Man, The match is so exiting.
The fourth wicket is gone in the 21 st. over.

Bangaladesh is in a very sorry state now and will surely lose the QF.

All cheers to India. But India will face their demon in the SF match.

Murali

-----------------------------------------------------------------
I am a Gents and not a Ladies.

Rohit Sharma displayed some stylish batting towards the end of his innings. The match was not as one sided as the score indicates. There were some tight moments for Indian team.


On a side note, an interesting article by Martin Crowe about current technology in bats.


********************************************************************
The balance is skewed too far in favour of batsmen already. Cricket cannot afford for bats to get any bigger



From the old Signature brand, through to the Magnum, Scoop and Jumbo, to the modern-day Kaboom: as with much else, it seems evolution is a given when it comes to cricket bats. We now are experiencing the Everest moment, the period when the technology and craft behind the batsman's tool of trade is at its absolute peak.

The manufacturer has produced a lethal weapon that authorities now need to rein in. Simple reason: the grounds, much like golf courses around the world, are struggling to contain the ball in the field of play. Sixes are struck now with ease. Mishits for the maximum are common. The bowler is at his wit's end. Any more grand technology to the bat and the game will become alien. So let's take Kaboom and use that as the limit.

What do we limit? We have a limit to the width, which is four inches, or 10.16cm. The thickness of the blade needs a limit too, and not just the edges but also the overall mass. Just as a driver in golf is limited to 460cc mass volume, the bat must be restricted. It can't go on getting bigger. No need to go backwards, but let's settle on a current size, before it gets out of hand and begins bordering on the ridiculous.

In layman's terms, bats these days are dried out completely. All moisture is removed - the absolute polar opposite to the grey old days, when bats were oiled. Removing the weight that moisture provides helps when you're looking to add extra mass to the edge and back of the bat. What would normally be a three-pound-plus bat 20 years ago, picks up at 2.9 (with up to 4cm edge thickness) today.

The bat is then compressed briefly to give it the punch and power it needs. But they don't last long. The willow snaps like a twig when put under the extreme pressure of being swung and connecting so hard so often. The weak points are the splice, where the handle is joined by glue to the main piece, and the bottom edge. Bats come and go in weeks. My trusty Duncan Fearnleys would last two full seasons each.

For the record, I got used to 2.6 pounds (1cm edge thickness) as a young pro and also carried a 2.4 for quicker conditions. When I saw others try heavier, thicker bats, I tried to follow suit and failed miserably. If I had done a full upper-body-strength programme, I might have prospered. I wasn't built like Viv Richards or Ian Botham, and I believed keeping my arms loose and light, not muscular and ripped, would help my last-second adjustment to aid my defence. And therein lies the issue: in the '80s, defence was required, for long periods.

For a time early in my career, I despised limited-overs cricket, as I tried to master occupying the crease. But when I saw Greg Chappell dismantle one-day attacks, I knew it could and should be done. Similar to Greg in build, I stuck to a light bat and kept the ball along the ground. Hitting a six was a rarity, normally attributed to a side boundary that was small enough (Eden Park was the obvious one). Never did I hit a six in Australia, except square in Adelaide, and in an ODI in Sydney. It never crossed my mind to do so, and with my light blade it was a huge risk to even attempt to hit over the top, except when advancing down to a spinner with the field up.

Times have changed, and rightly so, but we have now reached the threshold. It is time to acknowledge the great work by bat manufacturers, but we must give them boundaries. I say we stop at Kaboom, and no more.

Either the new turbocharged fast-moving bats are damaging the modern ball exponentially more, or the ball manufacturers have fallen asleep, but the ball has not improved at all. It simply doesn't last. Recently in the New Zealand-Sri Lanka Test series the red ball seemed to be replaced more frequently than drinks were brought out on the hour. While the white ball has gone nowhere in its evolution, to the point where we are using two balls to get through 50 overs.

Which brings me to the saddest thing of all. Bowlers are now cannon fodder. They were once the controllers, the scene setters. Alas, they have become poor cousins in a game where administrators want boundaries struck between every heartbeat.

Over time, the bowler has lost his confidence. With the small boundaries positioned, cruel field restrictions adopted, and the Kaboom in full force, the bowler hasn't a hope. To his credit, he has tried his best to produce multiple clever and skilful variations to compete. The overriding problem here is, most bowlers are now trying to use them all, and have become masters of none.

The bowler is dead, long live the bowler.
*****************************************************************







I generally agree with the above analysis.

In addition to new bats, Tony Greig once mentioned that balls do not swing like they used to before. The design changed sometime during nineties. Plus pitches are flat, robbing the bowlers off their livelihood.

India into Semis !
From scoreboard it will look like a single sided match , though till 34 overs India struggled and went through time of scare. Good recovery thereafter. Rohit & Raina from 35-40 overs played the power play wonderfully.

Congrats to Indian team......

After Indian victory, feels sacrifices of the whole night sleep was worth it....

In the office, right now my eyes are making mind to close automatically, but still not feeling tired and no headache too..................LOL

India will play either bitter rivals Pakistan or Australia in a Sydney semi-final next Thursday....

must be a great match:-)

I feel sad for Raina.

Both in the SA match and in this match - it was really his knock which helped india and not only the centurian. However, the 100 gets all the glory, not the one who was responsible for making it possible. I am sure in all probability if Raina had not played those scoring shots - even with Rahane (vs SA) and Rohit (vs Bangladesh) century, India would have ended somewhere close to 270 and the result could have been different. In an ODI, a quick fire 30 (in the 35-40 over range) can make a more difference than a 100 ball century. Besides the runs added, it gives the set batsman chance to score more freely and the tail a better platform to attack in the final 10.

Anyways, all's well that ends well. Hope they share the camaraderie in the dressing room until at least the world cup is over.

M

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Live and let live!

Quote:

---

Originally posted by RBO

bitter rivals Pakistan

---

India were extremely lucky to WIN this match. & BAN extremely unlucky to lose.

1.Raina was PLUMB lbw , wasn't given out . DRS saved him BIG time ! Proves that DRS/Technology can be horribly wrong in LBW decisions. It wrongly showed slightly pitching outside the leg, by a fraction

That would have changed the course of the match as the pressure had already bulit up at that stage. A loss of wicket at that stage, especially of RAINA, who had just started accelerating, would have meant a NEW batsman at the crease & a TIRED/WORN out Rohit Sharma at the other end.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Rohit Sharma was caught of a FULL TOSS. The ball was way BELOW the waist. He was crouching, when he hit the shot, and even in that crouching position, you could clearly see that the ball was way below the waist . So if he was standing upright, it was even LESS below the wait. But it was given a NO ball as a ABOVE waist full toss .
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If the above 2 decisions had gone BANGLADESH's way at very cruculal stages of the game, India would have folded for around 250 .

Bangladesh would have easily chased 250 down , as their approach to the game would have been different , while chasing. They could have got it with singles & twos on this BIG MCG ground..& would have won it by the 47-48 over mark.
But bcoz they had to chase 300 , they had to go for the big shots right from the start as the RRR was high right from get go. They couldn't settle down much, and kept on losing wkts bcoz of that.

Indian bowlers are NOT good enough to defend 250 even against BAN , but they can defend 300 against them.