BringBackSwales
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Jul 2009
- Messages
- 33,650
My telly must be bust, I’m not seeing them!What is it with cameramen? Is it in their training to find attractive ladies in large crowds?
I'm not complaining, by the way!
My telly must be bust, I’m not seeing them!What is it with cameramen? Is it in their training to find attractive ladies in large crowds?
I'm not complaining, by the way!
How so? The Indian captain very clearly said it was a good wicket and if he’d won the toss he would have BATTED FIRST. So how did the toss affect the result today? Australia have just batted, bowled and fielded better (and seemingly done their homework better)
The fat dude with the beard and Aussie Warpaint?What is it with cameramen? Is it in their training to find attractive ladies in large crowds?
I'm not complaining, by the way!
The other poster was suggesting the toss had a big bearing on the result in this particular game. It didn’t, the outcome (India batting first) was the same whoever won the toss - Rohit Sharma was absolutely clear about thatIn any case, winning the toss frequently gives an advantage to bowling and batting first. It's a condition of the game of cricket. You play the hand you are dealt. A truly great team can turn it around. It so happens that here, on their own turf, India couldn't.
That's cricket.