Interesting that when India got flogged by England 4-0 six months ago, Dravid hit 3 tons and was a shining light.

Did anyone notice that Hussey scored a century? :-) I reckon Hussey's knock will sadly be forgotten with the passing of time, as the Punter and obviously Clarke knocks register so much more significance in people's minds.

It'll be a trivia question in a few years. 'Who else scored a century when Clarke scored 329*?'

Fantastic innings from Clarke, and equally good work from Ponting and Hussey. Put us in a position where we can't lose from here (unless we do a Cape Town and get bowled out in the final session on Day 5 for 47...)

I've had enough of Haddin.

+2. That catch was simple. On this track, opportunities will be few and far between. Dropping catches is a cardinal sin for a keeper and it's only worse on a pitch like this. You have to feel for Pattinson for persisting all afternoon and working Gambhir over to the point where he flirted at one.

It's going to be a long couple of days. Gambhir is good in these situations, Tendulkar is Tendulkar, and Laxman is due for an Australian-frustrating innings.

We have nothing to lose : Dravid

Excuse me ?

http://news.theage.c...0105-1pmrj.html

We have nothing to lose : Dravid Excuse me ? http://news.theage.c...0105-1pmrj.html

It sounds bad when you quote that one line out of context.

We've just got to go out and play and not even think about drawing the game or anything like that, just go out there to play and bat as long as you can and who knows?

I don't think he's said anything too outrageous there.

It sounds bad when you quote that one line out of context.

I don't think he's said anything too outrageous there.

It's not out of context Nasher ! He said "We have nothing to lose"

Whichever way you read it , it's a stupid comment . He's trying to somehow put a positive spin on a disastrous situation .

If / when they lose this Test they will be 2 nil down . They have everything to lose !

"There's nothing to lose in the sense that we're so far behind now" said Dravid .

He's effectively saying if we lose it doesn't matter ! But .......it does matter .

It's not out of context Nasher ! He said "We have nothing to lose" Whichever way you read it , it's a stupid comment . He's trying to somehow put a positive spin on a disastrous situation . If / when they lose this Test they will be 2 nil down . They have everything to lose !

It wasn't a great choice of words, but his point was that their aim is to go out and win the Test match.

It wasn't a great choice of words, but his point was that their aim is to go out and win the Test match.

Yep , and my comment was on his choice of words . Don't apologise for him , he's a big boy .

Yep , and my comment was on his choice of words . Don't apologise for him , he's a big boy .

I just don't see the point in harping on about a comment when the words he said were clearly not the words he meant. It's just nitpicking.

I just don't see the point in harping on about a comment when the words he said were clearly not the words he meant. It's just nitpicking.

I'm not nitpicking at all . I made a comment on what I reckon is an outrageous statement by Dravid .

The bloke has an excellent command of the English language so there's no excuses .

"Clearly not the words he meant" ? Can you please explain what he did mean to this mere mortal .

I'm not nitpicking at all . I made a comment on what I reckon is an outrageous statement by Dravid .

The bloke has an excellent command of the English language so there's no excuses .

"Clearly not the words he meant" ? Can you please explain what he did mean to this mere mortal .

I already explained my take on it. Let's move on.

Sri Lanka's win, or South Africa's loss, in the second test has just gotten even crazier.

After being destroyed in the first test, Sri Lanka came back and one the second.

In the third, S.A. have blasted 580/4d, S.L. in reply limped to 239 and are now batting again. At 1-12, still 329 behind, their second test victory seems even more remarkable.

I don't see the problem with those comments from Dravid.

They are in an impossible position where the overwhelming likelihood is that they will lose the match. They have 8 wickets in hand and 180 overs to bat. They're stuffed. Completely and utterly.

So, if the context of the match, he is right. They have nothing to lose. If they lose the match then it will not be a comment on their batting of the next two days, so they are free to bat without the weight of expectation. They can't lose because they can only lose.

But if they don't lose ........

India have effectively already lost this match. They are not batting to avoid a loss, they are batting to claim a draw.

So if India lose this Test they haven't really lost . I get it now . How silly of me not to see this .

In all seriousness that "We've got nothing to lose" line is trotted out far too much . To me it's a total cop out and is just another way of making an excuse . It is often said when an individual or team has been completely outplayed .

It never ceases to amaze me how , in a match where there is a winner and a loser , one competitor can say that they've "Got nothing to lose". Ah , yes you have , because if the other mob win , you lose !

In that 'Age' article Dravid also made a veiled reference to Sachin hopefully making "that" ton . I thought it was supposed to be a team game . I can't imagine an Australian player focusing on an individual performance if we were similarly precariously placed .

Edited January 5, 201213 yr by Macca

You are seeing what you want to see from the comment.

It's a non-issue. It's less than a non-issue. It's the issue that non-issues ignore due to a lack of substance. In fact Dravid's grandmother's pet gerbil's strangely coloured turd has laid greater claim to importance than that comment.

You are seeing what you want to see from the comment.

It's a non-issue. It's less than a non-issue. It's the issue that non-issues ignore due to a lack of substance. In fact Dravid's grandmother's pet gerbil's strangely coloured turd has laid greater claim to importance than that comment.

I didn't see into the Dravid comment the way you think I did . I took it on face value and thought it was an oxymoron.

And if Dravid's comment is such a non-issue then why did the sub editors of the 'Age' use it as the headline of the article?

So if India lose this Test they haven't really lost . I get it now . How silly of me not to see this

In this situation everyone expects them to lose. Dravid's point is that the remaining batsmen should not be burdened by the pressure of having to bat for the best part of two days to have any hope of winning. I think it's a decent attitude to take at this stage of the game.

In this situation everyone expects them to lose. Dravid's point is that the remaining batsmen should not be burdened by the pressure of having to bat for the best part of two days to have any hope of winning. I think it's a decent attitude to take at this stage of the game.

My thoughts precisely. I'm more concerned of the colour of Dravid's grandmothers pet gerbil's turd.

And if Dravid's 38yo, his grandmother is playing a mighty innings.

In this situation everyone expects them to lose. Dravid's point is that the remaining batsmen should not be burdened by the pressure of having to bat for the best part of two days to have any hope of winning. I think it's a decent attitude to take at this stage of the game.

I get what his point is . I read the whole article and all his quotes . I see sport as winning and losing so his opening comment baffled me and still does . If people want to see "into" his comment then so be it . That's what we're debating here - those who see it as black and white and those that see the grey . Most times I see the grey but not this time .

Most people do expect them to lose but Dravid shouldn't be thinking this . I believe he is with his "nothing to lose" comment . The Aussies would have seen his comment as a sign of weakness . Or they should . We're talking elite competitive beasts here .

It sounds bad when you quote that one line out of context.

I don't think he's said anything too outrageous there.

Agree with that.

those who see it as black and white and those that see the grey . Most times I see the grey but not this time .

You should be looking at the grey on this occassion.

I've had enough of Haddin.

What really annoys me about Haddin dropping that catch yesterday is that he was carrying on like an absolute [censored] after he took a couple of regulation catches in the first innings.

Gee the pitch looks an absolute belter today. There appears no wear. Its far cry from the 4th and 5th day spinning dust bowls that used to be at the SCG in past years.

As I speak Gambhir is out for 83. Again caught Warner and once again Siddle gets the break. This is an important break through. Now we have Very Very Susceptible Laxman coming in.

Laxman could easily have been out a couple of times in his innings but he's still there and he and SRT are forming a dangerous partnership. It's always a dangerous partnership on a dead pitch like this.

We need to stay positive with our bowling and field settings and keep plugging away. We've done well to prise 3 wickets out already and there are encouraging signs every now and again. As I write SRT has just inside-edged one so things can happen. Diligence and persistence will get wickets on this track, even if SRT gets that 100th 100 before we get him.

After caning him mercerlessly I have to admit Clarke has been very good in this game.

Earned his spot this week.

Great Game.

Question about the dismissal of MS Dhoni on a return catch to Hilfenhaus. I wasn't watching at the time the wicket fell but wonder why the umpire referred the decision to the third official to check on whether the shot was a bump ball. We either have a referral system or we don't. What was the justification to refer when the Indians are against the use of this technology?

Where's the consistency?

Question about the dismissal of MS Dhoni on a return catch to Hilfenhaus. I wasn't watching at the time the wicket fell but wonder why the umpire referred the decision to the third official to check on whether the shot was a bump ball. We either have a referral system or we don't. What was the justification to refer when the Indians are against the use of this technology?

Where's the consistency?

Umpires have always been able to ask the third umpire for clarification on bump balls or if a catch was clean. That has stood for years and isn't a part of the DRS.

Whether or not this suggests that umpires should have the ability to go to the third umpire for any decision, such as lbw or caught, is another question.