Australia v India
-
-
@NTA said in Australia v India:
Smith with a second ton in two matches. That's 34 in Tests, and not far from 10k
You can thank me for that! I said in the first test I thought age was catching up with him, and that his dodgy technique walking across his stumps would finally be found out now his eye is not as good... so he goes and scores two superb tons! Incredible player.
-
@voodoo said in Australia v India:
@MajorRage said in Australia v India:
Who cares?
Aussies been treating opposition like shit for years on their home territory. Anybody want their fuckin arm broken?
Don’t condone it, but no interest in Aussies getting pissy about it.
Really?
I thought it was really fucking average behaviour. The captain of the most popular cricket team on the planet intentionally shouldering a 19yr old kid on debut because he was slapping their bowlers around a bit. What a complete piston wristed gibbon.
And what a pathetically (yet totally expected) weak sanction.
He should have been banned from the 5th test as a minimum. This wasn’t a few words about his mum, this isn’t getting into his head. It was deliberate physical contact.
And don’t get me started on the way he carried on like a wounded pork chop who’d been on the receiving end of a Jerry Collin’s special
Complete fuckwit, how could you look your wife and kids in the eye after that?
Both things can be true.
Kohli being a petulant piston wristed gibbon who should be banned and not wanting to put up with the bleating of some precious fans who delighted in the sportsmanship of underarm bowling...
-
-
@Donsteppa said in Australia v India:
At first glance I don't think that was Virat's call...
Definitely the striker's call.
Kohli turned to watch the ball instead of getting into gear
-
-
-
-
@NTA said in Australia v India:
Send another Night Watchman, you cowards
That's the third or fourth time in recent times, I've seen a team send out a nightwatchman with about 20 minutes to play.
I don't think any of them have survived.
I don't know what they're thinking! A nightwatchman (MAYBE!) if there's ten balls or less left in the day. Because you don't want a specialist batsman to get out facing three or four balls. But four or five overs - that's ridiculous.
And even worse, the commentary teams appear to have invented a new role, where the nightwatchman is also apparently supposed to dominate the strike and protect the set batsman. That's bollocks IMO. The one thing you don't want is for the nightwatchman to get out and have to have your new batsman come out anyway - so if anything I'd want the set specialist batsman to farm the strike. After all, you don't trust your bunnies at the end of the innings.
And in Akash Deep's case - following this theory, he came out with five overs to play so ideally he faces all 30 balls.
Problem being he's had 8 innings in test cricket and faced 138 balls - so on average he only lasts 17 balls.
Edit: Maybe in the last over of the day, when a new batsmen doesn't have to come out anyway - the nightie might turn down a single to protect the set batsman.
-
-
-
@Chris-B said in Australia v India:
@NTA said in Australia v India:
Send another Night Watchman, you cowards
That's the third or fourth time in recent times, I've seen a team send out a nightwatchman with about 20 minutes to play.
I don't think any of them have survived.
I don't know what they're thinking! A nightwatchman (MAYBE!) if there's ten balls or less left in the day. Because you don't want a specialist batsman to get out facing three or four balls. But four or five overs - that's ridiculous.
And even worse, the commentary teams appear to have invented a new role, where the nightwatchman is also apparently supposed to dominate the strike and protect the set batsman. That's bollocks IMO. The one thing you don't want is for the nightwatchman to get out and have to have your new batsman come out anyway - so if anything I'd want the set specialist batsman to farm the strike. After all, you don't trust your bunnies at the end of the innings.
And in Akash Deep's case - following this theory, he came out with five overs to play so ideally he faces all 30 balls.
Problem being he's had 8 innings in test cricket and faced 138 balls - so on average he only lasts 17 balls.
Edit: Maybe in the last over of the day, when a new batsmen doesn't have to come out anyway - the nightie might turn down a single to protect the set batsman.
I reckon.
Someone supposedly in the team as a batsman gets protected from actually batting by a guy who is very likely tired from bowling heaps earlier on. It’s pretty ridiculous
As @NTA alludes to if it comes to it Australia might not enforce the follow on and instead bat again and set a huge 4th innings total.
It’s the modern way it seems
-
@NTA said in Australia v India:
@Chris-B like the follow-on, I don't think it's a thing any more unless it's the circumstances you describe
Shouldn't be - but, India and NZ are both still using it - and both guilty of sending in early nighties.
Steve Waugh got rid of it altogether and I think was probably correct - except in exceptional circumstances.
-
