2007-08-15 17:47:47 · 15 answers · asked by ncsqe 1 in Sports ➔ Cricket
yes, we should put england follow on..
2007-08-15 19:05:43 · answer #1 · answered by senthi 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Even after getting a day's rest for the bowlers (that is by not enforcing follow-on), Zaheer was having problems on the last day. It would have only worsened if India had enforced follow-on.
Another thing is that, the pitch was still fresh, and if England would have followed-on, they would have made a better score, which means India would be batting on the last day.
Looking at the way India batted in second test in second innings, it would have been a disaster.
Most importantly, India had to make sure that it did not lose the test at any cost - that was most important.
I think that decision was very well planned.
2007-08-16 04:23:48 · answer #2 · answered by Oceandeep 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You can't criticise anybody's decision esp if he was given the chance to opt for either.
Dravid might have thought that his bowlers are tired after bowling so many overs and then to bowl again. Secondly, he wanted to secure India's win in the series which they would have got irrespective of the result but not in England's win.
So u can't blame him.
Zaheer didn't accept that Dravid's decision is purely idiotic but he denied that he was tired.
2007-08-16 06:42:58 · answer #3 · answered by DPC 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no its is not like that. actually dravid want to win the series. so if we bat again & scores some 200 runs, india will be in a comanding position to make them to chase the target. alternatively if we make england to follow on. if they scored more than 200 runs as a target for india. there makes india in a crutial situation. we cannot trust the indian bating line up because they get collapsed at any time. so the pressure will be return to us.
2007-08-16 03:46:38 · answer #4 · answered by ranjith 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
In 2001 in kolkota Australia put follow on Indians In that match India was won the match. After that was happen no captain put follow on.Even in Australia against Australia when Ganguly was captain India was leading 270 runs then also captain didn't put follow -on.Not only India any another team did not put follow -on after 2001.
2007-08-16 01:53:21 · answer #5 · answered by Rahul Dravid 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Zaheer is a old guy.he is not enthusiastic.so he accepted the decision of not enforcing the follow on.Dravid thoght he could go out quickly and rest in the pavillion.so he did not enforce the follow-on.
2007-08-17 23:51:08 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I understand that it was not individual decision of Dravid not to enforce follow-on, but the collective decision of the team and team management.
2007-08-17 00:36:13 · answer #7 · answered by vakayil k 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Rahul was defensive but I support his decision the bowlers would have not been able to bowl to their full strength. His decision was correct as a captain.
2007-08-16 02:08:14 · answer #8 · answered by Sarang 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Dravid should have asked England to follow on!
2007-08-16 01:53:55 · answer #9 · answered by mayavi 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
As he explained his situation of tired bowlers obliged not to call follow on, his decision is correct as a caption...
2007-08-16 01:48:00 · answer #10 · answered by karthik d 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
This only shows there is no proper communication or team spirit in the team.Just a bunch of cricketers without proper leadership.
2007-08-16 02:41:26 · answer #11 · answered by karikalan 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋