Things were not as simple for Pakistan like it would have been trading on sasono site for, sport is not gambling. But, the Pakistani team has made their cricket look like a gamble since the days when all major cricketing nations started boycotting their tour to the trouble torn country. That apart, coming to yesterday's 4th day of the test match between England and Pakistan, that was one last blow for Pakistan when they fell one run short in ending up their 2nd innings score twice of what they could manage to do in their 1st innings at London. No prizes for guessing.
On the 1st day's play, it was as though that Pakistan would continue to rock the series the way they did in the 3rd test which they eventually won. The 1st day's play saw England ending the truncated day with 39 runs for the loss of one wicket. This was not a problem with 9 more batsmen still to go at that time. But, it was later in the day that followed that misery stared for England. England lost 7 wickets for a score just above 100 on day 2 which spoke for itself. But, as the scorecard suggests, Stuart Broad and Jonathan Trott settled things for England.
In addition to praising the duo who bought England back into the game, it would not be wrong to blame Pakistan for allowing a number 9 batsman to settle down and settle his team as well at the same time. One cannot expect someone like Mohammed Asif and Saeed Ajmal to do the same for Pakistan. If Broad scores more than twice the total put up by Pakistan team, the caliber of Pakistan should be under scrutiny. One can recall the way India got back into the game against Australia at the Eden Gardens Kolkata in 2001 after allowed to follow on by Steve Waugh in a situation similar to the one under consideration.
But then, it was Laxman and Dravid, two notable batsmen from the Indian side and not some Venkatesh Prasad or Debashish Mohanty. There has been a nightwatchman who has scored a double century when Jason Gillespie did it against Bangladesh. But, the team against Stuart Broad did the feat was a team that has had a world cup triumph against its name. No matter that even Australia's collapse for 88 recently would have made people think likewise. But, Pakistan has been doing it since past one year or so. England required just four bowlers to get all ten Pakistani wickets unlike 6 bowlers from Pakistani side.
There was some Umar Akmal who scored 79 runs at a strike rate of 116 as though it was a LOI game. With this sort of approach, the results can get only worse.
Showing posts with label Stuart Broad. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Stuart Broad. Show all posts
Monday, August 30, 2010
Sunday, August 29, 2010
Pakistan misses hattrick
Well it is not a big task for any team or a player can make it to the headlines of a cricket site or a cricket magazine but, it is the reasons for which the player or the team that has made news which takes precedence. And, needless to be said, Pakistan has made it to the headlines for the wrong reasons yesterday when they lost all their ten wickets for yet another score of less than 100. The score was one run less than 75 to be exact. And, this is the third time in the series out of eight innings Pakistan has played that it has been bowled out for a score less than hundred.
Not even Bangladesh or Zimbabwe have been able to do this no matter against which team they have played. Of course, I remember the West indies losing all their ten wickets for 47 on one occasion and 94 on the other during their tour of England 2004 which is famous for Brian Lara's epic knock of unbeaten 400 at Antigua in the fourth test. Even England last year against the West Indies lost al their ten wickets for a score of 51 to hand the West Indies a rare victory. This bought in some change, not to the West Indies who are at most time at the receiving end but to the viewers who would have gone sick watching West Indies lose.
Now, Pakistan have gone even further when they were bowled out for a score less than 100 on the fourth occasion in the last two months or so. They were bowled out for a score of 80 in the 1st test against England at Nottingham and 72 in the 2nd test at Birmingham which Pakistan lost by 9 wickets. Now, as if that were not enough, Pakistan have yet against been bowled out for 74 yesterday at London. Only three players from Pakistan were able to cross the double digit and thanks to the extras which did not score than the Pakistani batsmen.
Otherwise, it would be fascinating to see the extras having a hand in the top scorer of the match. As I had written in yesterday's post about Stuart Broad's innings with the bat despite coming in at number, now it is to be highlighted that Broad's score of 169 was more than twice of what the entire Pakistani batsmen could score that includes the extras as well. Stuart Broad played 297 ball that constituted close to 50 overs which was close to 17 overs more than what the entire Pakistani innings lasted. This was not even achieved by Bangladesh when they toured England recently. Instead of watching Pakistan play, I'd recommend you to Download Free e-books,games,movies,music(videos),softwares,tv shows,wallpapers from The Rapidshare Links World.
Not even Bangladesh or Zimbabwe have been able to do this no matter against which team they have played. Of course, I remember the West indies losing all their ten wickets for 47 on one occasion and 94 on the other during their tour of England 2004 which is famous for Brian Lara's epic knock of unbeaten 400 at Antigua in the fourth test. Even England last year against the West Indies lost al their ten wickets for a score of 51 to hand the West Indies a rare victory. This bought in some change, not to the West Indies who are at most time at the receiving end but to the viewers who would have gone sick watching West Indies lose.
Now, Pakistan have gone even further when they were bowled out for a score less than 100 on the fourth occasion in the last two months or so. They were bowled out for a score of 80 in the 1st test against England at Nottingham and 72 in the 2nd test at Birmingham which Pakistan lost by 9 wickets. Now, as if that were not enough, Pakistan have yet against been bowled out for 74 yesterday at London. Only three players from Pakistan were able to cross the double digit and thanks to the extras which did not score than the Pakistani batsmen.
Otherwise, it would be fascinating to see the extras having a hand in the top scorer of the match. As I had written in yesterday's post about Stuart Broad's innings with the bat despite coming in at number, now it is to be highlighted that Broad's score of 169 was more than twice of what the entire Pakistani batsmen could score that includes the extras as well. Stuart Broad played 297 ball that constituted close to 50 overs which was close to 17 overs more than what the entire Pakistani innings lasted. This was not even achieved by Bangladesh when they toured England recently. Instead of watching Pakistan play, I'd recommend you to Download Free e-books,games,movies,music(videos),softwares,tv shows,wallpapers from The Rapidshare Links World.
Saturday, August 28, 2010
Broad as a batsman
Well more than anybody else, it looks as though my yesterday's post has been read by none other than the English captain Andrew Strauss and then decided not to gift their nation to Pakistan. The last time anybody could see such a mindblowing performance from the England side was in the Ashes last year when they hosted Australia. England came back from nowhere to win the ashes 2-1 after being 1-0 down in the initial stages of the tournament. The match that England lost to the Aussies was by a whooping innings margin after escaping from the clutches in the first test.
From then onwards, it was England all the way when they didn't lose a single game from then onwards. They drew one test and won two out of the remaining three against Australia all unexpectedly. Of course, England did win the title in 2005 by the same margin with the situation being the same almost. England were 1-0 down after losing the first test by 239 runs. But, that was just a fluke which is justified by the margin itself with the English team winning the second test by 2 runs and the fourth test by 3 wickets to take home the ashes after 20 long years.
England were chasing a total of just 125 in the third test at DASH and en route to their successful run chase lost 7 wickets in between. One can guess the situation had there been 30 more runs added to the target. So, according to me that performance does not go down as England's best performance till date. Instead, last year's Ashes win against an Australian team minus Shane Warne and Gilchrist was a better one and a deserving one too. The performance by the England team yesterday was even more worth cheering when not only did England rise from 102-7 at one stage but also it was Stuart Broad who settled the issue for his team.
Stuart Broad was until then known to be a bowler and remembered for the wrong reasons for getting belted by Yuvraj Singh for 6 sixes in an over in the inaugural world T20 in 2007. Still, it would be wrong to rate him as an under achiever as a bowler. The century by Broad went on to become a 150 by a tail end batsman. Scorecard suggests that Broad came in at number 9 in the batting order and for him to do the job on a pitch that suits bowlers is indeed praise worthy. Broad might not be able to bowl the way he batted yesterday. I compare Broad with gadgets that does something efficiently for which it was not designed.
From then onwards, it was England all the way when they didn't lose a single game from then onwards. They drew one test and won two out of the remaining three against Australia all unexpectedly. Of course, England did win the title in 2005 by the same margin with the situation being the same almost. England were 1-0 down after losing the first test by 239 runs. But, that was just a fluke which is justified by the margin itself with the English team winning the second test by 2 runs and the fourth test by 3 wickets to take home the ashes after 20 long years.
England were chasing a total of just 125 in the third test at DASH and en route to their successful run chase lost 7 wickets in between. One can guess the situation had there been 30 more runs added to the target. So, according to me that performance does not go down as England's best performance till date. Instead, last year's Ashes win against an Australian team minus Shane Warne and Gilchrist was a better one and a deserving one too. The performance by the England team yesterday was even more worth cheering when not only did England rise from 102-7 at one stage but also it was Stuart Broad who settled the issue for his team.
Stuart Broad was until then known to be a bowler and remembered for the wrong reasons for getting belted by Yuvraj Singh for 6 sixes in an over in the inaugural world T20 in 2007. Still, it would be wrong to rate him as an under achiever as a bowler. The century by Broad went on to become a 150 by a tail end batsman. Scorecard suggests that Broad came in at number 9 in the batting order and for him to do the job on a pitch that suits bowlers is indeed praise worthy. Broad might not be able to bowl the way he batted yesterday. I compare Broad with gadgets that does something efficiently for which it was not designed.
Monday, January 18, 2010
England Deceived!!!
The way England played their first innings of the fourth test match against South Africa at Johannesburg was as though the English players had taken a draw to be granted like it happened in the earlier tests against the Proteas. One has to just imagine as to how foolish one can get when they are found expecting a fortune to happen, when it is a known fact that fortune has to come by its own in case of lack of hard work and fortune is hunted down by hard working people. How could the English players expect South Africa to take just 9 wickets just because it happened on two earlier occasions?
If one can take trouble to go through the scorecard of England's batting, it would be clear that England had no plans to even sweat it out at the stadium. It is not a big task to bowl out some team like Bangladesh, Zimbabwe and even the West Indies (to a greater extent) on day one itself. But, if someone like England have lost all their 10 wickets on a single day and that too on two successive occasions, their test status needs to be questioned whatsoever. On the first day's play, England were all out for 180, that was followed with South Africa putting 29 runs for no loss of wickets.
Then on the fourth day, even before half of the scheduled time had elapsed, England lost 7 wickets, earlier to which England had lost 3 wickets at the end of the third day's play itself. With England winning the fourth test at Johannesburg or even a draw completely being out of question, at least, England could have avoided an innings defeat by scoring atleast 254 runs required for South Africa to bat again. But, England ended up their second innings putting up a score less than what they could in their first innings when they lost all their 10 wickets for 169.
The third and the first tests that ended in draws was not only a caution for the South African players but also for the English players. Finally, England who took the caution for granted had to pay the price for their half minded approach. Whatever be the result of the Johannesburg test, there was no chance of England losing the series and may be that England were more the less contended with that. Who cares when a loss can only see the trophy being shared! If South Africa had Kallis, Smith and Steyn, England had Peitersen and Broad an co..who could have given it back to the Proteas which didn't.
Finally, though no one expected England to win, or though there can be at the most one winner, both the teams are expected to put up a tough fight which can make the spectators keep their fingers crossed. But, England relied on things which were beyond their control and may be that home sick England just wanted to leave South Africa ASAP.
If one can take trouble to go through the scorecard of England's batting, it would be clear that England had no plans to even sweat it out at the stadium. It is not a big task to bowl out some team like Bangladesh, Zimbabwe and even the West Indies (to a greater extent) on day one itself. But, if someone like England have lost all their 10 wickets on a single day and that too on two successive occasions, their test status needs to be questioned whatsoever. On the first day's play, England were all out for 180, that was followed with South Africa putting 29 runs for no loss of wickets.
Then on the fourth day, even before half of the scheduled time had elapsed, England lost 7 wickets, earlier to which England had lost 3 wickets at the end of the third day's play itself. With England winning the fourth test at Johannesburg or even a draw completely being out of question, at least, England could have avoided an innings defeat by scoring atleast 254 runs required for South Africa to bat again. But, England ended up their second innings putting up a score less than what they could in their first innings when they lost all their 10 wickets for 169.
The third and the first tests that ended in draws was not only a caution for the South African players but also for the English players. Finally, England who took the caution for granted had to pay the price for their half minded approach. Whatever be the result of the Johannesburg test, there was no chance of England losing the series and may be that England were more the less contended with that. Who cares when a loss can only see the trophy being shared! If South Africa had Kallis, Smith and Steyn, England had Peitersen and Broad an co..who could have given it back to the Proteas which didn't.
Finally, though no one expected England to win, or though there can be at the most one winner, both the teams are expected to put up a tough fight which can make the spectators keep their fingers crossed. But, England relied on things which were beyond their control and may be that home sick England just wanted to leave South Africa ASAP.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)