India are doing the same thing they did in the last ODI series against Australia, they are making themselves look silly and look like bad losers. During the 2005 Ashes series did Ricky Ponting come out and bag the umpires over the horrible decisions against Damien Martyn or did he just say 'things didnt go our way today and we will learn from it'. India suck it up and stop your whining because 4-0 will be a definate unless they calm down because the last thing you want to do is **** off the Aussies because they will want to inflict pain. Not by hitting the batsman on bouncy wickets but pumping them like the boxing day test.

__________________
Bill Ponsford - The only one who could play in Bradman’s company and make it a duet.

The umpiring was attrocious for sure. However having said that though, a top team NEVER, NEVER, gives up.

NEVER.

When the pressure was on and the game was there to be saved India folded.

Yep justice was done, the team that dropped it's bundle lost.

It makes me wonder if we would have had all this response and outpouring of emotion if a guy called Michael Clarke did not come on to bowl eleven balls that claimed three Indian wickets, and the match ended up as a draw.

Hugely selective memory here Quaggy. I have already posted today on pontings behaviour in the 2005 series. Your phrase "silly and bad losers" sums up his behaviour at Nottingham perfectly.

The whinning would have been there - not to this extent though. The umpiring was bad. But India would have still had a chance to tie or win the series if they had seen out those last 18 balls.

Losing is never fun, however the true measure of a champion team, it's Captain, and the character of it's fans is the way they react to losing and move on to the next challenge.

We all have been there, and all have failed the test in some cases, but the best of the best learn to move on without the bitterness and name calling.

I Personally beleive umpires have a tough job, but they should be helped with a kind of mini TV idea to view replays, "Snicko", Hawk eye and hot spot to judge LBW's, catches and run out/stumpings. only with all available technology should you be able to make a tough decision. sure it would delay the game for a minute or so every time but you wouldn't have these arguements and there would be a 99% success rate. with the other 1% Benefit of doubt.

Just a though. The umpire is supposed to give not out if there is doubt over the wicket right?

So, if the umpire doesn't know whether the balls been caught (i.e. the clark catch) than isn't that instantly enoguh doubt to give the batsman not out. Why are fielders taking low catches the only people quizzed other wickets, why don't the umpires also ask the batsman if they nicked it?

There was an agreement before the test by the teams that the "fielders" word would be taken on those kind of catches if he thought he DID take the catch.

Didn't Ponting say a ball didn't carry to him at Gully earlier in the game when the other fielders appealed ?

Kumble now says they will no longer honor that agreement.

This agreement can only work if both sides are going to be honest about it. Having seen the catch I am bound to say this was not the case.

Yes ponting did not claim a catch earlier but so what? It didn't come close to carrying and the fact other oz players were appealing says it all.

Lets not single out oz here; Dhoni did the same thing at Lords last summer and so did Bell in Pakistan a couple of years ago to mention just two.

These agreements are all very well before a series starts but in the heat of battle players judgement can be impaired. I don't blame Kumble for saying the agreements off one bit because clarke and ponting have clearly used it under false pretences.

I've seen the Video. Do you think Clarke caught the Ball ? I do.