Where is Gavaskaer now? in starting he was so much crisizing autralia....and said this indian team is better that 1983 wrold cup team...nonsence...Now he must be hiding his face somewhere GROW UP Gavasker
RE:Where is Gavaskaer now?
by Mat on Apr 29, 2007 08:17 AM Permalink
He was probably the best Indian TEST opener ever ,but that shouldnt give him the superiority complex he has.I sincerely hope Sunil Gavaskar stops pretending to be the God Father of Indian cricket.
Its easy being a commentator and critising others with his dirty tongue.Instead he should concentrate on truly improving the cricket infrastructure of our country.May be its asking too much considering his ego.
Just goes to prove once again that great players dont necessarily make great statesmen.I really couldnt believe his statemants after the death of that Aussie ex-cricket player.
Congrats team Australia ! See how the greats of australian cricket anounce their retirment and leaving space for the yongesters at the peak of thier carrer!here is a player declared best player of the tournament decides to leave with simple words!
when its tough,when the going gets tough ..........tough gets going ........... aussies has laways performd well under pressure ........... our team should learn such tings from them . hats off to dear aussies .......... nobody really nobody can even dream to match them.......... we r at least 20 yrs behind them ... wish all the best from my deep heart to them ......
australia is no.1 and no team could beat them presently seeing their form and they proved that why they are the no.1 team, they can perform well under pressure, where as other team cannot. they delivered the good when required they made srilankan looks hope less they made vaas and murali think where to bowl and this is the good quality of good team, congrats australia
now to the main question that this world cup posed to all of us , and everyone has forgotten! "WHO THE HELL KILLED BOB WOOLMER" DOES ANYONE REMEMBER THAT GUY????????
RE:what about the main question
by Mat on Apr 29, 2007 07:48 AM Permalink
The truth will never come out. Had the death been of natural causes,it would have been declared 'natural' by now by their police. If they knew the truth and have delayed declaring what happened till WC got over, I expect a few big names to be involved.I only hope and pray that there wouldnt be a cover up. Frankly, I dont think they have a clue of what happened.
RE:Yeh to hona hi tha
by clint sequeira on Apr 29, 2007 06:49 AM Permalink
Nonsence! you say this just cos australia won.Can't you see they are commited & non selfish.Also take their age into consideration.
Just report the facts and spare us the flowery language. Does rediff really pay you for this stuff or do you pay them to get this published? You nauseating turn of phrases and illogical analogies are all good in your blog, but please, let the main article on one of the day's events be plain and precise.
RE:Mr.Panicker. Cut the chaff
by raghava hn on Apr 29, 2007 07:07 AM Permalink
IMO, this style of reporting is good. if he was just to state the facts, it would look like someone reading the scoreboard which Im sure you can also do.
RE:Mr.Panicker. Cut the chaff
by mani phs on Apr 29, 2007 04:52 PM Permalink
most readers find Panicker's notes peppy to read . combining facts & humour descriptively. if kk iyer has a problem he shd refrain from reading.
RE:Final match should have 50 overs else don't play.
by Harish on Apr 29, 2007 06:29 AM Permalink
Mr. Tallest I cant say how much I agree with you. The fool organizers had a spare day. They could have very well played (if required) 50 overs one day and the other 50 overs the next day. To think that this is the final of the World Cup!!!. If the rain had lasted longer, would have they have reduced it to 20/20? The final was nothing but a farce. Having said that, we must also accept that Australia would most likely have won anyway.
RE:Final match should have 50 overs else don't play.
by vikas vidyadhar vibhute on Apr 29, 2007 06:53 AM Permalink
I do not quite agree with this one. I feel if SriLanka would have batted first then chances were they would have won. For Murli to have a good bowl he requires used pitch and not a new pitch. I quite agree to Harish comments that the game should have been played in 2 days if 50 overs could not be bowled but thus generally is not possible as it is very difficult for organisers toplan that way.
RE:Final match should have 50 overs else don't play.
by raghava hn on Apr 29, 2007 07:10 AM Permalink
I agree with u guys, but its not the game, its the money thats truly important. Think of the involved sponsorship deals. if u remember the 1992 WC semifinal between SA and england, it was such a hopeless decision to go ahead with the match after the rain. this was done just to please the sponsors. truly money spoils the game.
RE:Final match should have 50 overs else don't play.
by pavan on Apr 29, 2007 08:40 AM Permalink
yes it should have been postponed and held the next day this is unfair
