It is more related with the captaincy issue. Dravid does not want to lose the captaincy by losing the match and leveling the series so gone safe rather going for the kill and in the bargain killing the game and befooling the cricket loving Janta.
Look at Aussies, South Africa, West Indies, etc always play for result.
Poor Captaincy and Dravid was never a captaincy material and he proved that time and again.
Quote:
Originally posted by kalia
It is more related with the captaincy issue. Dravid does not want to lose the captaincy by losing the match and leveling the series so gone safe rather going for the kill and in the bargain killing the game and befooling the cricket loving Janta.
Look at Aussies, South Africa, West Indies, etc always play for result.
Poor Captaincy and Dravid was never a captaincy material and he proved that time and again.
Quote:I used to say the exact same thing about Azhar.
Originally posted by jughead
I think Dravid is too much of a gentleman to be involved in something like match fixing.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"Mah deah, there is much more money to be made in the destruction of civilization than in building it up."
-- Rhett Butler in "Gone with the Wind"
I dont want to argue on match fixing issue but lets talk about Dravid's decision today.
1) If India wins or even manages to draw the match india will win the series. That will be after may be what 50 years, india will win the series against England, in England. Also India can say that they can win Test series overseas and not just india.
2) You have to keep in mind that, if you ask other team to follow on, then you should have sharp bowlers, someone like, McGrath, Warne, Murli, Wasim etc. If you are bowling with Zahir, Sree-sath and Kumble then its always advisable to give them some rest as they wont be as effective by bowling 3 days continuous.
3) England is not a bad team, Lets assume they made some 400 odd runs in second inning and India have to make 100 runs to win the match. I think Indian team is more vulnerable to lost the match on the last day. (you must have seen today what they did on 4th day)
So if England is batting second and if they are playing well then you can set defensive fielding and bowl accordingly to restict them.
4) Last but not least, I can bet whatever that if India would have lost the match by following on the england you ppl would have ask Dravid to resign because he is not a good captain.
So, I think Dravid made the wise decision, specially with, kind of bowling attack we have. India should win the series. Bottom line.
Are you enlightened yet?
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Boy
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Quote:
Originally posted by kalia
It is more related with the captaincy issue. Dravid does not want to lose the captaincy by losing the match and leveling the series so gone safe rather going for the kill and in the bargain killing the game and befooling the cricket loving Janta.
Look at Aussies, South Africa, West Indies, etc always play for result.
Poor Captaincy and Dravid was never a captaincy material and he proved that time and again.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Boy
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Quote:
Originally posted by bouy
I dont want to argue on match fixing issue but lets talk about Dravid's decision today.
1) If India wins or even manages to draw the match india will win the series. That will be after may be what 50 years, india will win the series against England, in England. Also India can say that they can win Test series overseas and not just india.
2) You have to keep in mind that, if you ask other team to follow on, then you should have sharp bowlers, someone like, McGrath, Warne, Murli, Wasim etc. If you are bowling with Zahir, Sree-sath and Kumble then its always advisable to give them some rest as they wont be as effective by bowling 3 days continuous.
3) England is not a bad team, Lets assume they made some 400 odd runs in second inning and India have to make 100 runs to win the match. I think Indian team is more vulnerable to lost the match on the last day. (you must have seen today what they did on 4th day)
So if England is batting second and if they are playing well then you can set defensive fielding and bowl accordingly to restict them.
4) Last but not least, I can bet whatever that if India would have lost the match by following on the england you ppl would have ask Dravid to resign because he is not a good captain.
So, I think Dravid made the wise decision, specially with, kind of bowling attack we have. India should win the series. Bottom line.
Are you enlightened yet?
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Are you there?
Quote:
Originally posted by BlueLobster
How would India have lost with a follow-on? Your #3 scenario sounds highly improbable. If England had made 400 runs, they would NOT declare with a 100 run lead if enough overs were remaining such that India would have the chance of winning. They'd just bat it out. If at all England would give up the batting, it would be if they knew outright that a draw was the only possibility.
Explain to me how with 2 days remaining and a lead of 350 odd runs, India would've lost the match by making England bat again. I personally feel that by giving England a TARGET now, there's probably a better chance of India losing, however low. They now need 444 with all 10 wickets in hand, very difficult in a test in one day, but not impossible.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Boy
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
Advertise Contact Us Privacy Policy and Terms of Usage FAQ Canadian Desi © 2001 Marg eSolutions Site designed, developed and maintained by Marg eSolutions Inc. |