and were content to play out a Boring Draw and more content looking after their averages.

Jimbo. How TF are you supposed to win a test match without Harmison, Hoggard and Flintoff? They lost the toss and India made a zillion runs. Game over my friend. England DID attack early on and India got off to a flyer. What exactly would have done in Vaughan's shoes?

The only thing I would have thought of was maybe alter the attack but that would have made it a third string attack in a match that had to be won. It's not so easy when you are the skipper my friend.

regards,

REB

Im sure Australia would have no trouble at least attempting to win a test match without McGrath, Lee and Warne in it. Even with Englands second rate bowling line up, it is no excuse for inept fielding, poor field placements and poor batting.

I dont know why people are bagging India for going for the draw. Any team would have done that.

Then why declare at all ?

[RustyCage]

Exactly Right mt79. What a PATHETIC Effort by England in the 3rd Test. With the Series on the Line, England were satisfied with a Draw When a Win should have been their only Aim. Another example why England will NEVER be No 1 Rated Test team again. Whats the Difference losing the series 0-1 or 0-2??? A loss is a Loss.
On the last Day, England had a chance to show the cricketing world that they would follow in the footsteps of Australias Game strtedgy of ATTACK, ATTACK, ATTACK, Playing for a Win at all Times and would Rather Lose Tests than Playing for a Draw But NO, England were WEAK AS PISS and were content to play out a Boring Draw and more content looking after their averages.

Jimbo. How TF are you supposed to win a test match without Harmison, Hoggard and Flintoff? They lost the toss and India made a zillion runs. Game over my friend. England DID attack early on and India got off to a flyer. What exactly would have done in Vaughan's shoes?

The only thing I would have thought of was maybe alter the attack but that would have made it a third string attack in a match that had to be won. It's not so easy when you are the skipper my friend.

regards,

REB

Im sure Australia would have no trouble at least attempting to win a test match without McGrath, Lee and Warne in it. Even with Englands second rate bowling line up, it is no excuse for inept fielding, poor field placements and poor batting.

I dont know why people are bagging India for going for the draw. Any team would have done that.

Then why declare at all ?

Because by that stage there was virtually no chance of England winning, and by giving them a crack at the runs, India still had the slim possibility of a win.

[mal]

PAFC
Why not declare at 450

[Rik E Boy]

Im sure Australia would have no trouble at least attempting to win a test match without McGrath, Lee and Warne in it. Even with Englands second rate bowling line up, it is no excuse for inept fielding, poor field placements and poor batting.

I dont know why people are bagging India for going for the draw. Any team would have done that.

My point was they didn't have the ammunition to win the test match, but yes they were carp. You have also contradicted yourself by using Australia as an example in the first part of your post and then convienently forgetting about the Aussies when presenting the second part of your arguement.

Aussies are a class above and can't be really be used as an example of what an average side can do.

regards,

REB

[RustyCage]

PAFC
Why not declare at 450

With 50 less runs and the extra time India used in getting those runs, England would have been a chance.

If India declared and England won, everyone would have been bagging them for throwing away a series win.

[mal]

PAFC
Why not declare at 450

With 50 less runs and the extra time India used in getting those runs, England would have been a chance.

If India declared and England won, everyone would have been bagging them for throwing away a series win.

Why not risk 450 which has never been done in TEST history
and have an extra 15 overs at them ????????

Do this over 100 tests and India would win about an extra 10 games with no risk

[silicone skyline]

Agree with MAL, records are meant to be broken, but the unwavering odds say that there was no way England would chase that down.
And if they tried to, they would have got themselves out anyway.
India play it too safe too often, if they want to be a world force, they have to be a little more ruthless, throw down the gauntlet, back their bowlers in, and start living up to their reputations and egos.

[rod_rooster]

mal, well done admitting you were wrong on Dravid

I agree with you that his 12 off 96 balls was not in the best interests of the game though. It was far too cautious but i think that is the mindset India went into the game with. They had a lead and did everything they could to protect it. Dravid would have felt the extra burden being the captain.

Fine player but this wasn't one of his finest moments.