Monday, February 6


Ok. i dont get this. Whats with Arshad Khan as the super sub, when Pakistan decided to win the toss and bowl? Do you see yourself using your supersub in an optimum way now? Baffling.

update: so it seems to have worked out ok (at least in terms of an option), given that Gul got hammered for a mere 35 off his 3 overs. But I still maintain thats providence, and the initial decision still makes little sense to me.


Sfx said...

thats the problem with having to nominate a guy as a supersub before the toss.. but this is the way pak wud have thot ..

their first choice was to win the toss and bowl. in the event that they didnt, and had to bat first, then they had a spare bowler when they were defending ... makes sense?

akr said...

yeah i can see that logic, naturally- its just that its an essentially defensive logic for me. But true- the problem here lies more with the bloody rule than its use.