India v Australia, Third Test, Chandigarh

First topic message reminder :

1st Test
Fri Feb 22 - Tue Feb 26
04:00 GMT | 09:30 local
12:00 WST | 14:30 CST | 15:00 EST
MA Chidambaram Stadium, Chepauk, Chennai

2nd Test
Sat Mar 2 - Wed Mar 6
04:00 GMT | 09:30 local
12:00 WST | 14:30 CST | 15:00 EST
Rajiv Gandhi International Stadium, Uppal, Hyderabad

3rd Test
Thu Mar 14 - Mon Mar 18
04:00 GMT | 09:30 local
12:00 WST | 14:30 CST | 15:00 EST
Punjab Cricket Association Stadium, Mohali, Chandigarh

4th Test
Fri Mar 22 - Tue Mar 26
04:00 GMT | 09:30 local
12:00 WST | 14:30 CST | 15:00 EST
Feroz Shah Kotla, Delhi


India:
Shikhar Dhawan, Murli Vijay, Virender Sehwag, Cheteshwar Pujara, Sachin Tendulkar, Virat Kohli, Ajinkya Rahane, M S Dhoni (c),
Rabindra Jadeja, Bhubhneshwar Kumar, Ravi Ashwin, Pragyan Ojha, Harbhajan Singh, Ishant Sharma, Ashoke Dinda

Australia:
Michael Clarke (c), Ed Cowan, David Warner, Phillip Hughes, Shane Watson, Usman Khawaja, Steve Smith, Matthew Wade, Glenn Maxwell,
Moises Henriques, Nathan Lyon, Xavier Doherty, Mitchell Johnson, Peter Siddle, James Pattinson, Mitchell Starc, Jackson Bird

In the first tour game before the series, a 2 day match against the Board President's xi, Australia were bowled out for 241. Ed Cowan scored 58, and Steven Smith also scored some runs.
9 wickets were taken by spinners, with J&K's young all-rounder Parwez Rassol, coached by Bishen Bedi, claiming 7-45. Rassol had a fine Ranji season with both bat and ball, and if he can show with the bat tomorrow, he should also come into the national reckoning.

msp83 wrote:Perhaps this thread could be merged in to LB's thread on the other squad debate as the debate has progressed there a bit more, and perhaps under a different title suggestive of a pre-series debate?

subhranshu.kumar.5 wrote:O.k. will go back there for the rest discussions.. I Think i just missed ur post derethats why i gave the stats here. We will go there for the discussion.

Guys - I have merged the two threads as per msp's suggestion.

Is it not Gavaskar-Border Trophy in India - and reversed in Australia?

I know it's engraved the "Border-Gavaskar Trophy" in Oz. Is there are separate "Gavaskar-Border Trophy" in India? Or is it called the "Airtel Trophy" these days?

Think its the Border-Gavaskar Trophy here as well.

Thanks msp.

I must have been thinking of the Warne-Murali one. Nice idea that... room for both trophies plus it gives the engravers in both countries more work

ShankyCricket wrote:Steven Smith has 5 FC centuries and 14 fifties in 38 FC matches at an average of 42. He has a far better FC record than Bailey. I'm not sure why he's been written off as a Test player so early. Bits and pieces is a rather odd tag for someone with those numbers. Agree about Maxwell though, wouldn't have picked him.

I'm quite shocked that you think Aus will beat India though. India, for all their issues, should still be very disappointed if they don't destroy this Aussie side 4-0.

Though Aussies side may not look the AUSTRALIAN way but I don't think this series in favor of India and that too 4-0. With shaking middle order, weak spin attack and shaky pace attack of India,Aussies side look better this time may be lill ahead of Indian team. With cowan and clarke a better one against spin and every one knows what will happen to Indian pace attack when watson and warner will start fire. But hope this will come up with some of better option for the void middle order(after Dravid and laxman). At last I hope this will be an interesting series with both the team searching for established players.

Linebreaker wrote:

msp83 wrote:Perhaps this thread could be merged in to LB's thread on the other squad debate as the debate has progressed there a bit more, and perhaps under a different title suggestive of a pre-series debate?

subhranshu.kumar.5 wrote:O.k. will go back there for the rest discussions.. I Think i just missed ur post derethats why i gave the stats here. We will go there for the discussion.

Guys - I have merged the two threads as per msp's suggestion.

Is it not Gavaskar-Border Trophy in India - and reversed in Australia?

I know it's engraved the "Border-Gavaskar Trophy" in Oz. Is there are separate "Gavaskar-Border Trophy" in India? Or is it called the "Airtel Trophy" these days?

I think it is B-G series though i think it will also be called as Airtel series..Don't know

Ashley Mallett, the former Australian offi, thinks Glenn Maxwell could make a significant impact for Australia in the test series. He reckons Maxwell play as the spinning all-rounder in the side and provide the side with the much needed balance. He also believes Maxwell is already a better bowler than Steve Smith is, and that he would become much more than a parttimer in years to come.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/604722.html

Moises Henriques had a good game against the board president's 11 with the ball. Will he get to play as the additional pace option?
Don't think 4 seamers will be the way to go about in India, so if Maxwell is a better bat than Smith, and as Khawaja hasn't presented an absolute pick me case as yet, I'd think going in with Maxwell could be the way for Australia, at least to start with. In that case, I should say I was disappointed with Matthew Wade underbowling Maxwell in the practice game.

Yeah, that's what I've heard too - re: the Ashley Mallett article. We do tend to talk certain players up I know but it will be very interesting to see how he goes in the 'graveyard' of spin for us. The balance aspect is very important - so I hope the two (Maxwell & Smith) can both put pressure on each in vying for the tandem role with Lyon.

I liked what I saw of Maxwell's bowling in the ODI series against the West Indies when he was given more responsibility. Nice flight, a good cricketing brain and turns it quite a bit.

I am not sure however that he is ready yet for the challenge of playing in India, which surely as a middle-order spinning all-rounder is the toughest place to start (as an opener it is arguably one of the easiest. I hope for his sake that if he is picked and does poorly people don't turn on him and say he is hopeless, because he isn't. He is a genuinely talented cricketer, but like Hughes and Smith the first time they were selected he might not be ready for test cricket yet.

Having said that, he may be the better of the 3 options vying for the all-rounder slot. I realise that Henriques has had a good game with the ball, but Wade at 6 and Henriques at 7 would really be a concern, and I am not sure how effective his bowling will be in the long run - he bowls a heavy ball and good cutters, but probably lacks half a yard of pace for test cricket, at least in India. Ultimately I'm not sure he'll score that many more runs than Mitch Johnson, so if the selectors are thinking of that, they may as well go with Johnson at 7 (which I don't think is viable personally)

Smith is a reasonable batsman, I know some english people like to ridicule him, but I don't think that's fair - he has been poorly treated by the Aus selectors. Unfortunately, his leg-spin bowling seems to have deserted him somewhat (whereas at some stage he showed genuine promise) and it does seem Australia are keen on playing 5 bowlers. I am not sure that on his own his batting is good enough for a top 6 spot, but of the 3 he is the most accomplished, and a decent player of spin.

The tour match went all right for the Aussies: 4 of their batsmen got good time in the middle, with only Maxwell a real disappointment, against a reasonably strong presidents XI. All of the bowlers got good overs under their belts, and the Indians' obvious strategy of going after Lyon didn't work that well.

Mike and LB you think there is a significant difference between Smith and Maxwell in terms of batting abilities? THeir FC average is similar, and when I saw smith in action with the bat earlier, he did look promising, but didn't look top 6 to me. It is unfortunate his bowling is not quite there. If Maxwell is the better bowler, and if there is no major difference in batting abilities, then Maxwell should be a certain starter for that first game.
By the way how do you see Watson as batsman only? Where would he bat? Will his unconverted starts, when taken as part of an all-round package would look fine, be a problem when he plays only as a batsman?

I don't think there is a significant difference, but I do think Smith is the more accomplished. I think he could bat at number 6, but he wouldn't be there if not for his bowling, so... However I also think Maxwell potentially could play the more destructive innings, and I think he has a bit about him, not sure how to describe it.

I'd go with Maxwell, but wouldn't be too fussed if Smith got the nod as of now, I can see arguments for both and I don't think it's clear cut either way.

Regarding Watson for me it's simple, either he opens (where getting starts can actually send a team on its way) or he doesn't play. Not skilful enough to bat at 5 or 6 (he'll get bogged down against the spinners), and doesn't score the match-defining innings you need from a 3 or 4. This, IMO is whether he bowls or not.

Personally I wouldn't pick Cowan in India - opening is potentially the best time to bat, and I can see him wasting a few deliveries and then ultimately getting stuck against the spinners and getting out.

I'd go with
Watson
Warner
Hughes
Clarke
Khawaja (time he got a good run in the side, although I still like Marsh TBH)
Wade
Maxwell/Smith
Siddle
Starc
Lyon
Pattinson/MJ/Bird (take your pick, I'd go Pattinson, but feel the other two could be useful also; Bird could be a good foil if you have Starc in there)

Agree a lot with Mike. Said something similar about Cowan during my discussion with Shelsey on Facebook. I'd pick MJ or Bird over Pattinson though. Pattinson has broken down in 3 of his 7 Tests. Just not worth the risk IMO.

I don't however agree about Khawaja, I wouldn't have picked him in the squad in the first place but if Watson is to open, he probably would have to play. I'd also take Smith over Maxwell.

Agree that I'd have preferred Marsh. Did well in SL in 2011. More experienced in these conditions than Khawaja.

Seems a bit concerning about Smith. Get the impression that he's currently an all rounder who isn't quite trusted with bat or ball.

There's considerable potential there but how much will come to the surface? I think he's a great fielder but he's going to be unlikely to demonstrate that much if he doesn't develop his batting further or rediscover his bowling. With regard to the latter, I flagged to Mike a few months ago that the art of leg spin is sadly much easier to lose than rediscover.

I hope he turns things round.

msp83 wrote:Ashley Mallett, the former Australian offi, thinks Glenn Maxwell could make a significant impact for Australia in the test series. He reckons Maxwell play as the spinning all-rounder in the side and provide the side with the much needed balance. He also believes Maxwell is already a better bowler than Steve Smith is, and that he would become much more than a parttimer in years to come.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/604722.html

Thats a terrible article.

"Unlike Pietersen, Maxwell is not mentally fragile, but like him, he is ever willing to take the opposition attack on and unafraid to try an improvised shot to bemuse and defeat the bowler."

So KP is mentally fragile? Give me strength

"Australia cannot rely totally on the skills of Michael Clarke, whose batting against spin probably has no equal worldwide at the moment". Is this the same Clarke who averages 38 in the subcontinent?

I think it's an uneven article rather than a terrible one.

There are about 3 lines having a bash at Pietersen which seems entirely unnecessary and off-topic, except that from the outside Maxwell and Pietersen do seem to possess a certain swagger about them (Pietersen has of course backed this up numerous times, whilst Maxwell is yet to really make his mark on international cricket). I do think that confidence is a massive part of spin bowling (think of Swann and Warne say) and that Maxwell's bowling has improved imeasurably over the last year or so.

The characterisation of Pietersen as mentally fragile is one of the more ludicrous I've seen in a while.

Clarke however when on song is a fine player of spin bowling. There is no obvious reason for his poor record on the subcontinent, except that he played quite a few tests there right at the start of his career, and a few when he was going through a real rut in the middle. He is not an obviously better player of spin than the likes of Younus Khan or Pujara or Kohli or even Amla or De Villiers, but I don't think stating an opinion that he is the best in the world is that far wide of the mark, and certainly Mallett isn't alone in that line of reasoning.

Then there is some technical nonsense about Smith, which Richie Benaud disagrees with and I would side firmly with Richie. Smith's bowling action is fine, but he seems to have gotten a bad case of the yips, and hasn't yet recovered. He may never, which would be a great shame as he is a tremendously talented sportsman.

I think on the whole I'd tend to pick Bird ahead of Pattinson right now, until Pattinson has proved that he can bowl a good quantity of overs without breaking down - as Shanky says it's simply too risky, particularly when you're playing in India and your spinner can't really be relied on to hold an end up.

Johnson I think can do well on the subcontinent, but I don't think you can pick both him and Starc in your 3 seamers - if they both start spraying it as they can then you're putting a huge amount of pressure on Siddle to bowl long spells, again given the Indians will try to get after Lyon. At the moment I think Starc is a must given how he's been bowling, so he gets the nod over Mitch.

Khawaja IMO is very talented, technically very able, but inherently lazy (not necessarily in his work ethic) in the sense that he plays a bad shot every now and again and gets out for no reason, which is very frustrating. I do think he deserves another chance, but I also think that Marsh has been harshly treated - one horror series and it was right that he was given some time off, but should have been back in and around the squad far earlier once his first class form picked up, and should definitely be out there in India (Henriques, Smith and Maxwell? only one can play, so 3 people for one place seems a bit excessive and indecisive).

One final and not particularly relevant point, but guildford brought up Smith's fielding, which I agree is brilliant (and until recently his fielding in the IPL was the best I'd ever seen), however Maxwell's... wow. Just wow.

Touched a raw nerve there Shanky?

Agree however, it is far too early (and therefore incorrect) to make any comparison with KP.

As for the Clarke comment - that is probably true "at the moment". Only 5 runs difference in average on the sub-continent but I suppose we will soon know if he can get it up over 40... or whether it will fall back to the early 30s.

I quite like Mike's lineup. I believe the inclusion of Khawaja is fair enough and naturally I want him to cement a place in the Test team in the long term.

At least give him a chance on this tour and again we'll have to see how he copes. I have a feeling that if things don't go to well then yes - Shaun Marsh may get another look in. I would like to see one or both of them play in England in June/July but only if Watson (as opener) struggles to get his 3rd Test century in India.

I'd be perfectly happy for my opener in England to get 30-80 consistently. Let the other guys get the glory of the big hundreds, but if you've got an opener who's constantly shielding the middle-order from the new ball I reckon that's an important job.

I'd prefer more than 30 on the low end of the scale. At least 50 then push on and convert to more centuries than Watson has.

It's a mental thing I know and to date he has shown a propensity to give his wicket away too cheaply. I'd like to see him concentrate for longer periods at the crease and win those mind games more often.

Mike Selig wrote:I think it's an uneven article rather than a terrible one.

There are about 3 lines having a bash at Pietersen which seems entirely unnecessary and off-topic, except that from the outside Maxwell and Pietersen do seem to possess a certain swagger about them (Pietersen has of course backed this up numerous times, whilst Maxwell is yet to really make his mark on international cricket). I do think that confidence is a massive part of spin bowling (think of Swann and Warne say) and that Maxwell's bowling has improved imeasurably over the last year or so.

The characterisation of Pietersen as mentally fragile is one of the more ludicrous I've seen in a while.

Clarke however when on song is a fine player of spin bowling. There is no obvious reason for his poor record on the subcontinent, except that he played quite a few tests there right at the start of his career, and a few when he was going through a real rut in the middle. He is not an obviously better player of spin than the likes of Younus Khan or Pujara or Kohli or even Amla or De Villiers, but I don't think stating an opinion that he is the best in the world is that far wide of the mark, and certainly Mallett isn't alone in that line of reasoning.

Then there is some technical nonsense about Smith, which Richie Benaud disagrees with and I would side firmly with Richie. Smith's bowling action is fine, but he seems to have gotten a bad case of the yips, and hasn't yet recovered. He may never, which would be a great shame as he is a tremendously talented sportsman.

I think on the whole I'd tend to pick Bird ahead of Pattinson right now, until Pattinson has proved that he can bowl a good quantity of overs without breaking down - as Shanky says it's simply too risky, particularly when you're playing in India and your spinner can't really be relied on to hold an end up.

Johnson I think can do well on the subcontinent, but I don't think you can pick both him and Starc in your 3 seamers - if they both start spraying it as they can then you're putting a huge amount of pressure on Siddle to bowl long spells, again given the Indians will try to get after Lyon. At the moment I think Starc is a must given how he's been bowling, so he gets the nod over Mitch.

Khawaja IMO is very talented, technically very able, but inherently lazy (not necessarily in his work ethic) in the sense that he plays a bad shot every now and again and gets out for no reason, which is very frustrating. I do think he deserves another chance, but I also think that Marsh has been harshly treated - one horror series and it was right that he was given some time off, but should have been back in and around the squad far earlier once his first class form picked up, and should definitely be out there in India (Henriques, Smith and Maxwell? only one can play, so 3 people for one place seems a bit excessive and indecisive).

Actually, Clarke's record in the subcontinent was better at the start of his career.

Not saying he is a poor player of spin (unlike say Ian Bell) but to say that he has no equal worldwise is ludicrous. Amla, Kallis, KP, Cook, Pujara, Younis, Sanga, Mahela all better.

But Cowan did alright so far in his test career, and did his job even against the world's number one side. Watson has been breaking down all that while when Cowan was making important contributions in a closely fought series. Will be harsh if he gets dropped even after all that. And he scored a 50 in the first tour game.

We have to remember Nick Compton's role during England's series win in India. He didn't score big, but almost always, he stuck around with Cook, provided decent starts, and took out whatever possibilities of an early wicket with the new ball.

And now we have this. The search for answers to life after Warne continues in strange ways!. http://www.espncricinfo.com/india-v-australia-2013/content/current/story/604969.html

Cowan has done "OKish" but really his average is fairly poor for an opening batsman. How long do you want to give him? Plus, his running between the wickets is terrible. More importantly, he has serious issues against spin bowling (namely his defensive technique is poor, and he has no attacking shots bar the sweep) which doesn't bode well for the subcontinent. 50 in a warm-up game isn't worth more than 30odd for me, it's all about form and time in the middle.

England are a different side from Australia, and went about their business in India based on their spinners outperforming the Indian ones, and then building big long innings with the bat. I don't see that as a feasible blueprint for this Australian side, and I don't see how Cowan eating up a load of deliveries before inevitably getting tied down against spin will be in any way beneficial.

Add Jayawardene to the list Shanky, but for me Sangakara is not a great player of spin bowling. Swann for one has had him tied up fairly frequently.

You may be right about Cowan , Mike , but frankly I'd be a little surprised if he was dumped before the first Test. Think he is seen as adding a bit of solidity to an otherwise possibly over aggressive top order, allowing the like of Warner and Hughes to play more freely...
It probably won't work so well in India - certainly Cowan looked pretty tortured in Sydney facing some class spin bowling in the run chase ; but he is not one to throw his wicket away and I suspect he'll be given first chance at least. Not certain they will even pick Watson first up , from the noises Clarke has been making. I agree if Watson were to play it should be as an opener.

Just from the absurd number of players sent it is clear the Australian selectors are unsure who to pick , and I guess a lot will come down to form in the warmups.

The Ashton Agar one really baffles me.

I hadn't even heard of him which is not surprising considering he's only played 2 first class matches. Then there was an article today about how he might stay on for the next game v the Indian XI (fair enough, nice gesture to a young 19 y.o. rookie) but please - Inverarity shouldn't be going further than that and hinting he might get a Test debut... based on what?

http://www.espncricinfo.com/india-v-australia-2013/content/current/story/604969.html

msp83 wrote:And now we have this. The search for answers to life after Warne continues in strange ways!. http://www.espncricinfo.com/india-v-australia-2013/content/current/story/604969.html

Yes, that's what I mean! They must be kidding themselves.

If that were to happen and he gets a pounding... what then? Another 'promising' (based on what I don't know) career destroyed.

By all means let him stay with the team to get a feel for the game at this level - but why not take another young up and coming player (say a batsman or wicketkeeper next time) to England for the same reason?

Mike Selig wrote:Cowan has done "OKish" but really his average is fairly poor for an opening batsman. How long do you want to give him? Plus, his running between the wickets is terrible. More importantly, he has serious issues against spin bowling (namely his defensive technique is poor, and he has no attacking shots bar the sweep) which doesn't bode well for the subcontinent. 50 in a warm-up game isn't worth more than 30odd for me, it's all about form and time in the middle.

England are a different side from Australia, and went about their business in India based on their spinners outperforming the Indian ones, and then building big long innings with the bat. I don't see that as a feasible blueprint for this Australian side, and I don't see how Cowan eating up a load of deliveries before inevitably getting tied down against spin will be in any way beneficial.

Add Jayawardene to the list Shanky, but for me Sangakara is not a great player of spin bowling. Swann for one has had him tied up fairly frequently.

India could always open the bowling with Ashwin or Ojha. Both Cowan and Watson have problems scoring quickly against spinners. But Watson has a better range of shots, and if he gets going against spin, then he could take the attack to the bowler. But Cowan could offer some solidity up front even against spin, even if he doesn't score too many.

lets be honest, Ashwin or Ojha will most likely open the bowling all the time.........they always tend to in india.

Mike Selig wrote:Cowan has done "OKish" but really his average is fairly poor for an opening batsman. How long do you want to give him? Plus, his running between the wickets is terrible. More importantly, he has serious issues against spin bowling (namely his defensive technique is poor, and he has no attacking shots bar the sweep) which doesn't bode well for the subcontinent. 50 in a warm-up game isn't worth more than 30odd for me, it's all about form and time in the middle.

England are a different side from Australia, and went about their business in India based on their spinners outperforming the Indian ones, and then building big long innings with the bat. I don't see that as a feasible blueprint for this Australian side, and I don't see how Cowan eating up a load of deliveries before inevitably getting tied down against spin will be in any way beneficial.

Add Jayawardene to the list Shanky, but for me Sangakara is not a great player of spin bowling. Swann for one has had him tied up fairly frequently.

Not KP or Cook? Not after that Mumbai masterclass?

msp83 wrote:We have to remember Nick Compton's role during England's series win in India. He didn't score big, but almost always, he stuck around with Cook, provided decent starts, and took out whatever possibilities of an early wicket with the new ball.

IMO Compton has a much better technique against spin than Cowan and unlike Compton, he won't have someone like Cook opening the batting with him. Their best chance is to go hard at India early on with Watson and Warner taking on the Indian bowlers and forcing MSD on the defensive.

Linebreaker wrote:The Ashton Agar one really baffles me.

I hadn't even heard of him which is not surprising considering he's only played 2 first class matches. Then there was an article today about how he might stay on for the next game v the Indian XI (fair enough, nice gesture to a young 19 y.o. rookie) but please - Inverarity shouldn't be going further than that and hinting he might get a Test debut... based on what?

http://www.espncricinfo.com/india-v-australia-2013/content/current/story/604969.html

Hard to see him being worse than Doherty tbh. Remember Lyon didn't play a lot of games either before his debut either. He could well turn out to be an inspired pick.

Forcing MSD on the defensive? Can' happen!. He does it without being forced!.

To be fair to the Indian captain though, the quality or the lack of it, in his bowling unit actually forces his hands, no external push needed.

ShankyCricket wrote:

Linebreaker wrote:The Ashton Agar one really baffles me.

I hadn't even heard of him which is not surprising considering he's only played 2 first class matches. Then there was an article today about how he might stay on for the next game v the Indian XI (fair enough, nice gesture to a young 19 y.o. rookie) but please - Inverarity shouldn't be going further than that and hinting he might get a Test debut... based on what?

http://www.espncricinfo.com/india-v-australia-2013/content/current/story/604969.html

Hard to see him being worse than Doherty tbh. Remember Lyon didn't play a lot of games either before his debut either. He could well turn out to be an inspired pick.

Sure, maybe they want to throw a game or two, right?

Gautam Gambhir starts his attempt at a test comeback cith a hundred against the Australians in the tour game. Gambhir, who is leading India A, is batting on 105, and India A are 188-1, with Rohit Sharma giving Gambhir company.

Gambhir goes for 112, Henriques with the wicket. Strange that the Australians aren't playing either Maxwell or Smith here. Agar, meanwhile has gone for 54 in his 7 overs.

I knew they would be targeting him. Doherty and Lyon getting scored off too?

yh they're going at nearly 5 an over.....

but Agar is going at nearly 8 an over...

I have a feeling they are keeping a few things up their sleeve and sparing the quicks a bit. India A seem to be seeing off Starc, Siddle and Henriques and not scoring many runs off them.

or maybe thats just because they are bowling well and the spinners arent lol...

Yeah, they seem pretty tight. Bit of a farce these 3 days games but better than nothing I suppose.

i would be more concerned with how the batsman go against spin to be honest...

I'm not too confident about that at all.

Lions are getting hammered again in Hobart I see. England lack a bit of depth obviously.

Doherty gets a wicket. Watson must have been fielding up in the stands.

LB Doherty in fact outbowled Lyon. Agar was just dispatched, hopefully that would be enough for the Australian selectors not to make a stupid mistake and ruin a potentially good career even before it starts.

He got 2 more wickets after my last post, msp.

I'm glad you agree with my point about young Agar. It's like throwing him into the fire taking him to India. They should send him back here to get more domestic experience....and send over Zampa instead (joke)

So, India will declare on about 450/6 and then we'll see how Watto & Co. go tomorrow afternoon. It could get messy for us!

Manoj Tiwary has been among the runs and has a chance to go on and make a big one tomorrow. Very happy for him, otherwise some would start calling for Rohit Sharma to be included in the national squad!.