Are India playing Pakistan in the near future in a test series. I would be interested to see how our Indian batsmen would do against Ajmal and Rehman in Indian conditions.

[Call Centre]

Both are excellent finger spinners. It would be very interesting to
see how the Indian batsmen would fare against these two very good
finger spinners even in India where we are supposed to be very strong.
Add Umar Gul to the line up and Pakistan would have a very potent
bowling line up for Indian conditions. India may well win the test
series but I'm sure those two bowlers would really test our batsmen.
After all that is what test cricket is all about. The bowlers and
batsmen both getting tested. :)

[Mike Holmans]

On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 10:34:08 -0800 (PST), Call Centre
<outsourci...@yahoo.com> tapped the keyboard and brought forth:

So how would India be proposing to test the Pakistani batsmen?

Cheers

Mike
--

[Asif Zaidi]

On Jan 28, 12:34 pm, Call Centre <outsourcingbusin...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

At this time, it would be an awesome series and I would like it to be
played vs SRT/Dravid/Laxman and not a team on rebuilding mode.

Even with present Indian players, I wouldn't be so sure that India
would win. Indias problem is bowling - if they bowled like they did in
Aus/Eng, I hardly doubt they could take 20 Pak wickets. Pak spinners
aside, Gul is a pretty good bowler and either Junaid/Wahab/Aizaz would
be a good fast/medium bowling combination. Sehwag would lay a very
good foundation in all likelihood and this would not doubt help the
other bats (SRT may yet his 100th 100 against Pak :) Pak main problem
is batting - don't tell me Taufeeq Umar can bat on non-Asian wickets.
The rest need to be tested - so lets see.

In any event, it would be a good series and fun to watch


Thanks

Asif

[alvey]

Some Pakistan players don't give good results when they're tested...



alvey

[PlaySafe]

some of them surely will be positive when tested .... oooops!!

[John Hall]

In article
<248f95f2-3f22-420d...@lr19g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,

I reckon that India have the edge in batting but Pakistan have the edge
in bowling and probably in fielding and captaincy too. So it would be
very interesting.
--
John Hall
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism
by those who have not got it."
George Bernard Shaw

[eusebius]

On Jan 29, 4:34 am, Call Centre <outsourcingbusin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Both are excellent finger and elbow spinners

Typos corrected

[eusebius]

On Jan 29, 6:30 am, John Hall <nospam_no...@jhall.co.uk> wrote:
> In article
> <248f95f2-3f22-420d-a949-2612c2a98...@lr19g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,

>  Call Centre <outsourcingbusin...@yahoo.com> writes:
>
> >Both are excellent finger spinners. It would be very interesting to
> >see how the Indian batsmen would fare against these two very good
> >finger spinners even in India where we are supposed to be very strong.
> >Add Umar Gul to the line up and Pakistan would have a very potent
> >bowling line up for Indian conditions. India may well win the test
> >series but I'm sure those two bowlers would really test our batsmen.
> >After all that is what test cricket is all about. The bowlers and
> >batsmen both getting tested. :)
>
> I reckon that India have the edge in batting but Pakistan have the edge
> in bowling and probably in fielding and captaincy too. So it would be
> very interesting.
> --

India's batting lineup needs a cleanout and a rethink. At the moment,
I fail to see them succeesding in any conditions, against anyone bar
Bang and Zim.

[Call Centre]

On Jan 29, 12:22 am, Mike Holmans <m...@jackalope.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 10:34:08 -0800 (PST), Call Centre

> <outsourcingbusin...@yahoo.com> tapped the keyboard and brought forth:

Well, in India I presume our finger spinners Ashwin and Ojha would
also do well but my post was more to question how our batting line up
would perform even in India (where they are supposed to dominate)
against a real quality spin attack comprising of very good finger
spinners. The last time I saw a truly top world class finger spinner
really trouble the Indians was in the 1999 test series against
Pakistan in India. Where Saqlain Mustaq bowled exceptionally well.
Taking 20 wickets in the 2 test match series. He took a 5 wicket haul
in each of the 4 innings played. And took a 10 wicket haul in both the
test matches. I believe Ajmal is almost as good as Mustaq and Rehman
could be the ideal foil to him. I would really like to see how our
Indian batsmen cope against such high quality finger spinners in
Indian condtions. :)

[Call Centre]

It would certainly be an interesting test series. If "rank turners"
are prepared spinners on both sides would dominate. However, against
Pakistan (especially having such good finger spinners) I doubt whether
the Indian board would allow rank turners to be prepared. We might
actually see flat pitches which remain true till the last day.
However, even in such placid conditions it would be interesting to see
how the batsmen on both sides perform. India might have the edge here
on flat pitches however. :)

[Call Centre]

Yes, I did find Ajmal's action slightly suspect. But once Muralitharan
was allowed to bowl in that fashion than that opened the door for
others to follow. All this so many degrees allowed etc. etc. has now
opened the door for that kind of a bowling action and we will have to
get used to many more spinners in the future emulating that type of
bowling actions. :)

[CaraMia]

I saw highlights of the last days play. Ajmal didn't look blatant like
Botha or Murali. At worst, he would be in Harbhajan's league. However, I
didn't see too shots which showed him side on.

[alvey]

With their traditional methods... Refusing DRS and bullying the umps.



alv

[John Hall]

In article
<a8c5a6b6-c493-4bfe...@y5g2000pbk.googlegroups.com>,

Apparently the umpires in the match just finished have said that they
are perfectly happy with his action.

[Plum4u]

On 28/01/2012 11:34 PM, Call Centre wrote:
> Both are excellent finger spinners. It would be very interesting to
> see how the Indian batsmen would fare against these two very good
> finger spinners

Tendulkar looked clueless against Ajmal in the semifinal.

[eusebius]

I have been saying as much for years. It's a shame. But only Pakistan
and Sri Lanka seem to have milked the anomaly. Perhaps SA to a degree
(but Botha is hardly a regular test player)

[eusebius]

On Jan 29, 8:36 pm, John Hall <nospam_no...@jhall.co.uk> wrote:
> In article

> <a8c5a6b6-c493-4bfe-837c-228f96b83...@y5g2000pbk.googlegroups.com>,

>  Call Centre <outsourcingbusin...@yahoo.com> writes:
>
> >On Jan 29, 12:37 pm, eusebius <eusebiu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Jan 29, 4:34 am, Call Centre <outsourcingbusin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> > Both are excellent finger and elbow spinners
>
> >> Typos corrected
>
> >Yes, I did find Ajmal's action slightly suspect. But once Muralitharan
> >was allowed to bowl in that fashion than that opened the door for
> >others to follow. All this so many degrees allowed etc. etc. has now
> >opened the door for that kind of a bowling action and we will have to
> >get used to many more spinners in the future emulating that type of
> >bowling actions. :)
>
> Apparently the umpires in the match just finished have said that they
> are perfectly happy with his action.
>

They must be blind, or cowed.

[eusebius]

By the way, I wasn't suggesting for a second any problem with Rehman.

[Call Centre]

Probably due to the coaching etc. in the other countries plus maybe
even the acceptance (or unacceptance) in the club domestic level of
allowing such actions. But eventually, I'm sure young players in other
countries will want to bowl like that (if they can get away with it)
especially if they can earn big bucks in IPL etc. I did an analysis of
Muralitharan before he was allowed to bowl like this. (When Hair
called him for no ball and first brought to light his controversial
action). During that time it was a big controversy and he was very
circumspect about bowling like that. During those days if one saw his
wickets per test match etc. He had about 4 wickets per test match upto
that point. Once the ICC cleared him however and he could bowl like
that as much as he liked he went up to between 6 to 7 wickets per test
match and ended his career with an incredible 6 wickets per test match
getting 800 test wickets. But if you take away that controversial
action Muralitharan would still be regarded as a very good bowler who
got 4 wickets per test match. He would have probably still ended his
career at about 500 test wickets (or close to it). Harbhajan on the
other hand is an ordinary bowler who could benefit mainly due to his
suspect deliveries. Inspite of bowling suspect deliveries he has about
4 wickets per test match. Without it I believe he would have been
somewhere around 3 wickets or so per test match.

They should probably even allow the fast bowlers some leeway. That way
at least we might get bowlers who can bowl faster and make the matches
more interesting. Since batsmen today are all padded up and protected
all over their body. They have helmets etc. On top of that they only
allow one bouncer per over in test match cricket (or is it two). This
is ridiculous. So, if a fast bowler is already so hampered and at a
disadvantage maybe they should give some leeway to fast bowlers as
well. Would make test match cricket a whole lot more exciting to watch
with the batsmen hopping around. :)

[eusebius]

I always felt that Murali was talented, his improvement over the years
might have been due to greater maturity. Perhaps as you say Murali
realized (he was no dunce, spinners have to be crafty) that he could
get away with it with impunity. But I detected no marked change in his
action over the last few years. Mind you he must have been extra
conscious of his action in Australia. I agree that bowlers are the
whipping boys of cricket, but there are other ways to even out the
ledger rather than allowing a free for all with respect to chucking.
On the other hand if the levee is breached conclusively and
irreversibly, then the floodgates may be permanently opened and thus
unstoppable. But chucking to my way of thinking is a blight. A run up
then incidentally becomes superfluous, nearly, as momentum must be
stopped prior to the point of release. In baseball they have the
standing chuck. Anyway our views may be rather similar on this issue,
only a difference (in degree) in terms of what can be prevented in
future :)

[Call Centre]

Not just the last few years. Please check his statistics before the
1994 Australia tour and upto the point where the ICC were still
debating his action. They cleared him a little while later. So from
that point onwards which was still sometime in the 90's till when he
retired he bowled with impunity regarding his controversial action.
But before that carte blanche was allowed by the ICC (till that point)
he had about 4 wickets per test match. So, for a majority part of his
career he bowled unhinged with that controversial action. But before
he got that go ahead (and when he was still under scrutiny sometime in
the 90's) till that point he had about 4 wickets per test match. I am
not sure how many test matches he had played till then (maybe 30 or
35) could be more or even less than that. But check those statistics.
You will find that what I am saying holds true. After he got the go
ahead to bowl his doosras or teesras or what not (which people like
Bedi have called javelin throwing) he then started to take 6 to 7
wickets per test match for the rest of his career. :)

Mind you he must have been extra
> conscious of his action in Australia. I agree that bowlers are the
> whipping boys of cricket, but there are other ways to even out the
> ledger rather than allowing a free for all with respect to chucking.
> On the other hand if the levee is breached conclusively and
> irreversibly, then the floodgates may be permanently opened and thus
> unstoppable. But chucking to my way of thinking is a blight. A run up
> then incidentally becomes superfluous, nearly, as momentum must be
> stopped prior to the point of release. In baseball they have the
> standing chuck. Anyway our views may be rather similar on this issue,
> only a difference (in degree) in terms of what can be prevented in

> future :)- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[eusebius]

On Jan 31, 11:01 pm, Call Centre <outsourcingbusin...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>

> Not just the last few years. Please check his statistics before the
> 1994 Australia tour and upto the point where the ICC were still
> debating his action. They cleared him a little while later. So from
> that point onwards which was still sometime in the 90's till when he
> retired he bowled with impunity regarding his controversial action.
> But before that carte blanche was allowed by the ICC (till that point)
> he had about 4 wickets per test match. So, for a majority part of his
> career he bowled unhinged with that controversial action. But before
> he got that go ahead (and when he was still under scrutiny sometime in
> the 90's) till that point he had about 4 wickets per test match. I am
> not sure how many test matches he had played till then (maybe 30 or
> 35) could be more or even less than that. But check those statistics.
> You will find that what I am saying holds true. After he got the go
> ahead to bowl his doosras or teesras or what not (which people like
> Bedi have called javelin throwing) he then started to take 6 to 7
> wickets per test match for the rest of his career. :)

It is sad if he got away with 'carte blanche' as you put it. In
Australia perhaps he was more circumspect; his record here might bear
this out. Evidently he has a new career these days:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ri1KrC7YpCs/Twc0Z6BdtGI/AAAAAAAABFk/m7K4sUFsKf8/s1600/cg-Vice_Admiral_MP_Muralidharan__AVSM__NM.jpg

[eusebius]

On Jan 31, 11:01 pm, Call Centre <outsourcingbusin...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>

> Not just the last few years. Please check his statistics before the
> 1994 Australia tour and upto the point where the ICC were still
> debating his action. They cleared him a little while later. So from
> that point onwards which was still sometime in the 90's till when he
> retired he bowled with impunity regarding his controversial action.
> But before that carte blanche was allowed by the ICC (till that point)
> he had about 4 wickets per test match. So, for a majority part of his
> career he bowled unhinged with that controversial action. But before
> he got that go ahead (and when he was still under scrutiny sometime in
> the 90's) till that point he had about 4 wickets per test match. I am
> not sure how many test matches he had played till then (maybe 30 or
> 35) could be more or even less than that. But check those statistics.
> You will find that what I am saying holds true. After he got the go
> ahead to bowl his doosras or teesras or what not (which people like
> Bedi have called javelin throwing) he then started to take 6 to 7
> wickets per test match for the rest of his career. :)

Look you make an interesting and startling point about the way Murali
may have been able to exploit the carte blanche the whole chucking
hoopla enabled him to get away with. If, as I feel, he was more
circumspect in Australia perhaps that is why he was so ineffective
here.

Evidently questionably-gotten success has enabled him to move on in
careers. Now he is chucking out illegal immigrants ;)

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ri1KrC7YpCs/Twc0Z6BdtGI/AAAAAAAABFk/m7K4sUFsKf8/s1600/cg-Vice_Admiral_MP_Muralidharan__AVSM__NM.jpg

[eusebius]

Repost due to google gropes