Australia vs India - Second Test @ GABBA - Dec 17-21 - Day 3

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

Insightful. Yes I'm aware of that.
So why bother saying india would've won if they'd done more with their second innings. At crucial periods in this test India weren't able to capitalise on their position of dominance - they will rue their efforts not to build a better first innings score after being 4/311 after day one and then fail to close out Australia's first innings when they had us at 6/247 to eventually concede a near 100 run lead

Then after absorbing a tricky patch to end day 3 they capitulated and only managed to post a moderate lead thanks to a fighting knock from a guy who's somewhat selfish decision not to bat at the start of play helped create the calamity to begin with

Sure the run chase was a bit shambolic towards the end but we had 7 wickets in hand within 20 runs and I think the batsmen weren't as mentally focused as they might have been had they needed more than 15 runs or so to win

India did persevere and credit to them for that but it was their inability to do that earlier that cost them

Would've. Could've. Should've. Didn't.
 
How would you guys on BF rate the Australians performance against India in the 2nd Test out of 10. I'd give it a 6. Still room for improvement, with question marks hanging over Watson and Haddin.
 

Why? If you've mentioned prior to the test that you have a few vegetarians in the team, and the Gabba catering can't be stuffed to get it right, of course the players have a right to be angry.

If one of the players had a peanut allergy, and the dishes contained peanuts without any warning or sign on it, what do you think the consequences of that would be? Furthermore, the fact that they weren't allowed to bring outside food in, purely because the inside food was horrible, is just sad.
 
The Indians are quite within their rights to ask for a vegetarian dish so to not have at least one available is really quite poor

Should've gone asked siddle for a couple of bananas
 
So why bother saying india would've won if they'd done more with their second innings. At crucial periods in this test India weren't able to capitalise on their position of dominance - they will rue their efforts not to build a better first innings score after being 4/311 after day one and then fail to close out Australia's first innings when they had us at 6/247 to eventually concede a near 100 run lead

Then after absorbing a tricky patch to end day 3 they capitulated and only managed to post a moderate lead thanks to a fighting knock from a guy who's somewhat selfish decision not to bat at the start of play helped create the calamity to begin with

Sure the run chase was a bit shambolic towards the end but we had 7 wickets in hand within 20 runs and I think the batsmen weren't as mentally focused as they might have been had they needed more than 15 runs or so to win

India did persevere and credit to them for that but it was their inability to do that earlier that cost them

Would've. Could've. Should've. Didn't.
well done aussies and smithy
could be a great captain for us
well liked by his team mates
 
Why Wade? He has shown nothing with the gloves or bat. I was all for him replacing Haddin a few years ago because he had the fire and form. Then they picked him and his keeping was absolutely atrocious. I partially blame Wade for Lyon's lack of wicket taking in the past. You can't take wickets when your keeper misses most catches and stumpings.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Sounds like an exciting finish. Well done Aussies. 2-0 See you at the 'G on Boxing Day. Bring it on.

India, how about bringing on DRS in future?
Australia, could we please go a test match injury free!
 
So why bother saying india would've won if they'd done more with their second innings. At crucial periods in this test India weren't able to capitalise on their position of dominance - they will rue their efforts not to build a better first innings score after being 4/311 after day one and then fail to close out Australia's first innings when they had us at 6/247 to eventually concede a near 100 run lead

Then after absorbing a tricky patch to end day 3 they capitulated and only managed to post a moderate lead thanks to a fighting knock from a guy who's somewhat selfish decision not to bat at the start of play helped create the calamity to begin with

Sure the run chase was a bit shambolic towards the end but we had 7 wickets in hand within 20 runs and I think the batsmen weren't as mentally focused as they might have been had they needed more than 15 runs or so to win

India did persevere and credit to them for that but it was their inability to do that earlier that cost them

Would've. Could've. Should've. Didn't.

No arguments from me there, I quite agree as I've been saying throughout this match. Not quite sure what your point is aside from stating the obvious. They didn't capatilise on their opportunities and should be rightly kicking themselves for not adding on another 60-70 runs to the target.

Whilst the chase itself was made unnecessarily difficult, it shouldn't gloss over the fact that India went missing during key periods of the match.
 
I'd like to see how many 2 wickets overs Johnson has had in his career. Only other bowler I can think of who did that regularly recently is Swann.

The clumping of wickets is so dangerous to the opposition as it engenders panic.

Probably pre-banning Ajmal was up to it too.
 
Someone needs to tell these guys about the s**t holes Australia had to live in and the conditions they had to endure in the 1969-70 tour (and other tours) of India. Players returning home with life threatening illnesses, some never playing cricket again. They may not feel so bad about a little bit of meat they can push to one side on their plate. Even up to recent times, Australians have had to ship in their own water and food whilst on tour to India. If they're not happy, I suggest they learn to do the same.
 
Someone needs to tell these guys about the s**t holes Australia had to live in and the conditions they had to endure in the 1969-70 tour (and other tours) of India. Players returning home with life threatening illnesses, some never playing cricket again. They may not feel so bad about a little bit of meat they can push to one side on their plate. Even up to recent times, Australians have had to ship in their own water and food whilst on tour to India. If they're not happy, I suggest they learn to do the same.

First of all, it's not 1969 anymore. Secondly, you don't honestly believe that 'pushing meat to the side of the plate' is a genuine and viable alternative for a vegetarian? Particularly one of Indian origin (on the assumption it's beef).
 
I'm with the above posters, if they are failing to provide vegetarian options then it's pretty poor form.

Me too. Should be doing better on this (assuming the report is correct). Expecting a vegetarian option is not unreasonable, it's not like they were asking for quinoa and goji berries or whatever it was the Poms expected last year!
 
Me too. Should be doing better on this (assuming the report is correct). Expecting a vegetarian option is not unreasonable, it's not like they were asking for quinoa and goji berries or whatever it was the Poms expected last year!

Agreed. It's unacceptable not to have their needs catered for in 2014 especially at this level of sport. Of course, that's on the presumption the original story is true. The Indian press can tend to over exaggerate things.
 
Well the best keeper in the country is Peter Nevill and the best keeper/batsman in the country is Peter Nevill. Therefore, the selectors should take the safe option and stick with Haddin or replace him with Wade.
 
First of all, it's not 1969 anymore. Secondly, you don't honestly believe that 'pushing meat to the side of the plate' is a genuine and viable alternative for a vegetarian? Particularly one of Indian origin (on the assumption it's beef).

Yes, believe it or not, I am aware it is not 1969 any more, so stop being a smart arse, okay? My point is, if you cared to understand my post, is that travelling overseas is fraught with many worse things than not getting a meal to your liking. Happens to me every time. I manage to survive, just as I am sure the Indian players will as well. Australian cricketers are aware of that which is why on occasion they cater for it with their own provisions. Geez, people need to toughen up in today's world. "Oh, boo hoo, I didn't get exactly what I asked for". Well, tough. Deal with it.
 
Yes, believe it or not, I am aware it is not 1969 any more, so stop being a smart arse, okay? My point is, if you cared to understand my post, is that travelling overseas is fraught with many worse things than not getting a meal to your liking. Happens to me every time. I manage to survive, just as I am sure the Indian players will as well. Australian cricketers are aware of that which is why on occasion they cater for it with their own provisions. Geez, people need to toughen up in today's world. "Oh, boo hoo, I didn't get exactly what I asked for". Well, tough. Deal with it.

You were the one who likened this event to a period 45 years ago, hence my comment as it has no relevance to a player not being catered for today. And yes, I'm quite aware of the conditions overseas in particular India. I've been there 22 times for work and travel.

Of course they'll survive. That's not even in question. Your original contention was for them to put it to the side of their plate, which if they are vegetarian for religious purposes (which many Indians are), is completely ridiculous. Anyway, hopefully it's not an issue that the Indian camp blow out of proportion.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top