Not a very entertaining match so far unfortunately. But the last day could be cracker.
Not that I blame them but the Indians have played very negative cricket in this last match. More concenred with not losing rather than winning.
While Krejza has taken some wickets, he’s bloody expensive in doing it. I don’t see him having a long stint in the Aussie team unless he can work on his runs conceeded.
And India win fairly comfortably in the end. There was some timid captaincy from Dhoni in the morning to match Ponting’s disgraceful after-tea display yesterday, but once Hussey and Hayden were gone the Australians didn’t even give a yelp.
A quick reminder of how real Australian captains go about their business: Old Trafford, 1997. Australia is 1-0 down after two Tests. Mark Taylor is out of form and the pitch is going to seam like crazy. As an opener he has little chance to make a decent score. He bats anyway. Australia wins.
At tea yesterday, Australia were in with a real shot at getting out of the series with a (lucky) draw. That they went with part-timers to save the captain’s bacon in the next series beggars belief. Ponting should go.
Yeah, the over-rate manoeuvre was one of the least Australian moves I can imagine; pressure at that point, and they might’ve been chasing 270-odd, and squared the series. I have to think there’ll be some fallout from that. India’s over rate was shocking, too; both teams were down around 10 or 11 overs per hour, and India were bowling spinners. What the hell are they doing out there, having cream teas between overs? The Windies in Holding’s era managed 18 per hour, and half of their bowlers had to run in from neighbouring islands for each delivery.
Ponting argues that in the spirit of the game he had to try and get the over rate up; Nielsen doesn’t believe “for a minute” that Australia weren’t pressing to win the match. Cobblers, sez I. Well, Ponting has half a point, but if he really did bowl Hussey out of consideration for the Indians, and not to avoid a ban, I will eat my hat. Cricket Australia do not sound pleased.
From an personal [Indian] perspective, this has been a slightly tepid series i am afraid, perhaps barring the indian bowling effort in Mohali and some VVS moments. Dont get me wrong, It is great to beat Australia any time, but Aus also contributed to their losses. The squad selection for India was moronic, and their captain found wanting. Why White played all 4 tests is a mystery. [The only mystery in White’s bowling is that he gets selected boom boom]
Unlike previous editions, there were no game changing sessions/moments that we were fortunate to witness. No Warne Vs Tendlya, No Calcutta 2001, No Ganguly 145 [Brisbane], No Sydney test, No Perth 2008! etc … The “magic” moments were missing. In that respect it was an “ordinary” series.
We did get to see some good test cricket though, some good performances from both sides. But some tepid pitches also added to the tepidness 
. Where did all the dustbowls that England got though the 80s-90s go?? The only magic perhaps was in Krazy’s debut, he looks like a decent bowler [but just that] - and it is difficult to judge how good he is when he picks up 12 wickets at that cost.
England though will still lose the Ashes. Thats a given
18 an hour? I believe you may be misremembering, or hit 8 when you meant 3. No way Holding, Croft and co were anywhere near 18 an hour. (It wasn’t the long run-up so much as the tortoise-like plod back to the mark.)
Yeah, I am pretty sure that the Windies are the reason that over limits are in use. They were basically cheating the way that they slowed the game down to suit their own ends. The slow over rates allowed them to pick nothing but quicks who could bang it in short 5 times an over in 4 over spells. They never had to think about bowling 20 odd overs each in a day and it sure dried up the oppositions scoring.
I think it reached it’s lowest depths in 1989 at Queen’s Park Oval, Port of Spain when England were set 151 to win in about 3 and a half hours and had to quit due to darkness at 5 for 120 off 33 overs. Ian Bishop took 13 and a half minutes to bowl the opening over, “losing his runup” 3 times before delivering the first ball which took IIRC 7 minutes to bowl.
It was meant to be a 5, not an 8, but I stand corrected even so, apparently.
There is, of course, a difference between slowing the over rate for cynical tactical reasons and being behind because you’re a dithering slugabed.