"Cricket is special in India, I'm sure they'll be celebrating back home in India as well,"certainly does not reflect my sentiments. First of all, Dravid's decision not to enforce the follow-on was not in the best interest of cricket. Alright, Zaheer pulled an hamstring and his other bowlers were tired on a new day. But to allow England off the hook inspite of a three hundred run lead is inexplicable. Yet Dravid went on to say that he wants to win the series and not particularly the game to defend his strategy at the end of the third day. To my mind India lost there. Let us go back to the first test where India were given a relatively modest total of three hundred and eighty. Given the conditions, India faultered to humility only to be saved by Varuna Bhagavan.
Okay, even if we accept Rahul's "defensive strategy", it is hard to explain the defensive batting that he displayed when the need of the hour was a rapid thirty from all the batsmen. But for Saurav's brilliance India was on the verge of a collapse that would have embarassed a billion fans in front of the monarchy. Imagine a score of 115 all out in the second innings that would have reduced the target to a gettable 435 with an hour for England. How on the world was it a defensive move to bat third when you had the chance of getting England out with an innings to spare or if necessary, score the remainder going in last? I am disappointed, to say the least
14 comments:
anna,
though i am moreso on u'r side of this arguement... 1st tht the follow-on not imposed was too very defensive for anyone's liking... and dravid batting like tht.. was insane, [Dada proved his worth there, me happy] but Dravid same pressmeet la idayum sonaan...
quote
'If I was sitting in an armchair then I'd be disappointed as well."
Rahul Dravid with a message for armchair fans who were critical of his decision not to enforce the follow-on at The Oval
unqoute
idukku enna sollrel?
and also Vaughan again says he wud have done same thing in dravid's posn... :)
the whole thing is very much arguable... more his batting than the decision... but andrew miller[again on cricinfo] a british guy says 50yrs down... 2-0 or 1-0 victory will not matter... only the victory will matter so its ok...
ippo sollungo... :)
Andrew Miller's comment is what provoked the title. I don't care about history. I go by the game.
'If I was sitting in an armchair then I'd be disappointed as well."
Yes I am disappointed that he makes such statement without giving reason to his decision of not going for a win.
It was not definitely a good idea by Dravid to bat the second innnings.. I am strongly on ur side.. and Dravids batting.. I am not sure.. if he was slow bcoz we lost some quick wickets..
Think Dravid just wanted to finally win a test series as a captain..
It was not definitely a good idea by Dravid to bat the second innnings.. I am strongly on ur side.. and Dravids batting.. I am not sure.. if he was slow bcoz we lost some quick wickets..
Think Dravid just wanted to finally win a test series as a captain..
I defend Dravid in his decision. England had almost two days after the 1st Inn. Assuming India were left to a target of 120 or so with more than 2 sessions, imagine 11/3 at that point. Suddenly 120 seems far away. Forget the pitch, the pressure and the enormity will defintely wear our batsmen. Then the criticism would have been why he enforced the follow on. 11/3 with a 320 lead is any day far better than the other.
I agree to your point that his decision was not in the best interest of cricket. But I am not worried about that. We had a chance to win the series, an away series against a respectable opposition. I would take it even if it meant we were ready only to draw the match.
I don't necessarily say he was right in everything. The things which I felt he should have done are: declared sooner both in the first and seconf innings. I was perplexed why he kept playing even after Kumble got his century in the first.
ajay,
loser.
That I am a loser is known well, but, as they say, beside the point!
ok what if India playing 3rd had been dismissed for 120. England wd have made merry.
For England to take a lead of 120 in the third innings, it wd have taken them till lunch of 5th day. Don't tell me India can't play two sessions leave alone scoring 120.
Tats exactly what I feel too. If Dravid announces "We dont have killer instinct, all of us, including you all, are made this way. Just leave us alone. We'll play as per our decisions and aspirations. If you wanna pass comments, go watch some other game instead of obsessing about cricket", I wouldn't be as annoyed with him as I am right now. You play the way you did and you top it off with such silly statements!!
A decision's right/wrong only after we know the result. These are just many if-then scenarios which would only run in closed loops.
Apam,
What's your prediction for the one-day series?
If Munaf is back India will win all games.
ICL will shake up BCCI at least a little bit... they will have to take the game and the fans a little bit seriously then -
anon,
true. but don't blame BCCI for Dravd's stupidity.
Post a Comment