What's new

Shameful display by Australians in the 4th Test vs India

I

Idreamofcricket

Tape Ball Regular
Joined
Nov 30, 2012
Runs
418
I am all for a good sporting game, but I don't know if you guys watched the match ball by all like I did to notice the sheer arrogance and violent aggression of the Australian Fast bowlers against the Indians.

I don't give a rat's behind if Cummins is the #1 bowler in the word or the sheer knee-buckling reaction to faaaaassst bowling of Hazelewood.. I think these are HORRIBLE human beings and display sportsmanship that is unbecoming of the game. No one seems to be talking about this.. so here it is..

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/crick...ur-in-shameful-short-bowling-assault-on-india

I have no words to describe how brave the Indians not only stood up to this but also TRIUMPHED over it. The White Man's aggression is a real problem. In the past it led to violence everywhere and now it is leading to poor sportsmanship and behavior that does not honor this sport.

The Ego on these people..
 
Last edited:
The first ball that Mitchell Starc bowled at the hapless tailender Thangarasu Natarajan was designed to hit him and to hurt him. He barely fended it off and the Australian commentators swarmed like flies. They called the “intimidating” balls “all part of the game” and said there was “an opportunity here to inflict a couple of wounds on to opposition bowlers.” They talked about breaking Natarajan’s hand or foot, what they call “nose and toes” bowling.

But of course intimidatory bowling, particularly at tailenders, is not part of the game. Law 42.8 specifically prohibits it. It states; “The bowling of fast short pitched balls is unfair if, in the opinion of the Umpire at the Bowler's end, it constitutes an attempt to intimidate the Striker…

why the heck didn't the umpires question this?
 
Hazlewood’s reaction to that bouncer was definitely not very sporting, but i liked how Pujara took the blows & stood like a rock in there. The Australians pretend that their sporting culture has changed, but the mask does slip off when the chips are down.
 
There were 5 bouncers in one Cummins over. Unfortunately the umpire didn't spot those.

And also didn't Hazlewood make a snide remark when Pujara got hit on his head?

Fair to say that the Phil Hughes episode is long forgotten.
 
Why you are so sensitive?. I would have been very disappointed if Australian bowlers had not shown aggression and had bowled like dead zombies. Aggression and attitude is part and parcel of Australian cricket identity, and I love it.
 
Muhammad Kaleem said:
Why you are so sensitive?. I would have been very disappointed if Australian bowlers had not shown aggression and had bowled like dead zombies. Aggression and attitude is part and parcel of Australian cricket identity, and I love it.
Click to expand...

Everybody loves controlled aggression that goes to show grit and determination. You have not understood what I am talking about here. Bowling 5 bouncers in an over and bowling bodyline bowling to tail-enders.. ..... you call that "part of the game"??.. That is shameful.

Pujara had to stop Hazelwood from bowling his delivery abruptly after the run-up because a butterfly got in the way and distracted him.. He was well within his rights to do that.. Instead of understanding and being a sport, Hazelwood glares him down and then bowls a bodyline ball that ends up hurting Pujara.. That is cricket for you?
 
If I were to attribute this poor display of violent aggression and disrespect from the australians to others, two people come to mind.. Ricky Ponting and Glen McGrath...

Ricky Ponting especially is a egomaniac arrogant person who thinks aggressive and violent behavior that is aimed at INTIMIDATING others by force is a good thing.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Idreamofcricket said:
Everybody loves controlled aggression that goes to show grit and determination. You have not understood what I am talking about here. Bowling 5 bouncers in an over and bowling bodyline bowling to tail-enders.. ..... you call that "part of the game"??.. That is shameful.

Pujara had to stop Hazelwood from bowling his delivery abruptly after the run-up because a butterfly got in the way and distracted him.. He was well within his rights to do that.. Instead of understanding and being a sport, Hazelwood glares him down and then bowls a bodyline ball that ends up hurting Pujara.. That is cricket for you?
Click to expand...

If a bowler is bowling 5 bouncers, why are the ICC umpires allowing that? That is strictly against the rules. ICC should be reviewing this & step in to rein in these biased umpires.

As far as Warne is concerned, guy is a complete tool!
 
Last edited:
Sweet memories these will be for fans of India. The bowling attack of India was third strung and still obtained 20 wickets. Mongrel in aussie attack teetered along the lines of being rabid and still fell short while bowling to a heavily depleted/patched up batting Indian unit.

Pujara copped a fair bit, and there was a clear intent to go with the 'cant get em, then injure em' policy. I really believed that a joint man of the match (Pujara and Pant) was on the cards. The humble fellow deserved it.
 
Australia was my second team, but now switching to another non Indian team. Probably England.
 
Its 2. But the umpires seem to have some ‘leeway’ in deciding a bouncer
 
BreadPakoda said:
Cummins bowled 5 in the 43rd over. But you're right, its the umpire's call and they have some leeway.
Click to expand...

Generally they should not - ICC rules are pretty clear about what constitutes a bouncer, but not enforced by the umpires. ICC should crack down on this.
 
Idreamofcricket said:
Everybody loves controlled aggression that goes to show grit and determination. You have not understood what I am talking about here. Bowling 5 bouncers in an over and bowling bodyline bowling to tail-enders.. ..... you call that "part of the game"??.. That is shameful.

Pujara had to stop Hazelwood from bowling his delivery abruptly after the run-up because a butterfly got in the way and distracted him.. He was well within his rights to do that.. Instead of understanding and being a sport, Hazelwood glares him down and then bowls a bodyline ball that ends up hurting Pujara.. That is cricket for you?
Click to expand...

But Hazlewood was accused of not showing enough care for his opponent, stump microphones appearing to pick up the Aussie paceman saying “see that one?” — perhaps in reference to the amount of times Pujara had taken his eye off short balls and been hit on the body.

Fox Cricket’s Adam Gilchrist suggested the sledge was the result of Pujara pulling away the previous ball when Hazlewood was halfway through his run-up because a butterfly flew in front of him, infuriating the Aussie star.


See what I told you? Utterly inexcusable behavior!.. WTH is this allowed?

After that ball I wanted India to win... only if to humiliate this arrogant punk!..
 
Idreamofcricket said:
I am all for a good sporting game, but I don't know if you guys watched the match ball by all like I did to notice the sheer arrogance and violent aggression of the Australian Fast bowlers against the Indians.

I don't give a rat's behind if Cummins is the #1 bowler in the word or the sheer knee-buckling reaction to faaaaassst bowling of Hazelewood.. I think these are HORRIBLE human beings and display sportsmanship that is unbecoming of the game. No one seems to be talking about this.. so here it is..

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/crick...ur-in-shameful-short-bowling-assault-on-india

I have no words to describe how brave the Indians not only stood up to this but also TRIUMPHED over it. The White Man's aggression is a real problem. In the past it led to violence everywhere and now it is leading to poor sportsmanship and behavior that does not honor this sport.

The Ego on these people..
Click to expand...

Credit to Cummins though because he's genuinely a nice guy. Hazlewood on the other hand...
 
Sachin136 said:
Credit to Cummins though because he's genuinely a nice guy. Hazlewood on the other hand...
Click to expand...

i don't think that is true. If a Bowler is resolving to short-pitched bodyline bowling to tail-enders, he has no credibility in my book. Cummins is a just another gutter dwelling arrogant Ozzie
 
There was nothing wrong with what Australian bowlers did, that kind of old fashioned aggression is greatly missed in recent days. I really enjoyed watching that.
 
Idreamofcricket said:
i don't think that is true. If a Bowler is resolving to short-pitched bodyline bowling to tail-enders, he has no credibility in my book. Cummins is a just another gutter dwelling arrogant Ozzie
Click to expand...

Mot tails nowadays can bat a bit. They are not like the last 2-3 Indians net bowlers who were forced to play in the Gaba test. Yes, bowling bouncer after bouncers to tail like Natarajan is not fair, but the same can't be said about all tail in the current era.
 
moghul said:
There was nothing wrong with what Australian bowlers did, that kind of old fashioned aggression is greatly missed in recent days. I really enjoyed watching that.
Click to expand...


Once again.. aggression is OK.. but using tactics to INIMIDATE the opponent with PHYSICAL HARM AND INJURY because you are incapable of taking wickets is just a poor move.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Don't worry...
Just pay these bowlers a million bucks and make them feel like kings in India....
All will be well and they'll do high fives with their team mates
 
Idreamofcricket said:
I am all for a good sporting game, but I don't know if you guys watched the match ball by all like I did to notice the sheer arrogance and violent aggression of the Australian Fast bowlers against the Indians.

I don't give a rat's behind if Cummins is the #1 bowler in the word or the sheer knee-buckling reaction to faaaaassst bowling of Hazelewood.. I think these are HORRIBLE human beings and display sportsmanship that is unbecoming of the game. No one seems to be talking about this.. so here it is..

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/crick...ur-in-shameful-short-bowling-assault-on-india

I have no words to describe how brave the Indians not only stood up to this but also TRIUMPHED over it. The White Man's aggression is a real problem. In the past it led to violence everywhere and now it is leading to poor sportsmanship and behavior that does not honor this sport.

The Ego on these people..
Click to expand...

As I stated a few days ago.... it has now become a permanent ploy by the Australians (and very dirty one too), where spearhead pace bowlers and top spinners of the opposition team when come to bat, are purposely targeted to get injured so that they cant bowl.

It's dirty and classless and cowardice by the Australians.
 
I don't see a big issue on this, Josh is a good kid overall, along with rest of the aussie bowlers. Guys like Glenn Mcgrath, Clarke, Warne, were 10 times worst during their playing days.... Would have been good if he asked the batsmen whether he was ok, however its still no big deal, Let it go...
 
I agree that Hazlewood was too aggressive after that shot, but the best way to beat them down is by hunkering down & frustrating them, which Pujara did. Bet after this humiliating series loss against a makeshift Indian team, Australia would not bully them again, lest they want to be reminded of this loss every single time 😂
 
Romali_rotti said:
I don't see a big issue on this, Josh is a good kid overall, along with rest of the aussie bowlers. Guys like Glenn Mcgrath, Clarke, Warne, were 10 times worst during their playing days.... Would have been good if he asked the batsmen whether he was ok, however its still no big deal, Let it go...
Click to expand...

Good kid? He is 30 frickin years old - he is not a baby anymore to put it down as youthful ignorance. Warne and Clarke did it and so this must be accepted and tolerated? What kinda nonsense is that? When Shardul Thakur bowled two short balls he was immediately warned by the umps and the next one was called a wide. Yet, the Aussies were bowling them every second ball and the umps wouldnt bat an eyelid. Warne in the commentary was asking for the Aussies to rip the helmet off Pujara! - the whole sporting world (except the Aussies) have moved on from such behaviour.

There was even a movie (Concussion) made about sporting injuries. Aussies are just thugs - the age old saying of "can dish it out, but cant take it" applies.
 
I hated that IPL effect with goody-goody interaction between both teams, finally I saw some badly needed aggression on the flied which used be the norm in the golden era of test cricket.
 
I think OP is excessive, as is probably the article, which I didn't bother to read once I saw .nz at the end of it. It's what the Kiwis do when it comes to Aus, and that's fine for them because of their long history and their own general nice-guy attitudes.

But what's worth mentioning and surprising is that not much of a fuss is being kicked about Shardul Thakur who was warned for intimidatory bowling. Think it was to Cummins or maybe Starc. Aus were 7 down if I recall right. And he still bowled a short ball after that, which didn't rise above the batsman's neck :cobra


Shardul Thakur warned for intimidatory bowling :))) Who'd have believed until they watched him bowl this match.
 
pillionrider said:
But what's worth mentioning and surprising is that not much of a fuss is being kicked about Shardul Thakur who was warned for intimidatory bowling.
Click to expand...

Yeah apparently some fuss was kicked on social media :)

Indians fans on social media are unhappy with the ‘double standards’ in Australian umpiring after Shardul Thakur was warned for a couple of bouncers to Pat Cummins while Mitchell Starc bowled bouncers after bouncers to T Natarajan during India’s 1st innings.

In the 75th over of the Australian innings, on Day of the ongoing Brisbane Test, Australian umpire Bruce Oxenford warned Shardul Thakur after a bouncer went well past Pat Cummins’ height. Oxenford called a wide for the delivery and also issued a warning to Shardul Thakur (4/61).
Click to expand...

https://www.indiatoday.in/sports/cr...happy-crickte-fans-twitter-1760131-2021-01-18
 
sensible-indian-fan said:
How many bouncers per over is allowed in tests?

Or its arbitrary?
Click to expand...

2 bouncers per over. Only a ball over the batsmans shoulder in a normal standing position is deemed a bouncer though.

You can bowl as many as you want at the armpit/heart. And if the batsman has a crouched stance, then you can target the throat without going over too.
 
Are you against bouncers at all OP? Do you want them removed from the game? All bouncers intimidate so might as well ban them all?

Weird topic. Cricket would lose a dimension without bouncers.

And all this "white mans aggression" stuff? Where was that when Shoaib was cracking skulls? Or when WI rolled around the world with 4 pace bowlers, no mid off & no restriction on the amount of bouncers at all...
 
Yes ,they bowling more than 2 bouncers every over most of time .in match thread I'm baffled the way umpires stopped Thakur but not any Australian bowlers . pathetic from Australian bowlers & Umpires.
 
wrongun said:
Are you against bouncers at all OP? Do you want them removed from the game? All bouncers intimidate so might as well ban them all?

Weird topic. Cricket would lose a dimension without bouncers.

And all this "white mans aggression" stuff? Where was that when Shoaib was cracking skulls? Or when WI rolled around the world with 4 pace bowlers, no mid off & no restriction on the amount of bouncers at all...
Click to expand...

Only 2 bouncers allowed per over but they were bowling more than 2 ,why even they allowed by umpires ??
 
Devadwal said:
Only 2 bouncers allowed per over but they were bowling more than 2 ,why even they allowed by umpires ??
Click to expand...

You need to understand what is designated a bouncer by umpiring laws and what is a just a short ball.

Remember it is only a bouncer if it is above the batsmans shoulder height when standing upright, not batting stance. So clearly the umpires felt the balls were not over that height.

In the 80s, there was no restriction.
 
The irony was , harmless bouncers from Shardul to Cummins were called for intimidation. That is a world away from the mismatch between Starc and Natarajan.
 
Victory was the best reply. Also its clear that Australias tactics were not coming from any aggression, but from desperation. They were really frustrated with the fight india kept showing. The short ball tactic actually helped India as very few deliveries were targeting the stumps
 
wrongun said:
You need to understand what is designated a bouncer by umpiring laws and what is a just a short ball.

Remember it is only a bouncer if it is above the batsmans shoulder height when standing upright, not batting stance. So clearly the umpires felt the balls were not over that height.

In the 80s, there was no restriction.
Click to expand...

Maybe you should understand that if ball is hitting to helmet than certainly above shoulder hight
 
Devadwal said:
Maybe you should understand that if ball is hitting to helmet than certainly above shoulder hight
Click to expand...

Not always. Batsmen are not hit on helmet only when they are standing tall. Sometimes they are bending.
 
WengerOut said:
The irony was , harmless bouncers from Shardul to Cummins were called for intimidation. That is a world away from the mismatch between Starc and Natarajan.
Click to expand...

It was hilarious to see Shardul Thakur getting a warning for intimidatory bowling.
 
lol harmless Thakur of all bowlers was warned for intimidating bowling while the Hazlewood, Starc, Cummins weren't! If it isn't bias for Aussie officials what else will be?

Aussies (including their umpires) tried their best but still couldn't stop these greenhorns.

And hence this victory tastes even sweeter!
 
Devadwal said:
Maybe you should understand that if ball is hitting to helmet than certainly above shoulder hight
Click to expand...

Most times they are actually ducking into it & hunched over, turning their face away from the ball. Watch these clips of Pujara as an example. The very first ball is a legit bouncer- head high. Then we see several quite hostile balls hut him but all below shoulder high. Even the last one which actuall hits his helmet, when you see the replays his knees are bent & he is swaying backwards so the ball hits his helmet but would be line ball as to whether it is over shoulder high (standing straight) or not.

https://www.cricket.com.au/video/ch...dia-australia-day-five-fourth-test/2021-01-19
 
Persisting with Lyon cost Australia. Lyon gave lots of easy runs. Plus fielding let them down.
 
I think all of this should make victory even sweeter for the Indians.

Aussies tried everything and still lost to an Indian second XI.
 
At least they didn't start throwing beamers at tail enders like Michael Holding would.
 
1.Youngsters stood for us
2. There was perfect plan for Smith, Labu and Warner
3. Lack of aggression.

I am strongly feeling Australians will bounce back. They lost because of failure in batting.

Their bowling attack still best in the world.
 
I am not too concerned with the bouncers, that's within rule book and if we are not able to deal with it , it's really something we should be concerned rather than questioning why Australians are bowling bouncers. I am pretty confident if Shami and Bumrah would have played they would have responded in similar lines. Heck even Shardul and Siraj tried but were not consistent enough.

However what is absolutely delightful to see is that we stood our ground and played those bouncers pretty well through out the batting order. I know Pujara struggled but if you ask me, it was something he invited by being too defensive prior to lunch. Aussies were running out of ideas and thought that they can intimidate him to throw his wicket. I was critical of Pujara's approach for first 100 balls where he was only looking to block but then he changed his approach post lunch and dealt with those same bouncers much more postively. He was still getting hit but his body language was more spirited and also started hitting them when he can and in end it indeed turned out to be a tremendously gritty innings that allowed the rest to run with the chase.
 
Idreamofcricket said:
Everybody loves controlled aggression that goes to show grit and determination. You have not understood what I am talking about here. Bowling 5 bouncers in an over and bowling bodyline bowling to tail-enders.. ..... you call that "part of the game"??.. That is shameful.

Pujara had to stop Hazelwood from bowling his delivery abruptly after the run-up because a butterfly got in the way and distracted him.. He was well within his rights to do that.. Instead of understanding and being a sport, Hazelwood glares him down and then bowls a bodyline ball that ends up hurting Pujara.. That is cricket for you?
Click to expand...

Well its not thier fault the umpires didnt call the bouncers.bowling bodyline bowling is fine even if they are tailenders.
 
australia have every right to bowl the bouncer its the duty of the umpires to recgonise and call bouncers.
 
shamaan said:
Well its not thier fault the umpires didnt call the bouncers.bowling bodyline bowling is fine even if they are tailenders.
Click to expand...

Umpires not calling out is a separate issue.. But players have more responsibility to not conduct in a way that brings disrepute to the game.. that' like saying "The bank robbers - it's not their fault that the police couldn't stop the heist".

Bouncers and short-pitched bowling is NOT the same in it's theory as body-line bowling INTENDED to hurt is... Indians have been subjected to short-pitched bowling before from England and South Africa and they learned how to deal with it.. Even Washington Sundar learned to hook it for a 6. That's not what I am talking about.. I'm talking about balls that are intended to injure .. You have their own Shane Warne even saying "rip his helmet off".. does that fall under the intent of a bouncer for you?
 
Idreamofcricket said:
Umpires not calling out is a separate issue.. But players have more responsibility to not conduct in a way that brings disrepute to the game.. that' like saying "The bank robbers - it's not their fault that the police couldn't stop the heist".

Bouncers and short-pitched bowling is NOT the same in it's theory as body-line bowling INTENDED to hurt is... Indians have been subjected to short-pitched bowling before from England and South Africa and they learned how to deal with it.. Even Washington Sundar learned to hook it for a 6. That's not what I am talking about.. I'm talking about balls that are intended to injure .. You have their own Shane Warne even saying "rip his helmet off".. does that fall under the intent of a bouncer for you?
Click to expand...

So we're are they meant to bowl to take a wicket? So your saying that they intended to hurt the Indian players ?.if you watched cricket in the past eras you would know .ultiple times when bouncers or body line bowling was being bowled.shaoib bowled bodyline bowling multiple times.many players have said they eant to put fear in the players eyes all being fast bowlers.if its a big deal the icc to look into it.
 
I dont have a problem with bouncers directed at a batsman - its absolutely fair if somebody like Pujara or Pant are peppered with bouncers with an intention to unnerve them & induce mistakes. But bodyline bouncers targeted at tailenders with a deliberate intention to injure & prevent them from bowling again is not cricket. And infact those are against ICC regulations too - the umpires should have totally monitored that.
 
shamaan said:
So we're are they meant to bowl to take a wicket? So your saying that they intended to hurt the Indian players ?.if you watched cricket in the past eras you would know .ultiple times when bouncers or body line bowling was being bowled.shaoib bowled bodyline bowling multiple times.many players have said they eant to put fear in the players eyes all being fast bowlers.if its a big deal the icc to look into it.
Click to expand...


Arre bhai!.. that is WHY rules were put into place.. that you cannot have more than 2 bouncers in an over.. this is not a rule from the bygone past... Bodyline bowling is all about intimidation.. it's not about forcing an error.
 
They will rise again. They have these periods every 10 years. Around 2009-2010 mark England smashed them in the ashes 4-0 iirc. And then wholesale changes happened and they rose to the top again.

10 years down the line and they are not nearly as bad as they were 10-11 years ago. Couple of players will be swapped out. Paine and Starc should go. Everybody else will probably get another shot.

Cummins and Lyon are still insane level bowlers. Hazlewood is still a threat too.
 
Suleiman said:
They will rise again. They have these periods every 10 years. Around 2009-2010 mark England smashed them in the ashes 4-0 iirc. And then wholesale changes happened and they rose to the top again.

10 years down the line and they are not nearly as bad as they were 10-11 years ago. Couple of players will be swapped out. Paine and Starc should go. Everybody else will probably get another shot.

Cummins and Lyon are still insane level bowlers. Hazlewood is still a threat too.
Click to expand...

2013 Ashes... 3-0 but in Eng, unless u r talking about 2010-11 in Aus that was 3-1 too , i can’t remember last England won 4 -0 against Aus.
 
Suleiman said:
They will rise again. They have these periods every 10 years. Around 2009-2010 mark England smashed them in the ashes 4-0 iirc. And then wholesale changes happened and they rose to the top again.

10 years down the line and they are not nearly as bad as they were 10-11 years ago. Couple of players will be swapped out. Paine and Starc should go. Everybody else will probably get another shot.

Cummins and Lyon are still insane level bowlers. Hazlewood is still a threat too.
Click to expand...

lol no, England have never beaten Australia by such a big margin :)) They won the 2009 Ashes 2-1 and 2010/11 in Australia 3-1. I think Australia lost their home dominance once South Africa started regularly beating them at home.
 
Giannis said:
lol no, England have never beaten Australia by such a big margin :)) They won the 2009 Ashes 2-1 and 2010/11 in Australia 3-1. I think Australia lost their home dominance once South Africa started regularly beating them at home.
Click to expand...

JaDed said:
2013 Ashes... 3-0 but in Eng, unless u r talking about 2010-11 in Aus that was 3-1 too , i can’t remember last England won 4 -0 against Aus.
Click to expand...

Yeah 3-1 in 2010-11, my b. I didn’t even remember the Aussie win.
 
Idreamofcricket said:
Arre bhai!.. that is WHY rules were put into place.. that you cannot have more than 2 bouncers in an over.. this is not a rule from the bygone past... Bodyline bowling is all about intimidation.. it's not about forcing an error.
Click to expand...

Yes and i stated its upto the umpires to decide if they class it as a 1 for the over or 2 for the over.so you have an issue with umpiring ?.and thats fine imitation is fine or maybe we should say if you bowl at the body 10 runs will be given to the batting side.
 
Whenever Australia tour India next, I can guarantee they will get short stuff with interest from our guys.
Virat will make sure of that. Sood samet wapis hoga sab.
Happened in 2018 series in Oz as well.. When bouncers were bowled to Ishant.
Next innings, they got the taste of what they dished from Shami, Bumrah and Ishant.
 
hoshiarpurexpress said:
Whenever Australia tour India next, I can guarantee they will get short stuff with interest from our guys.
Virat will make sure of that. Sood samet wapis hoga sab.
Happened in 2018 series in Oz as well.. When bouncers were bowled to Ishant.
Next innings, they got the taste of what they dished from Shami, Bumrah and Ishant.
Click to expand...

Would be disappointing if they didn't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
Has Pakistan (finally) grown a spine under Salman Ali Agha ahead of the Asia Cup 2025 encounter(s) against India?
2
Replies
155
Views
6K
ravisurya
R
BouncerGuy
Beyond the Boundary: Pakistan vs India: The fiercest rivalry (By Amer Malik)
Replies
1
Views
912
Asad T
Asad T
B
Was the pitch for the 5th Test between Australia and India in Sydney fair for Test match cricket?
Replies
23
Views
902
deltexas
D
Rana
Pakistan-India war: The question of what constitutes as serious damage in warfare and providing proof
Replies
78
Views
2K
uppercut
U
Cricket Warrior
India (518/5d & 124/3) defeat West Indies (248 & 390 (f/o) by 7 wickets in second Test to complete a clean sweep in the 2-match Test series
2 3
Replies
237
Views
4K
giri26
G
Back
Top