posted Dec 23, 2008

And the real dull part of the whole tour was the 5-0 bashing England got. One day Series against bangladesh might have provided more entertainment.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 23, 2008

JJ, You have done enough to grab the Wummia Minora title from RugbyS. Congratulations!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 23, 2008

Moon,
If people are hell bent on being entertained, there are many places to go, like the movie theatre, etc etc.
This is professional sport.
the priority is to win and if the team has a lead, to hang on to that lead and so the series can be won.
spectators to the match didn't pay money to be entertained. If they did, they got what they deserve.
When I go to watch a match I go to see my team win, not be entertained. I know many other ways to be entertained than to spend money watching a match.
If the team provides entertainment value while winning, that's a bonus, but the priority of the team is to win. If they can't win, it's their priority not to loose.
There is no team that has a duty to entertain.
Nobody would remember the ashes of '05 if England didn't win it.
Entertainment may have been provided as part of an exciting match, but winning it was utmost to England and Australia.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 23, 2008

It's a shame India didn't go for the win but in a 2 test series, I don't particularly blame them. I suspect Eng would've done exactly the same thing.

Usual platitudes from Moores after the game. I begin to wonder if his rather hasty appointment says more of his ability to spin the media than to build a team. People are beginning to talk of England regaining the Ashes because Australia have just lost one match. To be honest - with zero progress from England since Moores took over - tight losses but losses nonetheless - I'm beginning to wonder if it might not be another classic Ashes series with both sides playing pretty poor cricket.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 24, 2008

I have never heard so much rubbish in all my life - Agnew is at it as well - bleating on about the draw and India should have done this and this. Erm no I don't think so - and do what England did and throw away victory when they should have won the first test. The bottom line is India had a series win to think about. Winning is what counts at the end of the day at the top top level. What did India have to gain? As usual the media are very bad losers. At least KP had the decency and graciousness to accept India were the better team.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 24, 2008

Quite surprising comments from Agnew.

There are several things that need to be put into perspective, and then probably you need to re-read what Agnew has written.

First, I think we are all spoilt by the captaincy of Dhoni and this new-age, aggresive Indian team. No team in the world goes for a win all the time, except, maybe Australia a couple of years back, but not any longer (recall that they were very recently unable to defend 400+ in the fourth innings, at their own backyard in Perth, against an opposition that has a reputation for being chokers). Coming back to this, recall that India went for a win in a seemingly impossible situation on a breaking pitch in Chennai, and they did pull it off.

Secondly, bear in mind that the same team under the captaincy of a Kumble or Dravid would have tried to block it off in Chennai, would most probably not have pulled it off and lost. A lot of credit needs to be, and has been given to Dhoni and the Indian team for pulling this off.

Third, it is a tad surprising listening to a pontification on stalling tactics by Agnew. England lost the first test only because of some ridiculous tactics on the afternoon of the fourth day when their in-form batsmen ambled away and wasted a lot of time hoping that the Indians would not take the bait. This was similar to the defeat at Adelaide last year after a 200 by Colly and a declaration, and then England still managed to lose the test. At least there, they can blame it on the second innings collapse, in Chennai there was not even that.

Then, even if India had scored a tad faster, or declared, there was not enough time to get England out, what with the bad light and the late starts. At this time, it is appropriate to bat and go for some personal glory. Let me take you back to the last test of 2005, with England being 2-1 up. What did the England batsmen do? They batted on and on till they wasted enough time to get Australia into bat in their fourth innings and the bad light came into play with Australia scoring 4 runs only.

I also do not buy the argument that Test cricket has lost its value in India or the sub-continent. True, there is a great market for T20 and ODIs, but traditionally there weren't large crowds for Tests, as people do have to go into work. These games still have some massive following on the TV and the internet.

Let us close the year on a positive note, with a deserved test win by India and a good performance by England in both the test matches. They look to be in the process of building a good side for the Ashes and should continue their development to challenge Australia.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 24, 2008

@jjLastlaugh,

Remember India won the test series in England last time they played here and they were the only team which has given tough time to australians playing in australia by winning test matches and drew one series as well. The Aus vs Indian test matches in the last 3 or 4 series are one best exciting matches.

I agree that the Ashes 2005 is exciting as well but ashes 2007 is completely one sided and england lost is by 5-0. Do you call that as exciting series.

The pitches are different in different parts of the world. South Afircan pitches are different to Englands. If you are playing a professional cricket you should play well on all picthes and in all conditions. Indian pitches are mostly flat pitches where in you can score lots of runs.

Please do not make ridiculous comments just becuase England lost the series.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 24, 2008

i am a little shocked at agnew's comments. i recall the oval test in 2005 when with england defending a 2-1 lead, there were many england fans who were praying for rain for whole 5 days. also when australia were trying to bowl england out for a 2nd time there was no declaration from vaughan even though time was running out for australia to chase the runs. my guess is that agnew was not whingeing then about england "not making a game of it".

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 24, 2008

I think its similar to what Michael Schumacher said when he was completely dominating the sport and people were crying out for the lack of entertainment: I am here to win, and get paid to win, not to entertain people.
The entertainment part is inherent in any sport. It is not the team's responsibility or motive to entertain the spectators. So I think India did well to hold on to their lead. Congratulations to them!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Dec 24, 2008

I understand Indian fans may be frustrated by Agger's comments but he is NOT suggesting that England wouldn't have, (or haven't in the past) done exactly the same thing as India.

It's his frustration in general that Test cricket needs great matches to fend off 20/20 obsessions, especially in that part of the world. If England had been 1-0 up and done the same thing Aggers would have criticised England, check previous entries for that.

The 2005 Ashes, maybe was the exception. Not because England didn't play boring cricket in the 5th Test, they did, but it was an amazing achievement to beat the nation who was at the time by far the best team in the world.

Let's be honest, it is NOT an amazing achievement to beat the current bunch of no hopers in the England cricket team!

add comment | complain about this comment