1. First things first. Both these 'medieval' teams of world cricket are upgrading their ground fielding in leaps and bounds. Their foreign coaches must be thanked for that. Catching under pressure, though, remains the same old worry across the two dressing rooms. Of the two, Pakistan are probably worse hit for this aspect. Indian medium pacers were ever dependent on catchers for majority of their dismissals while the recently retired Waqar and Wasim did most of their hunting for Pakistan through 'bowled' & 'lbw's.

India dropped 3 of the simpler chances offered by their rivals. Pakistanis, known to be generous hosts, returned the favour through their keeper and Asif. This was a throwback to another huge run chase at Dhaka in 1998 (record breaking at the time). Then India dropped 5 chances during the Pakistani innings, only to get them back one by one during their mammoth chase. Two of them were off successive Srinath skiers in the final over and contributed 4 of the 9 runs required for India to win.

2. Pakistan scored an amazing 130 runs in the last 17 odd overs. And they had lost six big wickets by the time this period started.

3. Younis Khan, the Chinese wall for Indian aspirations, came in to bat under real pressure after half the side was gone. Ever heard of China deputing foot soldiers to defend its wall? Imran Khan hardly believes the move actually saw the light of the day and summed up his thoughts with this: " If I were Younis I would have refused to play as part of that strategy and instead would ask the team management to include another bowler."

The most inspirational cricketer seen this side of the 2nd Great War sounded angry there. And yet all this indignation will have to disappear like an Afridi sixer if Pakistan bat first again next match under similar conditions, make 'Lala' Shahid take first strike against Irfan and end up with 110/1 on board at the first drinks interval. Rubbishing strategies is dicey work these days.


4. Rahul Dravid's irritable habit of attempting ill-judged singles is now a genuine concern for his team. There surely are better things about this opposite skipper to derive inspiration from! Even more alarming must be his growing lapses as the most reliable slip fieldsman India has to make do with. Captaincy obviously is affecting his catching. Maybe Dravid needs to get a quick chat from his model of captaincy Mark Taylor who remained an exceptional slip catcher throughout his days at office, good and bad alike.

5. Despite all the glory to be soaked in from Lahore, things still look ominous for Indian bowlers for the balance two matches. Reason: conceding a 288 run total even in a match where their spearhead and 5th bowler did very well and ALL the specialist bats of the opposition failed miserably. From another angle, it also speaks volumes about the supreme capitalising abilities of the exciting Pak all-rounders in these conditions.

6. Mohammad Asif keeps taking giant strides towards the hall of 'feared bowlers', those who do it by their skill at bowling various lengths and lines with a decisive nip off the seam. At Lahore he bowled a specialist opener (Gambhir) off a full delivery round his legs, then followed it up with a throater a few balls later that India's very decent and level-headed pinch hitter (Pathan) had no answer to. Yet he was never brought back until the dangermen of the opposition middle order have a few runs under their belts.

7. Yuvrah Singh started off at his fluent best in the Indian innings, reaching 45 off 41 balls in no time. However he scored just a little over 25% of the last 130 runs - a measure of that innings from Dhoni.

Parting shot: This was reportedly India's 11th successful run-chase in a row. Many of these were big totals. The increased rates and quantities of runs in either forms of the game is generally attributed to dearth of great bowlers today. Some of it may not be misplaced. Minus Shoaib, none of the trundlers on either side seems to be confident with either of the 'shock-balls' of one-dayers, yorker and bouncer. And they all bowl pretty ordinary slower balls.

People often overlook one important facet though. The batting and protective equipment have been upgraded to great levels of comfort for the batsmen while the bowlers have had much less cause for cheer. I believe we have a strong case to develop a cricket ball that swings bigger and / or has a seam that lasts longer. What is so wrong about taking a page out of football if it can make the game fairer?

As far as I'm concerned, the Series ended with the Third Test at Karachi. Have fun thrashing our Reserve Bowlers around and enjoy our hospitality, that's the best way to make sure India comes back. Who needs footwork, eh?

There's a need to re look the status of pitches at least in Pakistan if not anywhere else. I would not mock the Indian line-up to conceed 250+ runs everytime in spite of a collapse.

Hey Firoz hate to bring your world crashing down but there are two versions of the sport, the Test match and the ODI. You may have beaten us in one of them but we still have a chance in the ODI. If you looked how India has spent most of its time, you would have known that they are in prep for WC 2007. So now you tell me if your series really ended with a meager 1-0 test victory.
As for the reserve bowler, these so called reserve bowlers were once strike bowlers (Naved, Sami) for your country beside Asif. Shoaib is all talk the guy has potential but no consistency... he does well one series and then has problems staying fit or showing up to the match.
I just have this question, if Younis Khan is in such great form why doesnt he move the order so Pakistan can pile the runs up rather than coming down the order and batting a few over?

Heard they're going to do away with the retarded SuperSub rule starting March 21. Can't we just get rid of this pathetic little mockery of cricket sooner than a month later? Who's with me?

I really think, pakistan are going to come back strongly in multan and karachi. Pakistan are without Shoaib and Afridi. Afridi though has not really bothered the score boards in the last 3 one days. Shoaib has proven to be extremely effective in the tests and he would be sorely missed by the Pakistanis. Can that guy ever play a full series without being injured. Asif is probably the only other bowler who has troubled the indians. Talking about footwork, Sehwag and Dhoni are probably the only indian batsmen who do not rely on footwork but have excellent hand eye coordination. Other than Inzi and Yousuf, i dont see any other pakistanis moving their feet well. Anyways, it is going to be tough for the indians in multan as they have not played a one day there ever. but with Sachin, Rahul, Yuvi, Pathan and Dhoni all in form, i dont think it should be a hassle at all.
p.s .. I really wanted to see Shoaib getting carted by Sachin...remember 2003 WC.

I'm with you, Jay.

Count me in as well, please.

I guess cricket right now is in a confused stage. The men sitting around that table in Dubai are wondering whether to continue to let the world watch "cricket" or this new game which suddenly makes no sense to any passionate cricket lover. What was the ultimate goal of coming up with the super sub rule. Basically, they wanted some sort of variation in the game.Unfortunately this game cannot remain the same if people are going to tamper with it. Twenty twenty according to me is also a mockery of the game. I dont see a Sachin, Lara or a Steve Waugh emerge from that version of the game. The gritty determination which encompasses the character of a successful player just does not exist in the 20-20 version. And who said test matches are boring? I strongly believe test matches turn out to be heavily contested mind games. Nothing can beat the beauty of watching a bowler play in the mind of a batsman or a batsman coming up with a flawless straight drive when the bowler thinks he has probably bowled the best five balls of his life. It is cricket. Plese do not let the game die.

I agree - get rid of the Supersub rule. Initially I liked it as a concept but I guess the ICC thought that teams would pick an allrounder as the sub, whereas most have gone for a specialist batsman or bowler. This as we know has led to the greater importance of the toss & can lead effectively into 12 v 11 matches.

Why have captains always taken a gamble & rarely selected an allrounder as the sub? If they had more reguarly selected an allrounder the Supersub idea may have actually worked.

However please can the ICC also get rid of Powerplays too. Anyone else agree? Americanisms are not part of cricket & I don't like seeing the umpires wave their arm around like a helicopter blade to signal the PP. Plus PP's were meant to spice up overs 15-40 but they haven't as they are consistently used up straight away.

For now lets just go back to the old rules please!

I am very strongly in favour of supersub (I love it more than the powerplay, in fact) PROVIDED it is exercised after the toss. The reasons may be obvious but let me mention it again - the specialists can then have a say in the game and throw their weight in, bringing with them a bit of the test match effect there.

Mr. K. Patel, may I remind you that the date that lives in Aussies' minds is 1995, when under Mark Taylor they finally beat the Windies in a Test Series(the first time since 1980). Before that they beat the Windies 4-1 in an ODI series, can you tell me what year that was ? And whether the Aussies attach any importance whatsoever to THAT result? "Meagre" 1-0 test series win? yeah, whatever makes you happy, sir.