A dreadful tie

Most people think the India-England match at Bangalore on Sunday was a terrific one. In fact, it was one of the worst ever.

Reason: you can't score 338 runs and then end up with a tie. That is simply too dreadful.

The batsmen failed India in the last 10 overs and England in the last three. Needless to say, the bowling was pathetic throughout.

Did the spectators get any thrills? Only the less savvy ones because the well-informed knew that nothing turned on the match. Win or lose, each side would get to the quarter finals.

True, there were some great individual performances, like Sachin Tendulkar's and Andrew Strauss's. Both got centuries.

Even the partnerships were good, especially the ones between Tendulkar and Gambhir and Strauss and Pieterson.

Sshh... the Captain is asleep

But captaincy? Perish the thought. Both captains seemed to have dozed off at various points when their side was fielding. In the end, too many half chances that were not converted proved costly for both sides.

Ok, so the wicket was placid which made it easy to score runs but is this the first time we have seen that? Nor was the ball coming on to the bat, and this could have been exploited. But as the field placing showed, it was not.

Another absurdity was Bell's LBW decision – not out when everyone could see the ball was going to hit middle-stump?

So what if Bell's leg was more than 2.5 metres away? Was the ball turning?

Too many variations in the rules governing one day cricket, ostensibly to make the game more interesting, have only succeeded in complicating a simple, enjoyable sport.

Will it end up like American football?

 Bats yes, balls no?

Then there was the business of so many batsmen changing their bats.

I have always wondered about this: if batsmen can be allowed to change their tools at work, why can't the bowlers also be allowed to change their balls which are their tools at work, not as at present but during an over with a choice from out of six balls?

COMMENT NOW