is therea anybody in india who can bowl at 140km steadily? reality tv should go alround india and do bowling competitions to find a bunch of bowlers who can bowl steadily at 145km. this would be really good program to watch if a few like this can be found,india will win more often.
HELLO REDIFF ! why dont you sponsor such a bowling competition in 8 cities? 10 fastest get Rs 50,000 each.
Re: pace
by Dev on Jan 08, 2011 09:22 AM
i know, just speed will not make a good test bowler. but it will create an effect that we do have fast bowlers and in time, we will have real pacers.
I feel Australia dominated cricket more than India. They were ruthless in their approach. When they were on top they were really good they didn't even let a team come close to them. India is a good team, but they don't play like a No.1 team. When Aussies were dominating they would white wash all the series almost. Look at thier records in ODIs also during those days. It was really Difficult to beat that team. India have a solid Batting, no doubt, but bowling needs to be really really good. To win a test match u need a really good bowling unit. Even if ur bastmen struggle u can still win a test match, but u need these bowlers to trouble opponents.If Zaheer performs then Ishanth doesn't, If Ishanth does then Harbajan doesn't. So they don't work in partnerships. Compare to the Aussies of those days. McGrath, Lee used to bowl a solid spell. Followed by some tight bowling of other seamers and spinners. like India Aussies never used to lose 1st match of series & then win the next one. They never even would give a chance to draw a test. It was all abt winning. They made sure they scored at 4 r.p.o and give a good chance of winning. Even if they got bowled out cheaply for 140-150 their bowlers would come back & still get them a lead. They would look for 3-0 series win in a 3 match series or a 5-0. I feel Indians don't really dominate as No.1. Can't imagine that they drew test matches against NewZealand, where they could have thrashed the
I feel Australia dominated cricket more than India. They were ruthless in their approach. When they were on top they were really good they didn't even let a team come close to them. India is a good team, but they don't play like a No.1 team. When Aussies were dominating they would white wash all the series almost. Look at thier records in ODIs also during those days. It was really Difficult to beat that team. India have a solid Batting, no doubt, but bowling needs to be really really good. To win a test match u need a really good bowling unit. Even if ur bastmen struggle u can still win a test match, but u need these bowlers to trouble opponents.If Zaheer performs then Ishanth doesn't, If Ishanth does then Harbajan doesn't. So they don't work in partnerships. Compare to the Aussies of those days. McGrath, Lee used to bowl a solid spell. Followed by some tight bowling of other seamers and spinners. like India Aussies never used to lose 1st match of series & then win the next one. They never even would give a chance to draw a test. It was all abt winning. They made sure they scored at 4 r.p.o and give a good chance of winning. Even if they got bowled out cheaply for 140-150 their bowlers would come back & still get them a lead. They would look for 3-0 series win in a 3 match series or a 5-0. I feel Indians don't really dominate as No.1. Can't imagine that they drew test matches against NewZealand, where they could have thrashed the
I feel Australia dominated cricket more than India. They were ruthless in their approach. When they were on top they were really good they didn't even let a team come close to them. India is a good team, but they don't play like a No.1 team. When Aussies were dominating they would white wash all the series almost. Look at thier records in ODIs also during those days. It was really Difficult to beat that team. India have a solid Batting, no doubt, but bowling needs to be really really good. To win a test match u need a really good bowling unit. Even if ur bastmen struggle u can still win a test match, but u need these bowlers to trouble opponents.If Zaheer performs then Ishanth doesn't, If Ishanth does then Harbajan doesn't. So they don't work in partnerships. Compare to the Aussies of those days. McGrath, Lee used to bowl a solid spell. Followed by some tight bowling of other seamers and spinners. like India Aussies never used to lose 1st match of series & then win the next one. They never even would give a chance to draw a test. It was all abt winning. They made sure they scored at 4 r.p.o and give a good chance of winning. Even if they got bowled out cheaply for 140-150 their bowlers would come back & still get them a lead. They would look for 3-0 series win in a 3 match series or a 5-0. I feel Indians don't really dominate as No.1. Can't imagine that they drew test matches against NewZealand, where they could have thrashed them in 4
India also got a full day to bat. Either they should have bowled them out at 260 or they must score one more run over the others score which SA did in one day. Why not rain comes and help them for a draw.
we didnt lose series and put up a good show atleast.all players chipped in this series. we have to win away series more often.look at England, they rolled oz 3-1 in oz easily
Re: positive attitude reqired
by kancheepuram narasimhan on Jan 08, 2011 08:48 AM
I agree with u fully. We are worst team by spirit. We boast that India is No1 in ICC rating, Sachin is the best batsman and Dhoni is the best capt etc. All are farce. I will prove. 2 years back, in an ODI, Australia played first and scored 432 runs in 50 overs. SA played next and scored 434 runs and won the match! this is the spirit! if SA can score 434 runs in 50 overs, can not Indians score 340 runs in 90 overs? shame on indian team. They never even attempted. shameful team.
Re: Re: positive attitude reqired
by Dev on Jan 08, 2011 09:06 AM
they wanted to atleast draw the series.as they havent even drawn series in sa. you have to admit,india did well to restrict sa to 340 and 260. coming away with draw is not bad. i think honors were with india this series as Kallis had to score centuries in ..both..innings of test to force draw
Re: positive attitude reqired
by sharath nb on Jan 08, 2011 09:12 AM
I feel Australia dominated cricket more than India. They were ruthless in their approach. When they were on top they were really good they didn't even let a team come close to them. India is a good team, but they don't play like a No.1 team. When Aussies were dominating they would white wash all the series almost. Look at thier records in ODIs also during those days. It was really Difficult to beat that team. India have a solid Batting, no doubt, but bowling needs to be really really good. To win a test match u need a really good bowling unit. Even if ur bastmen struggle u can still win a test match, but u need these bowlers to trouble opponents.If Zaheer performs then Ishanth doesn't, If Ishanth does then Harbajan doesn't. So they don't work in partnerships. Compare to the Aussies of those days. McGrath, Lee used to bowl a solid spell. Followed by some tight bowling of other seamers and spinners. Like India Aussies never used to lose 1st match of series & then win the next one. They never even would give a chance to draw a test. It was all abt winning. They made sure they scored at 4 r.p.o and give a good chance of winning. Even if they got bowled out cheaply for 140-150 their bowlers would come back & still get them a lead. They would look for 3-0 series win in a 3 match series or a 5-0. I feel Indians don't really dominate as No.1. Can't imagine that they drew test matches against NewZealand, where they could have thrashed them in 4
It would have been better if Dhoni had employed some attacking field to create more opportunities. Anyway if you were confident of drawing the match by playing out a day why there was more effort to get those wickets.
Re: Field
by sharath nb on Jan 08, 2011 09:14 AM
I feel Australia dominated cricket more than India. They were ruthless in their approach. When they were on top they were really good they didn't even let a team come close to them. India is a good team, but they don't play like a No.1 team. When Aussies were dominating they would white wash all the series almost. Look at thier records in ODIs also during those days. It was really Difficult to beat that team. India have a solid Batting, no doubt, but bowling needs to be really really good. To win a test match u need a really good bowling unit. Even if ur bastmen struggle u can still win a test match, but u need these bowlers to trouble opponents.If Zaheer performs then Ishanth doesn't, If Ishanth does then Harbajan doesn't. So they don't work in partnerships. Compare to the Aussies of those days. McGrath, Lee used to bowl a solid spell. Followed by some tight bowling of other seamers and spinners. Like India Aussies never used to lose 1st match of series & then win the next one. They never even would give a chance to draw a test. It was all abt winning. They made sure they scored at 4 r.p.o and give a good chance of winning. Even if they got bowled out cheaply for 140-150 their bowlers would come back & still get them a lead. They would look for 3-0 series win in a 3 match series or a 5-0. I feel Indians don't really dominate as No.1. Can't imagine that they drew test matches against NewZealand, where they could have thrashed them in 4
In sa onus of winning series was with sa which they failed.though team india cd have won but not lost the series.so far india alway lost series in sa.hats off to msd and his team.more so india maintains numero uno.now in return series in india sa will definitely loose.
Dhoni saying that series would have been different if they won the toss at Centurion. It would also have been different if SA bowled first at Newlands.
