4th Test: India v Australia at Nagpur

[Dirko]

Bloody hell...go away and have tea, come back and she's all over bar the shouting

Not good enough Aussies.....

Hate losing to those pricks.

[spell_check]

Yeah, and the last wicket to fall rubbed the face in the dirt even more. No surprise that the real monkey of the cricketing world got it, but it should have never been given out. I thought straight away there's no chance of an LBW there, but up goes the finger. Mark Nicholas says "Aleem Dar has seen enough", well, that's no reason to give a crap decision. Yes, we have been favoured sometimes, with Sunny and Ravi harping on about Billy not raising the finger before, but that's the worst of the lot. Of course, it only hastened the inevitable; but why gift the wicket to the person who least deserves it? And it's also detracts from Johnson too, who was looking good out there.

[NFC]

That was probably the worst LBW I have ever seen in my life. 9 wickets down or not, should be banned for the next test as that was horrible.

[JK]

I know everything's easy with hindsight, but a question here for the cricket guru's ... I think most are in agreeance that we were too defensive to give ourselves a bigger shot at winning the Bangalore test (BJ talking same on Fox at the moment).

Despite a different make-up of this team, would that historic Kolkata test loss during Steve Waugh's reign have lead to erring on the side of caution too much, or %100 irrelevant?

[panther]

A discovery of a new disease after this test, mad Pontings disease

[Rik E Boy]

Unfair comment Panther. Ponting may be hopping mad but I am hoping you aren't having a crack at his decision making. If it was tough for us to watch think of how tough it was for him.

regards,

REB

[Dutchy]

That was probably the worst LBW I have ever seen in my life. 9 wickets down or not, should be banned for the next test as that was horrible.

Your kidding arent you, he didnt play a shot FFS

[rod_rooster]

That was probably the worst LBW I have ever seen in my life. 9 wickets down or not, should be banned for the next test as that was horrible.

Your kidding arent you, he didnt play a shot FFS

The ball still needs to be going on to hit the stumps whether he plays a shot or not.

[MADDOG3]

Unfair comment Panther. Ponting may be hopping mad but I am hoping you aren't having a crack at his decision making. If it was tough for us to watch think of how tough it was for him.

regards,

REB

What's so hard about keeping your best bowlers on? Surely with the momentum and a no 8 at the crease you would have a chance of bowling them out within 10 overs. Perhaps I'm wrong but we wouldn't have to worry about over rates then?

Having said that, the ICC need to do something about these deplorable over rates. ALL teams are to blame. But the ICC, being the ICC, will either be too spineless to do anything, or they will come up with some 'innovation'. Maybe a supersub would help speed up the overs?

[MADDOG3]

That was probably the worst LBW I have ever seen in my life. 9 wickets down or not, should be banned for the next test as that was horrible.

Did you see the 2001 series? Some of Harbhajan's LBWs there would still make many people feel ill.

Mind you, the last wicket was just as bad!

[Gozu]

Averages for the India/Australia series:

India

Batting

Laxman 95.3
Gambhir 77.2
Dhoni 61.4
Tendulkar 56.6
Ganguly 54.0
Sehwag 43.9
Harbhajan 41.2
Vijay 37.0
Zaheer 31.3
Kumble 25.0
Dravid 17.1
Sharma 4.3
Mishra 3.5

Bowling

Sharma 15wk @ 27.1
Harbhajan 15wk @ 28.9
Mishra 14wk @ 24.1
Zaheer 11wk @ 43.2
Sehwag 5wk @ 43.4
Kumble 3wk @ 95.3
Tendulkar 0/15

Australia

Batting

Hussey 56.3
Katich 49.9
Ponting 38.0
Clarke 35.9
Hayden 33.4
White 29.2
Haddin 27.2
Watson 24.3
Lee 14.2
Johnson 13.4
Krejza 4.5
Siddle 0
Clark -

Bowling

Johnson 13wk @ 40.1
Krejza 12wk @ 29.8
Watson 10wk @ 32.1
Lee 8wk @ 61.6
White 5wk @ 68.4
Siddle 4wk @ 44.0
Clark 2wk @ 80.5
Clarke 2wk @ 128.0
Katich 1wk @ 73.0
Ponting 0/11
Hussey 0/41

[Dutchy]

That was probably the worst LBW I have ever seen in my life. 9 wickets down or not, should be banned for the next test as that was horrible.

Your kidding arent you, he didnt play a shot FFS

The ball still needs to be going on to hit the stumps whether he plays a shot or not.

Really?

which it was by the way

IMO the batsman loses all benefit of the doubt when they pad up....

[spell_check]

That was probably the worst LBW I have ever seen in my life. 9 wickets down or not, should be banned for the next test as that was horrible.

Your kidding arent you, he didnt play a shot FFS

The ball still needs to be going on to hit the stumps whether he plays a shot or not.

Really?

which it was by the way

IMO the batsman loses all benefit of the doubt when they pad up....

You must be thinking of another dismissal. It hit between middle and off, was going towards the offside, Johnson was a fair way down the track, that's the dismissal we are on about.

[rod_rooster]

That was probably the worst LBW I have ever seen in my life. 9 wickets down or not, should be banned for the next test as that was horrible.

Your kidding arent you, he didnt play a shot FFS

The ball still needs to be going on to hit the stumps whether he plays a shot or not.

Really?

which it was by the way

IMO the batsman loses all benefit of the doubt when they pad up....

See the problem with what you are saying is that the rules and not your opinion is what the umpires must go on. The only thing not playing a shot brings into play is the ability for the umpire to adjudge the batsman out if they get hit outside the line of the off stump and the ball is going on to hit the stumps. If there is any doubt at all if the ball will go on to hit the stumps whether the batsman is playing a shot or not then it should be adjudged not out end of story.

[Dutchy]

Thats the one Spelly, Harbs came around the wicket so not sure how it was going to off?

I know the rules Rod, Ive played the game for 30 years...

[rod_rooster]

Thats the one Spelly, Harbs came around the wicket so not sure how it was going to off?

I know the rules Rod, Ive played the game for 30 years...

I'm not suggesting you don't know the rules Dutchy i was just pointing out what was wrong with what you said. Obviously you feel the ball was without doubt going to hit the stumps so fair enough. Surely though knowing the rule if you had any doubt you'd have to say it's not out?

This is poor quality by the way but at 1:12 is the Johnson dismissal. Shows that Harbajan was actually over the wicket therefore bowling across Johnson not around the wicket as you suggest Dutchy.

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=GJbZ1gs0gWI

[Dutchy]

Ok I got the delivery wrong, it was over the wicket...anyway I still think it was very close, as did the umpire it seems

And its only my opinion that the rule should change if you dont play a shot you should lose the benefit of the doubt...you have a bat use it

[whufc]

[quote="Dutchy"]Ok I got the delivery wrong, it was over the wicket...anyway I still think it was very close, as did the umpire it seems

And its only my opinion that the rule should change if you dont play a shot you should lose the benefit of the doubt...you have a bat use it[/quote]

Even as a batsmen i 100% agree

[rod_rooster]

Ok I got the delivery wrong, it was over the wicket...anyway I still think it was very close, as did the umpire it seems

And its only my opinion that the rule should change if you dont play a shot you should lose the benefit of the doubt...you have a bat use it

Fair enough. Personally i think the rule is fine as it is. If there is doubt as to whether a batsman is out in any fashion the batsman should always get the benefit of that doubt IMHO.

[MAY-Z]

Ok I got the delivery wrong, it was over the wicket...anyway I still think it was very close, as did the umpire it seems

And its only my opinion that the rule should change if you dont play a shot you should lose the benefit of the doubt...you have a bat use it

Fair enough. Personally i think the rule is fine as it is. If there is doubt as to whether a batsman is out in any fashion the batsman should always get the benefit of that doubt IMHO.

i disagree if you pad up and get given out lbwyou can have no complaints as afar as im concerned

people on here have been going on about how hard it has been to take wickets and the pitches are all roads well here is a way to put some advantage back to the bowlers