Can someone please explain to me why do Indian batsmen are backing away to legside every time a bowler pitches the bowl short. I been playing cricket since the age of 7 and the first thing the coach taught me was to get behind the line of the ball.
Against a team like Australian, 286 is a very good number. That too with the burden of (chasing)pressure. What more do you expect from batsmen, and what can a captain do if the bowlers are not performing well.
I believe, bowlers need special training to bowl against each Australian batsman. Find out the weekness of every single player. Try to bowl according to the batsman. Got to try some tactics when playing against the world's best team. Put the brains to work. Nothing is impossible.
I guess with this bowling lineup the Aussies will always be too good. India needs to build a depth like australia ( who are not missing McGrath, brett lee or gillespie or can rest bracken) to compete at their level
Rediff always pointing out the number of dot balls. But only to Indian Innings. If the article gives number of dot balls in Australian Innings and wondered what would have happened if Pointing scored just 5 or 10 of those balls into further sixes, that would be called a fair assessment.
i rather think that aussies had never took indians lightly and thay have tried to overpower them with all there efforts. but wait what with indians ok guys let us frankly admit no batsman except for sachin in our team simply no one has shown his efforts for winning instincts. thay all tend to get pressurized by the fact that of "auzzie temparament". i mean look at them when you say "it's going to be hard to bowl in evening b'coz of due" they (auzz.) bowl splendingly well you say "it's going to be hard to bat", thay win the match and count the no. of batsman they have with ours almost equal, but where actually do we loose its with the temparament ours lacking "this is our match".
I cannot understand what you have seen in Thilak Naidu, but all of a sudden you seem to be on this mission to promote him, come hell or high water.
Also, you talk of giving 'Thilak Naidu a chance to prove his candidature', as if it is something to be given on a platter. Let Naidu prove his candidature first, then he will be given the chance. As far as I know, he hasn't done anything fantastic in domestic cricket, though he may well be a good wicket-keeper and batsman.
Sure, you may point out that neither did Parthiv Patel prove himself in domestic cricket, but the counter to that would be that he also did not disprove himself. In fact, despite what some so-called experts have been saying, Parthiv Patel is most probably our keeper for the future and we need to stick with him.
Sure, it may have been a wrong tactic to push him into the deep end of the pool right at the start of his career, but having done that you cannot abandon him there and leave him to find his way back. That's the surest way to destroy careers.
It is true that Indians failed to win this crucial match. But...the match-report is a little unfair. The reporter wonders why Ponting wants Newzealand to reach the finals....is it not obvious? In his own words: "India scored 26 boundaries to Australia's 28 but played 151 dot balls to Australia's 126. Australia had 8 sixes to India's three. " Imagin any...ANY one of the batsmen sticking around for two overs more. or imagine Harbhajan being there is trick gilchrist. Is it that difficult to imagine a more positive outcome of the second AND the final match?
Even if india plays 11 batsmen + 11 bowlers and a the best wicket keepr in the country keeps the wickets the result will be the same. These guys should not be paid a penny for such pathetic performance. They should rather fined.
