Suleiman
Test Debutant
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2014
- Runs
- 15,874
- Post of the Week
- 2
Cummins looks relaxed.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
You have to stay under the sun for 50 overs and bat again. Plus the pressure. So batting first is generally the norm. May be Australia has some secret something we don't know.Wow Cummins chose to bowl first? Seems everyone was suggesting to bat first!
They are worried about Jadeja. I am telling you. He always gives them nightmares. On a dry wicket he can be destructive. Also Chennai test probably forced them to do that.Chasing during a final.. incredibly bold decision, I suppose we’ll see if it pays off. Perhaps they’re expecting significant amounts of dew?
Kinda understandable when you are compensated handsomely for making a howler of a call at the tossCummins looks relaxed.
May be because of dew. Though this is one of the rare stadiums where out of 30 matches teams batting 1st and second have won 15 each. Even in this WC so far out of 4 matches in this stadium its again 2 matches apiece. So toss is actually not a big deal on this ground.Bowl?
Wow I didn't expect that decision
Yeah I’m very confused. Also considering how much the Indian fast bowlers have done under the lights.You have to stay under the sun for 50 overs and bat again. Plus the pressure. So batting first is generally the norm. May be Australia has some secret something we don't know.
Issue is not indian spinners to be honest. It is to cope with the fast bowling trio. If they are already 3/4 wickets down before the spinners come on the match will be over.Seems like Aussies think they can escape Indian spinners with the dew in the 2nd innings.
He did look tense. He was probably surprised by the aussie callIs it only me or others also observed, Rohit looked under pressure and tense.
You have to stay under the sun for 50 overs and bat again. Plus the pressure. So batting first is generally the norm. May be Australia has some secret something we don't know.
So when it's even stevens just bat 1st in a final.May be because of dew. Though this is one of the rare stadiums where out of 30 matches teams batting 1st and second have won 15 each. Even in this WC so far out of 4 matches in this stadium its again 2 matches apiece. So toss is actually not a big deal on this ground.
what the hell!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. Conventional wisdom says bat first
Last three WC final
Chasing teams have won the match
That is a major influence i guess. Think about it in that match India did not have Shami.The loss at Chennai could also be haunting Australia as they collapsed spectacularly after batting first.
Cummins has other responsibilitieswhat the hell!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. Conventional wisdom says bat first
2003 Final - India won the toss and decided to bowl first, lost the match.In the 2003 World Cup
Australia won 10 matches on the trot before the final
India won 8 matches on the trot before the final
In the 2023 World Cup
India won 10 matches on the trot before the final
Australia have won 8 matches on the trot before the final
Australia won their 3rd WC title in 2003
Can India win their 3rd WC title in 2023?
It exactly reversed. India was use all their anti dew spray to ensure dew does not play any role.Maybe a repeat of 2003 WC final, but with roles changed?
Wasim vibes for realEveryone calling out Cummins for his decision feels like deja vu when Wasim was being called out for batting first in the 99 final.
Ponting on screen rn, wonder how he feels about the decision.
A lot of drama / hype already and we’re not even in the actual game yet
Exactly especially as it is overcast English conditions.IMO Cummins elected to bowl after keeping 1999 WC final in mind
Australian should have batted first
Avg score batting first is 250 and its a losing score. 300 is a winnable scoreI think anything over 250 won't be chased by Australia unless there's heavy dew.
Yes I'm sure both are happy one way or anotherSo Toss wasn't a factor after all. India would have batted by default and Aussies chose to bowl.
Both teams should be happy with the outcome.
So if India had won the toss, we should have bowled too?There may be several reasons lol One reason is they were scared of getting shot out for a real low score. Second reason less dryness spinners will be less effective. Third reason dew.
Literally electric blue everywhereElectric atmosphere
Avg score batting first is 250 and its a losing score. 300 is a winnable score
You guys need to chill. No need to delete/modify every small harmless banter.Guys, please do not make this thread a controversial thread. Stay on the topic and talk about the match instead of talking about any toss or pitch controversy here, We have other threads available for that.
No bat first always. Difference is very very marginal. But fielding for 50 overs and batting has its own disadvantages.So if India had won the toss, we should have bowled too?