India v Australia: Third Test

[Maranello]

Originally Posted by Shaka

LOL. Now that's one hard-ass batting line up! I always think that Chanderpaul doesn't get the credit he deserves from West Indies...at least that's the impression I get listening to commentators like Holding and Tony Cozier. For me he is a lynchpin of the side which is filled with too many flash harry's who rarely show much inclination for sticking in when the going gets tough.

True, but that is the lot of the hard working grafter...whether its Kirsten (generally overshadowed by Gibbs, Cullinan or Kallis)..or Richardson (generally overshadowed by Astle, Fleming)... or Katich (vs Hayden, Ponting, Martyn, et al)...and the same applies to Chanderpaul vis-a-vis Sarwan or Lara or the others...

None of these chaps get the credit they deserve... unless {a} they have sublime copybook technique, a wonderful temperament and make defending look beautiful... a la Rahul Dravid ... or {b} they are such hard b*st*rds that they single-handedly win matches, series and wars, whilst accumulating runs by the truck load...a la Steve Waugh

[Mike Small]

At times I struggle to understand what people are trying to imply when they say the so called ugly but effective batsmen of our generation "are never given enough credit". Just about every time their name is mentioned in a discussion people are quick to point out their worth to their respective sides, laud there guts and determination, praise their low profile nature and blabb on for a many life time about it all, which is not to say wrong but it is ironic when and the end of the day you'll ask them and they won't forget to call them "under rated". It is true that they more flasy players as it were are more popular, but no one's ever shyed from appreciating the likes of Kirsten, Chanderpaul and Richardson.

Nasser Hussain use to do that role for England - the ugly buissness of scoring when we were 10-2 and it was a shocker of a pitch to bat on - Hussain gets all the credit in the world from his contemprories. When NZ toured England last summer the story of Richardson the fringe player and spinner batting at XI and the evolution of Richardson the opening test batsmen averaging in the late 40s was one of the most talked about things in the press. He had a a good series and every time he came up with a good performance people told me that story of his. I for once don't think he was ever over shadowed by Astle , Fleming or anyone else for that matter.

The same goes for Kirsten, he came to England, scored runs, showed gritt and he got liked for. Chanderpaul was WI's most successful batsmen this summer againts us, there was no way he could have been under reted or not given enough credit. All these players, the grafters, the real backbones of their sides mentioned here are respected, reputed names in international cricket and I for once feel the press or fans alike have never , absolutely never undermined them in the wake of their more illustrious partners. They do get the credit they deserve. And they are most certainly not under rated, not at least in my books for that matter.

[Maranello]

You may be right Mike...I guess what I meant by lack of credit relative to other players, it was not what the press go on about, but the actual atmosphere in a ground. Most of the tens of thousands of people who turn out to watch test cricket in most countries do not do so to watch Richardson or Chanders bat all day... they would rather see Lara or Astle... and this shows in who they cheer for, who they instinctively applaud for, etc. So a 100 from Richardson may actually get the crowd going to a similar extend as a 50 from Astle...

I agree that the press etc do tend to pick out the big scorers for credit, even if they are the grafters

[Maranello]

India all-out for 185, in reply to Australia's 398. Gillespie 5 for 56, McGrath 3 for 27.

Aus did not enforce the follow-on and are 8/0 at the moment . . .

[Amit]

Aus 398-10 india 185-10 aus 115-2 aus clearly have the advantage which is a must win game for india I think aus will set ind a target of 500 plus to win and indias batsmen are not on form

[Nikhil]

That's the word, which summerises India's performance in one word.

All of them need a real good hammering. It's been a long time now, since they have played well. I'm too disgusted to write anything more.

[fair_&_balance]

Originally Posted by Nikhil

That's the word, which summerises India's performance in one word.

All of them need a real good hammering. It's been a long time now, since they have played well. I'm too disgusted to write anything more.

Exactly my thought. So much of Final Frontier.

[Beny]

Originally Posted by Amit

Aus 398-10 india 185-10 aus 115-2 aus clearly have the advantage which is a must win game for india I think aus will set ind a target of 500 plus to win and indias batsmen are not on form

I wouldent be surprised if we declare overnight and bowl in the morning to make sure India can't force the draw. We've been having problems dissmising the Indian tail so it would be worth giving ourselves some time. Anything can happen with Sachin and Dravid in your team.

[Maranello]

Originally Posted by Beny

I wouldent be surprised if we declare overnight and bowl in the morning to make sure India can't force the draw. We've been having problems dissmising the Indian tail so it would be worth giving ourselves some time. Anything can happen with Sachin and Dravid in your team.

Interesting that Aus chose the safety-first route, opting to bat almost till lunch on the 4th day to get a lead of 542. So India only have to bat 5 sessions to save the match, though have already lost Chopra in the 4th over to Gillespie.

It seemed Gilchrist held off the declaration to allow Martyn get a 100 - he declared as soon as Martyn got out on 97. Very strange to put the individual above the team, if that is indeed what Gilchrist was doing.

[Beny]

3 Aussies have been out in the 90's in this test. I hope it's not going to become habit. Still though 90's a top score.