What's new

India [234/3] beat Australia [230] by 7 wickets in the third ODI to win the ODI series 2-1

WengerOut said:
MSD 2nd 50 was match winning but Kohlis innings at MCG test was not. Maybe it is too much to expect consistency from you.
Click to expand...
Can be more than one match winner, the last match Kohli scored a century and played a bigger role but Dhoni saw the team home so he deserves some credit. The job was not done.
 
Last edited:
As I said earlier, this series win will do us more harm than good.
 
Jadhav's success has probably ensured that Gill won't get a game in NZ.
 
Aman said:
If we had half the resources you had, I can assure you we wouldn't just have the 2 WCs. You've underperformed with all the advantages you have over every other country - you have the money and talent pool but are behind Aus and WI in terms of success.
Click to expand...

You are right that we have more money and a much larger population. It is good for us to remember that and stay humble.

Dhoni however needs to be replaced by Pant in the WC.
 
Aman said:
Can be more than one match winner, the last match Kohli scored a century and played a bigger role but Dhoni saw the team home.
Click to expand...

But you said Kohli did not play a match winning part during MCG test. It was all Pujara. You even looked down on his Perth century.
 
Can't wait the next time that hack jadhav pulls his hamstring after playing 15 balls in an important world cup match. :|
 
WengerOut said:
But you said Kohli did not play a match winning part during MCG test. It was all Pujara. You even looked down on his Perth century.
Click to expand...
Why are you bringing up a Test match? That too one which India LOST.
 
Aman said:
Why are you bringing up a Test match? That too one which India LOST.
Click to expand...

Last time i checked, we won the MCG test. I brought that up to point out your inconsistencies. You can dodge if it is too difficult
 
So the team is set now for World cup. Barring injuries, this is the team that should go for the world cup:

Rohit
Dhawan
Kohli
Rahul
Jadhav
DK
Dhoni
Pant / Rayudu
Hardik
Jadeja
Kuldeep
Chahal
Bhuvi
Bumrah
Shami
 
Dhoni wins POTS :dhoni

tenor.gif
 
WengerOut said:
Last time i checked, we won the MCG test. I brought that up to point out your inconsistencies. You can dodge if it is too difficult
Click to expand...
Oh, you're referring to his fifty as match winning in a Test :)))

Are you really going to go there?

You do realize ODIs and Tests are a different game with different elements.

Hundreds win you matches, 50s are forgotten. Why do you think I criticize Joe Root so much for his inability to convert?
 
Last edited:
Aman said:
Oh, you're referring to his fifty as match winning in a Test :)))

Are you really going to go there?

You do realize ODIs and Tests are a different game with different elements.

Hundreds win you matches, 50s are forgotten. Why do you think I criticize Joe Root so much for his inability to convert?
Click to expand...

What!! Lol. 100s win u matches but 80s not. But hey. Shift the goalpost again
 
Aman said:
Oh, you're referring to his fifty as match winning in a Test :)))

Are you really going to go there?

You do realize ODIs and Tests are a different game with different elements.

Hundreds win you Tests, 50s are forgotten. Why do you think I criticize Joe Root so much for his inability to convert?
Click to expand...
^
 
Dhoni's avg for the Australia ODI series is 193... and S/R is 73. Not often you will see the avg to be 2.5X the S/R.
 
WengerOut said:
What!! Lol. 100s win u matches but 80s not. But hey. Shift the goalpost again
Click to expand...
I was referring to Tests for hundreds....

ODI's are shorter and there's only really two elements - setting a platform (scoring the bulk of the runs) and finishing. Kohli set the platform for Dhoni to finish the second ODI.

The MCG Test, Kohli was a support player to Pujara but was unable to make a mark by converting. It was Pujara who got the headlines as he converted and broke the Aussie bowlers down. If Kohli had converted he would have been right there, yes 20 runs makes a difference in perception to the impact on the result. In this format 50s are not as meaningful, unless conditions are difficult and a 50 is the equivalent of a century.
 
MP2011 said:
For him there is no difference between 50 & 82. But a lot of difference between 82 & 100!
Click to expand...
99 or 82, neither goes down as a century, but then again 87 NOT OUT in a ODI chase is different to 80 out in a Test... Can't believe I need to explain this.

It's self explanatory...
 
Last edited:
Aman said:
99 or 82, neither goes down as a century, but then again 87 NOT OUT in a ODI chase is different to 80 out in a Test... Can't believe I need to explain this.

It's self explanatory...
Click to expand...
I bow down to your superior knowledge of has beens! No interest in getting that.

Can't believe, difference between 50 & 82 is lesser than difference between 82 & 100! Learnt a new mathematics lesson today!
 
MP2011 said:
I bow down to your superior knowledge of has beens! No interest in getting that.

Can't believe, difference between 50 & 82 is lesser than difference between 82 & 100! Learnt a new mathematics lesson today!
Click to expand...
You're comparing runs scored in a Test match to runs in an ODI...

Three players scored 50s in that innings, can you name them without needing to look back to the scorecard and would you class them all as match winners?
 
Last edited:
Aman said:
You're comparing runs scored in a Test match to runs in an ODI...

Three people scored 50s in that innings, can you name them without needing to look back to the scorecard and would you class them all as match winners?
Click to expand...

So for you, all '50s' have same meaning.

I know you won't have bothered but do you even know the importance of that Kohli-Pujara partnership in MCG test?
 
MP2011 said:
So for you, all '50s' have same meaning.

I know you won't have bothered but do you even know the importance of that Kohli-Pujara partnership in MCG test?
Click to expand...
In the end he was support player... support players never get much credit unless they score a century. It's like Kane and Nicols in the UAE, had Nicols gotten out in the 50s no one would have talked about him, but he carried on after Kane was out, scoring a century and scoring quick runs on day 5 to give us more time to bowl out Pakistan.

Had he fallen before the 100 or not scored those quick runs towards the end, his innings would have been forgotten and it would have been all about Kane. But people realize the importance of his innings and it wasn't that far off Kane's in terms of importance.

ODI's is different as it's more about setting a platform and finishing.
 
Last edited:
MP2011 said:
So for you, all '50s' have same meaning.

I know you won't have bothered but do you even know the importance of that Kohli-Pujara partnership in MCG test?
Click to expand...
You can look back to the NZ-SL Test thread. Kane was playing great (striking it at almost run a ball) and was set for a big 100 but fell ~10 runs, I was disappointed after he threw it away because no one remembers 50s. Latham went on to score a double and got all the headlines and Kane's nice 50 was forgotten.
 
Difference between 200 and 50 is same as difference between 100 and 80. [MENTION=132954]Aman[/MENTION] logic

Kohli scored more runs than Dhoni in won matches in Aus but Kohli is not equal to Dhoni
Another [MENTION=132954]Aman[/MENTION] logic
 
Last edited:
WengerOut said:
Difference between 200 and 50 is same as difference between 100 and 80. [MENTION=132954]Aman[/MENTION] logic

Kohli scored more runs than Dhoni in won matches but Kohli is not equal to Dhoni
Another [MENTION=132954]Aman[/MENTION] logic
Click to expand...
You're comparing Test runs to ODI runs again.

Can you honestly name the players who scored 50 in that innings without needing to check a scorecard?
 
Aman said:
You're comparing Test runs to ODI runs again.

Can you honestly name the players who scored 50 in that innings without needing to check a scorecard?
Click to expand...

What is with people remembering and quality of an innings? So many people don't remember Sanjay Bangar innings in Eng, Sehwag innings at Chennai against Eng, Sachin Tendulkar against Aus in Mumbai. Does that mean they are not quality?
 
WengerOut said:
What is with people remembering and quality of an innings? So many people don't remember Sanjay Bangar innings in Eng, Sehwag innings at Chennai against Eng, Sachin Tendulkar against Aus in Mumbai. Does that mean they are not quality?
Click to expand...
So you couldn't do it :)))

That's the point dude, a lot of people have been programmed not to care about 50s. You need to score 100s and win matches, in ODI's it's different because there's laying the platform which allows a top order batsmen to score a 100 and finishing which can contribute to wins. Generally the person who lays the platform gets most of the plaudits, but if it's a difficult chase and the finisher guides the team home he can get equal or more.
 
Aman said:
So you couldn't do it :)))

That's the point dude, a lot of people have been programmed not to care about 50s. You need to score 100s and win matches, in ODI's it's different because there's laying the platform which allows a top order batsmen to score a 100 and finishing which can contribute to wins. Generally the person who lays the platform gets most of the plaudits, but if it's a difficult chase and the finisher guides the team home he can get equal or more.
Click to expand...

As a matter of fact, i couldve listed. But then you would accuse me of peeping at the scorecard. That would be classic you.

Coming to the point , basically you have created a criteria that suits your current agenda and pass it off as a fact. So many ifs and buts.

PS : You missed the number of 50 scores i listed. I remember that. Maybe not a LOI fanatic like u
 
WengerOut said:
As a matter of fact, i couldve listed. But then you would accuse me of peeping at the scorecard. That would be classic you.

Coming to the point , basically you have created a criteria that suits your current agenda and pass it off as a fact. So many ifs and buts.

PS : You missed the number of 50 scores i listed. I remember that. Maybe not a LOI fanatic like u
Click to expand...
Off the top of your head would have been easy...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
Pakistan (169/1) thrash Australia (163) by 9 wickets in the second ODI to level the 3-match series 1-1
10 11 12
Replies
931
Views
11K
Wasim Ghulam
W
C
Australia (204/8) beat Pakistan (203) by 2 wickets in a low-scoring thriller in the first ODI
15 16 17
Replies
1K
Views
15K
Shoaib Akhtar 100 MPH
S
C
1st ODI of the three-match series between India (230) and Sri Lanka (230/8) end in a tie
2 3 4
Replies
260
Views
4K
jnaveen1980
J
FearlessRoar
Zimbabwe (133/8) defeat Pakistan (132/7) in a nail-biting encounter by 2 wickets to register win in the 3rd T20I - Pakistan win the series by 2-1
2 3 4
Replies
308
Views
4K
Dantheone
Dantheone
The Bald Eagle
Pakistan (148/0) thrash Zimbabwe (145) by 10 wickets in the second ODI to level the 3-match series 1-1
3 4 5
Replies
337
Views
4K
Nasty Naz
N
Back
Top