Bombay vs England (was Re: Dawson bowling well in Bombay?)

Bombay vs England (was Re: Dawson bowling well in Bombay?)

Post by Amol Cricketwall » Mon, 19 Nov 2001 15:19:44


Quote:

>Dawson seems to be doing well in Bombay. The MCA XI took most of the England
>attack to the cleaners - Hoggard, Ormond and White going for 5-6 runs per
>over
>without any wickets. Then Dawson came on and has bowled 4-2-2-0 till now and
>the settled openers Mane and Jaffer are playing him very carefully. Sounds
>pretty good. Anyone watching the match? If only cricinfo had video... sigh.

Bombay seemed to slow overall after the first hour. On a pitch that is
supposed to be a green-top (Hussain was apparently very pleased with it,
curator Nadeem Menon has made decent pace tracks even in tests the last
few years and this time he left grass on it as he likes to, without any
national-administration pressure :-), Bombay started off quite blazingly,
getting 74/0 in 13 overs in the first hour! Jaffer had 6 boundaries
and about 3 threes I think, and was already up to 47* or so by the
first hour IIRC, off only about 55 balls. Mane was slower - he was
quite slow for a while before taking 3 boundaries off one Hoggard over,
and he was 27* off about 50 balls after the first hour.

At the end of the first hour Bombay seemed to throttle back a bit -
Dawson came on with Vaughan, and both were handled with far more
circumspection than before (I presume the fields were far less attacking
as well - the early flurry had come partly because most of the crisp
strokes seemed to be going for fours :-) The pitch is probably taking
turn already - Hussain expected it (and if its a "normal" ***hede pitch,
that is as expected - the bounce and seam is good on the first couple of
days, but the turn is there from Day 1, and it is "biting" turn, which
makes the spinners harder to play early in the game compared to later,
usually).

Bombay moved on to exactly 100/0 off just under 20 overs, and then Mane
was run out - the previous ball Jaffer had pushed to cover, Thorpe had
misfielded and they had stolen a run. In this instance Mane also pushed
to cover and tried for a single, and Thorpe didnt misfield but threw
straight back to the keeper and Mane couldnt get back. Gone for 33 -
sounded a Mane-ish knock from what Ive seen of him :-) That is, some
quite Sachin-ish shots - especially a straight-ish drive for 2, a
flick thru square-leg for four, and a cover-drive for four according
to the commentators. Stupid way to get out, of course - would have been
an ideal time to get a decent-sized score against international-level
opposition after looking very good (according to the commentators, at
least).

Bombay 123/1 off 28 overs at lunch, with Jaffer on 69* off 93 balls
with 10 fours, and Kambli on 12* off 19 with one.

The first innings of either side has been restricted to 90 overs, apparently,
so the batsmen are unlikely to sit on the splice. A nice morning
session for Bombay, although things could change rapidly if they try to
accelerate as they probably will - I still dont like this batting lineup
theyve thrown out there :-) I still dont know why theyre playing Thakkar
over Kunal More, for one, and I see no reason to play Abhijit Shetye at
keeper over Nilesh Patwardhan either.

Also, 3 spinners for Bombay apparently - only Mhambrey and new-boy
Avishkar Salvi to man the pace attack (and Mhambrey is old now, though
Avishkar has done well lately and is apparently quickish). Nilesh
Kulkarni, Sairaj Bahutule, and Ramesh Powar the spinners, with Rajesh
Pawar missing out again unfortunately (apparently had a neck strain
yesterday, so maybe there is actually a valid reason to not play him
this time unlike usual :-)

Sadiq [ early days, long way to go ] Yusuf

Quote:
>- Gussie

 
 
 

Bombay vs England (was Re: Dawson bowling well in Bombay?)

Post by Augustus Fink-Nott » Mon, 19 Nov 2001 17:24:10

Quote:

>The first innings of either side has been restricted to 90 overs, apparently,
>so the batsmen are unlikely to sit on the splice. A nice morning
>session for Bombay, although things could change rapidly if they try to
>accelerate as they probably will - I still dont like this batting lineup
>theyve thrown out there :-)
>Sadiq [ early days, long way to go ] Yusuf

Woo hoo!
Vintage Kambli in action. And boy is he accelerating! I wish I could see him
now in full cry. Lets send him off to South Africa before he cools down and
hope the SAfricans don't notice. An hour after lunch and he's 93* off 83
balls, with 17 fours and a bunch of 3's. England has a big problem if this is
going to be their bowling attack for the tests. Dawson was the only one able
to restrict scoring and now Kambli is ruining his figures too. (237/2, 46.5
overs)

Ormond 10-1-58-0
Hoggard 9-2-48-0
White 7-1-40-1 (got Jaffer caught on 99. Bad luck for Jaffer.)
Dawson 10-2-33-0 (11 runs off last over, courtesy Kambli.)

Show 'em Kambli !

- Gussie

 
 
 

Bombay vs England (was Re: Dawson bowling well in Bombay?)

Post by Mike Holman » Tue, 20 Nov 2001 02:55:04


say:

Quote:

>>The first innings of either side has been restricted to 90 overs, apparently,
>>so the batsmen are unlikely to sit on the splice. A nice morning
>>session for Bombay, although things could change rapidly if they try to
>>accelerate as they probably will - I still dont like this batting lineup
>>theyve thrown out there :-)
>>Sadiq [ early days, long way to go ] Yusuf

>Woo hoo!
>Vintage Kambli in action. And boy is he accelerating! I wish I could see him
>now in full cry. Lets send him off to South Africa before he cools down and
>hope the SAfricans don't notice. An hour after lunch and he's 93* off 83
>balls, with 17 fours and a bunch of 3's. England has a big problem if this is
>going to be their bowling attack for the tests. Dawson was the only one able
>to restrict scoring and now Kambli is ruining his figures too. (237/2, 46.5
>overs)

Well, he got as far as 109 before Dawson got him and Muzumdar in the
same over.

A couple of sentences from Santhosh S's report on CI today:

"Hoggard bowled a brilliant spell in the evening, giving away just six
runs off five overs. It is the kind of stuff that England will be
looking for in the Test matches.

"Dawson was a completely different bowler when he started giving the
ball more air. The young off-spinner will have to bowl a lot during
the tour and he seems to be building up a nice rhythm."

I very much like the sound of that. They bowled one way to start with,
got hit about, and then came back and bowled differently and were much
more effective. These two are very promising bowlers, and this tour is
definitely an opportunity for them.

Cheers,

Mike

 
 
 

Bombay vs England (was Re: Dawson bowling well in Bombay?)

Post by Amol Cricketwall » Tue, 20 Nov 2001 15:37:21

Quote:

> Ormond 10-1-58-0
> Hoggard 9-2-48-0
> White 7-1-40-1 (got Jaffer caught on 99. Bad luck for Jaffer.)

Bad luck is right - I was very disappointed for him, the poor chap. He
played a quite brilliant knock - the commentators and reports all said
that he was very composed and dominating early on, out-scoring Mane
almost 2 to 1 in their partnership.

A friend watched it at the ground, and he said it was terrific to watch.
Said that White had a couple of balls that he bowled to Jaffer, that were
sort of cutters almost - and they seemed to surprise Jaffer, and had him
hurrying his defensive shot. Apart from that, he said that after about
the first few overs, no bowler seemed to even make Jaffer think twice during
his innings. Said some really pretty back-foot strokes - he went after
the pacemen with back-foot punches and cuts early in his innings as they
were a little short, and threw in 2 or 3 pulled fours as well. It was only
later in his innings that he unfurled a few very pretty front-foot cover
drives - friend said they were more stroked than hit, pure timing shots.
Dominating the attack for most the entire morning session in Mane's
company, before throttling back to play the support-role when Kambli
went beserk after lunch.

Friend also talked to Jaffer for a couple of minutes at the end of the
day, and he said he seemed very very upset about the dismissal. Apparently
there was a message sent from Coach Lalu a few overs earlier mentioning
a possible step-up in run-rate (I think at that stage Bombay were half
thinking of declaring before the end of the day, if Jaffer and Kambli
could really accelerate - they scored 83 in the hour after lunch
together). Jaffer had however slowed in his late 90s, had played out
a maiden on 98. So he was sort of over-eager - got a pitched up ball
on 99*, and tried to clip it for four as he had done a few times earlier
instead of just working the needed run. Didnt keep it down, and presented
a low-ish catch to mid-wicket.

Anyway. This is about the third time Jaffer has gotten a 90 in the past
year I believe. I think he knows he has slipped in the selectorial mind,
behind even his state-mate Mane since Mane is seen as talented but
younger. And he must know that his only way out is to score tons, because
thats all selectors look at - most of them are probably just looking at
the scorecard. He has probably been over-eager and nervous, I think -
pity it came back to bite him again yesterday.

Sadiq [ who was genuinely sad about it ] Yusuf

Quote:
> Dawson 10-2-33-0 (11 runs off last over, courtesy Kambli.)

> Show 'em Kambli !

> - Gussie

 
 
 

Bombay vs England (was Re: Dawson bowling well in Bombay?)

Post by Amol Cricketwall » Tue, 20 Nov 2001 16:07:38

Quote:

> >balls, with 17 fours and a bunch of 3's. England has a big problem if this is
> >going to be their bowling attack for the tests. Dawson was the only one able
> >to restrict scoring and now Kambli is ruining his figures too. (237/2, 46.5
> >overs)

> Well, he got as far as 109 before Dawson got him and Muzumdar in the
> same over.

Yes. Us Muzumdar fans were very upset at his being sent in at #5 to start
with (also non-Muzumdar fans, ie one who watched the game who I talked
to yesterday :-) There is no way he should have been sent below Thakkar,
but then Shetye being sent ahead of Powar was a ridiculous move at the
end of the day as well. (This is all Bombay politics talk, so you probably
wont understand, Mike :-)

Quote:
> A couple of sentences from Santhosh S's report on CI today:

> "Hoggard bowled a brilliant spell in the evening, giving away just six
> runs off five overs. It is the kind of stuff that England will be
> looking for in the Test matches.

> "Dawson was a completely different bowler when he started giving the
> ball more air. The young off-spinner will have to bowl a lot during
> the tour and he seems to be building up a nice rhythm."

> I very much like the sound of that. They bowled one way to start with,
> got hit about, and then came back and bowled differently and were much
> more effective. These two are very promising bowlers, and this tour is
> definitely an opportunity for them.

Yes they are, and Dawson did quite well - though Ive heard conflicting
reports on Hoggard yesterday (friend thought White was occasionally
posing more questions, and one report claimed Ormond was better than
the rest :-)

BTW, it might be pointed out that the "improvement" of the bowlers came
later in the innings, when Bombay didnt have its top couple performers
batting out there - maybe not entirely coincidental. For example, Jaffer
was quick early before throttling back against everyone pretty much;
Kambli was quick against pretty much everyone. After they fell, Bombay
slowed quite a bit (against everyone). Thakkar, who some of us Bombay fans
think shouldnt have played yesterday - at any rate, he has never played
a first-class match in his life before yesterday - wasnt particularly
rapid against anyone. Bahutule was similar - quiet batting against
most, after a mini-flurry of wickets. And while many of us think
wicket-keeper Shetye shouldnt have played this match, I think *anyone*
would think he shouldnt have batted where he did yesterday! It was
the last hour of the day, and Ramesh Powar was in reserve - Ramesh Powar
made 60-odd at a run-a-ball against Warne and Mcgrath a few months ago
in a tour match, and to push him down in favour of a dour player like
Shetye was beyond belief.

Anyway. Dawson did the best job early in the day actually, rather than
late - he came in when the batsmen were going beserk agains the pacemen
and was very good. He bowled 15 balls without a run to Mane, and
conceded only 12 off 29 balls against the other opener Jaffer - remarkable
after the openers had put on 74 in the first 13 overs! Kambli went after
Dawson a bit after lunch, getting 35 off 30 balls against him, before
Dawson got him and Muzumdar in the same over as you said. Thakkar and
Bahutule went at about 3/over combined against Dawson after that (with
5 combined fours in about 10 combined overs).

Hoggard conceded 5/over combined against Mane, Jaffer and Kambli, with
7 boundaries hit in 9 overs. He then conceded a total of 6 runs in 5
overs against Bahutule and Thakkar - very good, but Iam not sure its quite
the same level of batting as before.

And at the end of the day, of course, Shetye went and got no runs in
12 balls against Michael Vaughan, in the course of his 10* off 34 balls
in the final overs of the day! Bombay should have been looking to get
400 in the day, before that silly slowdown :-)

BTW, couple friends went to the England practices before this game as
well. They said they thought the pace bowling looked ok, but that they
felt the pacemen would struggle with the weather more than anything -
they seemed to be sapped by the heat and humidity quite rapidly during
their workouts. They got a little exposure to that yesterday I suppose -
hot and humid, and on these pitches, if you stray a little due to
tiredness, the batsmen are likely to make you pay for it unless you are
really express quick or do quite a lot with the ball.

Which is why, of course, I still say they should have brought Silverwood
along :-)

Sadiq [ England 130/3 as I write - Powar looking
        a whole lot better than I had hoped :-) ] Yusuf

Quote:
> Cheers,

> Mike

 
 
 

Bombay vs England (was Re: Dawson bowling well in Bombay?)

Post by Mike Holman » Tue, 20 Nov 2001 17:13:21


Quote:

>BTW, couple friends went to the England practices before this game as
>well. They said they thought the pace bowling looked ok, but that they
>felt the pacemen would struggle with the weather more than anything -
>they seemed to be sapped by the heat and humidity quite rapidly during
>their workouts. They got a little exposure to that yesterday I suppose -
>hot and humid, and on these pitches, if you stray a little due to
>tiredness, the batsmen are likely to make you pay for it unless you are
>really express quick or do quite a lot with the ball.

>Which is why, of course, I still say they should have brought Silverwood
>along :-)

I see. A man who bowls very fast but runs out of steam after three
overs in England is going to be useful in heat where he will be
limited to spells of about one over.

Cheers,

Mike

 
 
 

Bombay vs England (was Re: Dawson bowling well in Bombay?)

Post by Matthew van de Werke » Tue, 20 Nov 2001 17:22:47


Quote:

> >BTW, couple friends went to the England practices before this game as
> >well. They said they thought the pace bowling looked ok, but that they
> >felt the pacemen would struggle with the weather more than anything -
> >they seemed to be sapped by the heat and humidity quite rapidly during
> >their workouts. They got a little exposure to that yesterday I suppose -
> >hot and humid, and on these pitches, if you stray a little due to
> >tiredness, the batsmen are likely to make you pay for it unless you are
> >really express quick or do quite a lot with the ball.

> >Which is why, of course, I still say they should have brought Silverwood
> >along :-)

> I see. A man who bowls very fast but runs out of steam after three
> overs in England is going to be useful in heat where he will be
> limited to spells of about one over.

Yes, useful to India.

Cheers,
MvdW

 
 
 

Bombay vs England (was Re: Dawson bowling well in Bombay?)

Post by Mike Holman » Tue, 20 Nov 2001 23:54:55

England managed 370/5 where Mumbai had managed 373/5, which is
reasonably encouraging. Vaughan missed out completely and Butcher was
apparently all at sea, but the others all had decent workouts. Hussain
and Thorpe both retired at the tea interval to give some more people a
chance, which allowed Ramps and White to have a bash. CWHNS was
particularly *** towards the spinners Kulkarni and Bahutule, using
his feet and smashing sixes, so it seems that he's carrying on from
where he left off in Pakistan last winter.

As a tour opener, this seems to have been pretty useful. Most of the
batsmen have been out to the middle and got some decent runs and
rhythm. And the bowlers have had an education. From further reading,
it appears that they were mostly getting the length all wrong, which
isn't all that surprising given that they have very little collective
experience of sub-continental wickets aka "flat, low shitheaps" ((c)
Craig White). The question is whether they will actually learn the
relevant lessons.

Cheers,

Mike