Can someone explain to me why Dravid did not enforce the follow-on?
Jump to Page:
< Previous [ 1 ] [ 2 ] [ 3 ] [ 4 ] [ 5 ] [ 6 ] Next >
Posted on: 12-08-07 09:08:35
Can anybody watching the India England test explain this to me? Trust me, I already have some choice words for Dravid for not doing so. That's not what I'm looking for.
Here was a wonderful chance to win the 2nd test as well and make history. I feel like that was potentially thrown away by India not enforcing the follow-on. (We might still win, but I feel we've reduced the chances greatly, it'll probably be a draw now)
Howver, I don't consider myself an expert in cricket strategy, so maybe there's something I'm missing here. I'm trying to stay away from the "Dravid's galactically stupid" and the "bookies played a role" angle.
Cricket geniuses, please enlighten me.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Are you there?
I am no genius and I'm equally baffled.
Two possibilities come to mind -
1. Match-fixing and/or betting on India not enforcing follow-on
2. Lazy buggers (Indian bowlers) have already bowled/fielded for more than a full day and don't want to bowl/field for another possible two days.
They want to put their feet up while the batsmen add a few more runs.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"Mah deah, there is much more money to be made in the destruction of civilization than in building it up."
-- Rhett Butler in "Gone with the Wind"
They are already 5 down for less than 100 - what a disaster.
Capt. Dravid scored 12 off 96 balls.
I smell match-fixing.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"Mah deah, there is much more money to be made in the destruction of civilization than in building it up."
-- Rhett Butler in "Gone with the Wind"
I'm perplexed too. With a huge 319 run lead and more than 5 sessions left, he should have gone for the kill. Shows a lack of faith in his bowlers.
As if choosing to bat was not strange enough, the scoring rate has been too slow (esp Dravid's) to justify the decision.
As I write, they have finally declared at a 499 run lead, and just over a day to dismiss them - not to mention the chances of showers. It's almost as if he doesn't want to win.
A parallel can be drawn to the 1999 drawn test against NZ when India didn't enforce follow on despite a substantial lead. Match fixing was suspected there as well - and if I remember correct, Kapil's name was dragged in it (he was the coach then).
I think Dravid is too much of a gentleman to be involved in something like match fixing. More like a stupid strategy (or too lazy to take the field again as Pratick mentioned). Wait, could this also be due to the absence of a coach in the team?
Hi Everyone
It seems decision is based on his defensive nature. He is considered a "Wall" for nothing. DEFEND....DEFEND....DEFEND....is all he does.
It leaves a bad feeling on the viewers' mind.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Best regards
Lali
Every Indian is Cricket Genius. 
Shocking decision. I don't think it is because of the bowlers though. He does not believe in Bats. He is correct to an extent - these same bats could not carry through last day in some of the recent tests. For this team, 150+ in last inning is impossible.
He should have gone for kill. Decision is definitely defensive. His main aim is to win series. Which I hope comes through.
There is a light at the end of Tunnel for England too.
Draw is more likely now ... 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Mumbai Maazi Ladki ...
Quote:
Originally posted by lali
Hi Everyone
It seems decision is based on his defensive nature. He is considered a "Wall" for nothing. DEFEND....DEFEND....DEFEND....is all he does.
It leaves a bad feeling on the viewers' mind.
I wondered about that as well. But how is it a defensive decision? If he had enforced the follow-on, then one of two things would've happened.
1) They would've batted out the 2 days and the match would be a draw. Fine, India's still got the series.
2) They would've been skittled out for either less than or marginally more than India's lead, which would've given India a very good chance to win.
Given things like morale and the Indian team riding on a high, I would've thunk #2 was a higher probability.
With this stupid decision, all we've done is now given them a faint glimmer of hope. Granted, the chances are low, but what is England turns around tomorrow and produces a spectacular performance and actually scores the 500?
Albeit still low, the odds of them winning have definately gone substantially higher than before. And the odds of a draw are now much higher as well.
I don't believe Dravid himself would be involved in match-fixing, but hey, those goons in Bombay are pretty powerful. And Dravid's only a captain, mostly at their mercy.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Are you there?
