Re: 4th Test: Australia vs. India at Adelaide, Jan. 24-28, 2008
VVS Laxman c Gilchrist b Lee 51(102)*India:* 282/5 (73.3 Ovs)**
Re: 4th Test: Australia vs. India at Adelaide, Jan. 24-28, 2008
I am losing a lot of respect that i had for Sunil as commentator...he doesnt let go any chance to look for a controversy. An appeal was made by Hogg and Adam for a Caught behind and after it got turned down by umpire, adam asked sachin something...nothing big, but gavaskar goes in his typical way, Waaao waaao, lets see if Mr Baowden and Mr Rauf report this...as if it was start of 3rd WW.
Lee remove VVS witha very good short ball......ball is reversing enough to trouble new batsmen if bowled at 146KMPH+......should be good final hour for today's play
Re: 4th Test: Australia vs. India at Adelaide, Jan. 24-28, 2008
39th Test CENTURY!!, 9th against the Australians! what aggressive cricket by Sachin Tendulkar in the last half an hour!
What a player - scoring runs against the very best in the World and proving to be a true legend of the game.
Re: 4th Test: Australia vs. India at Adelaide, Jan. 24-28, 2008
Though India appear to be in a good position......the fact is that there is not much batting to come after this (even though only 5 wickets have gone down). India are playing 1 batsman short, plus they have a long tail.
I would be content if India manage to get to 450.
btw, did the failures of Dravid/Gangu have anything to do with their omisssion from the ODI team?
Re: 4th Test: Australia vs. India at Adelaide, Jan. 24-28, 2008
it would have better if laxman was still there
but good recovery thanks to sachin and laxman
gotta say gavaskar is an getting more and more senile by the day
Re: 4th Test: Australia vs. India at Adelaide, Jan. 24-28, 2008
What a batsman this Tendulkar… still scoring centuries :k:
Re: 4th Test: Australia vs. India at Adelaide, Jan. 24-28, 2008
Australian catching has been awful....hayden missed a sitter in the end from Dhoni ( ball seemed to dip a a bit) and earlier Gilchrist let Laxman off
Re: 4th Test: Australia vs. India at Adelaide, Jan. 24-28, 2008
Yes against the very best in their own backyard…
Re: 4th Test: Australia vs. India at Adelaide, Jan. 24-28, 2008
gavaskar sattiya gaya hai...he is paranoid of desis getting a raw deal from ICC...fine once or twice mentioning it...but to harp on it is pain to the ears....he smells conspiracy everywhere
also it was sickening to see him getting an orgasm when Sachin hit the century today
Re: 4th Test: Australia vs. India at Adelaide, Jan. 24-28, 2008
^ :D
Re: 4th Test: Australia vs. India at Adelaide, Jan. 24-28, 2008
Well-played India today. A lot depends on Tendulkar and Dhoni as to India’s final score but they should aim for a minimum of 400. Tendulkar’s 124* also equalled Lara’s record of 9 hundreds against Australia in the last two decades. 6 of Tendulkar’s 9 hundreds against them are in Australia which is a tribute to his great batting skill. 4 of Lara’s 9 hundreds were in Australia.
http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/content/records/284160.html
TENDULKAR (includes his current 124*)
25* Tests, 2310 runs, HS 241*, ave: 57.75, 9 hundreds and 9 50s
LARA
31 Tests, 2856 runs, HS 277, ave: 51.00, 9 hundreds and 11 50s
Re: 4th Test: Australia vs. India at Adelaide, Jan. 24-28, 2008
gavaskar sattiya gaya hai...
Either that or he has his eyes set on joining the BJP or Shiv Sena.
Re: 4th Test: Australia vs. India at Adelaide, Jan. 24-28, 2008
btw, England scored 550 here (the last time a Test was played at Adelaide) and still lost.
Also, Asad Rauf did not uphold two plumb LBWs (against Sehwag and Dravid) but gave Ganguly wrongly out.
I think, LBWs might as well be decided by a toss of the coin.
Re: 4th Test: Australia vs. India at Adelaide, Jan. 24-28, 2008
One in a million chance, the toss will result in more controversies. A penny for your thoughts. 
Re: 4th Test: Australia vs. India at Adelaide, Jan. 24-28, 2008
I honestly don't know why people complain about LBW decisions. You guys think Hawk-eye is perfect? It is only 75% accurate. Now add 25% of width to each hawk-eye simulation and you will notice that the subsequent path of most deliveries would be inconclusive. The ONLY person on a cricket pitch to make the best judgment is the UMPIRE at the bowling end. This is part of cricket. The umpire is part of the game. His decisions no matter correct or otherwise are part of the game. Accept the fact and also accept the decision and don't think too much on whether it was out or not.
Re: 4th Test: Australia vs. India at Adelaide, Jan. 24-28, 2008
^ From where did you get the 25% magic number...if I may ask !
Re: 4th Test: Australia vs. India at Adelaide, Jan. 24-28, 2008
I have 10 years of experience in AI engineering and statistical analysis. The technology used in hawk-eye is the same that guides Pakistani Police - which we all know is not on the straight path.
Re: 4th Test: Australia vs. India at Adelaide, Jan. 24-28, 2008
^Funguy, I am not talking of marginal decisions (where Hawkeye cannot be relied upon) , but those decisions which are outright wrong (where many times even by looking at a regular TV replay, you can tell that the LBW decision was CLEARLY WRONG).
My rough solution is the following (finer details can be sorted out) :
Give the batting & bowling team the option to challenge the Field Umpire's decision for a maximum of 3 times in a match.
So, for example : Symonds is given LBW by the Umpire but he feels that he nicked the ball to the pads....he would walk back to the pavillion and discuss the same with Ponting (his captain). Ponting will decide to challenge the field Umpire's decision by some gesture or some communication channel. (there would be a time limit within which a Captain can challenge the decision) . An announcement would be made in the stadium that Australia have decided to challenge the Umpire's decision and the decision has been referred to the THIRD UMPIRE.
The third Umpire can make one of the following three decisions :
(1) OUT
(2) NOT OUT (will not count towards Australia's quota of 3 challenges)
(3) REPLAYS/HAWKEYE INCONCLUSIVE (will not count towards Australia's quota of 3 challenges) - and field Umpire's decision would stand. (this option may be used for marginal LBW decisions where Hawkeye cannot be blindly trusted).
Similar thing would happen when the fielding Captain decides to challenge an Umpiring decision.
The third Umpire's role would be crucial in this whole system. He should make a decision only when "absolutely convinced" by the replays or Hawkeye (taking into account the margin of error in Hawkeyes). ---- else he should use the "Inconclusive" option.
Obviously, the above system is inspired by Professional Tennis.
Re: 4th Test: Australia vs. India at Adelaide, Jan. 24-28, 2008
^ OK...so this comes from a 10 years exp AI engineering and statistical analyst from PAKISTAN. Aur kuch bolney ke zaroorat nahee hai, Your resume says it all !!
Re: 4th Test: Australia vs. India at Adelaide, Jan. 24-28, 2008
^Funguy, I am not talking of marginal decisions (where Hawkeye cannot be relied upon) , but those decisions which are outright wrong (where many times even by looking at a regular TV replay, you can tell that the LBW decision was CLEARLY WRONG).
My rough solution is the following (finer details can be sorted out) :
Give the batting & bowling team the option to challenge the Umpire's decision for a maximum of 3 times in a match.
So, example (1) : Symonds is given LBW by the Umpire but he feels that he nicked the ball to the pads....he would walk back to the pavillion and discuss the same with Ponting (his captain). Ponting will decide to challenge the decision by some gesture or some communication channel. (there would be a time limit within which a Captain can challenge the decision) . An announcement would be made in the stadium that Australia have decided to challenge the Umpire's decision and the decision has been referred to the THIRD UMPIRE.
The third Umpire can make one of the following three decisions :
(1) OUT (2) NOT OUT (will not count towards Australia's quota of 3 challenges) (3) REPLAYS/HAWKEYE INCONCLUSIVE (will not count towards Australia's quota of 3 challenges) - and field Umpire's decision would stand.
Similar thing would happen when the fielding Captain decides to challenge an Umpiring decision.
The third Umpire's role would be crucial in this whole system. He should make a decision only when "absolutely convinced" by the replays or Hawkeye (taking into account the margin of error in Hawkeyes). ---- else he should use the "Inconclusive" option.
Obviously, the above system is inspired by Professional Tennis.
Its the otherway round.....Hawk eye is being used in tennis after its succesful implementation in Cricket.