Now playing in all three formats with same captain is also not good idea BCCI need to think about this and give some relief as bring Sharma is replacement for any one format ODI or Twenty/20 because this could be good for Kohli if they want to stay with him for long time because  he is also human not machine suddenly change of fortune is not new but still time to consider few things.

He is leading the team so he should be more responsible than other players,off course he is naturally aggressive run scoring machine but when the team needs he also should adapt for that situation.Iyer and Rahul played rally well in t20i but now the format chances so they also should be careful while playing,more they hold wickets then they have better chance to chase down any totals.

My Friend traded several times small amounts with said "investor" and all went without a hitch, but the latest trade worth 5K she did not pay up and just blocked all contacts attempts.
So Just as a warning to the community, be very aware of this Alicia from Mexico!!

My friend lost 5K including my 600€.

Jan/ Finland

Definitely India is more stronger team along with inform batsmen but India decided to try this series with newbie players to get some expereince but it doesn't go well as expected.Kohli need to control aggression and need to hold his wicket for other players to play well.

Saini and Jadeja played really well,am glad that I had chance to watch that match on television.Both team has weaker middle order batsmen which should be resolved sooner for better results in the future.

So its the monopoly of the big three and they will make decision keeping the interest of the each other.    I always said this many times but none agree to me. Now i am happy to see other sharing the same point of view of  Big three influence on cricket.




Or they are afraid to lose from Pakistan  ?

^ Don't judge too early bruh. India might comeback hard in the third ODI. As far as this match is concerned, Indian middle order messed up big time. No doubt there. But it was really a thrilling match to watch at the end. When Saini was raining boundaries of Grandhomme, there was slight hope that India could win the match. But I think Jadeja should have stepped up and should have played the big shots instead waiting at the non-striker's end. But credits to NZ they won this match and the series. The newbie, Jamieson well deservingly got the MOM.

Too many twists and turns in this match. At one point, it looked as if New Zealand would struggle to make a total of even 200. But they managed 273/8 (thanks to some fine batting by Jamieson and Taylor during the final overs). But the Indian batsmen seems to be struggling against the Kiwi bowlers, which was entirely unexpected. This is a team which is capable of chasing targets in excess of 350 with ease.

Well.. there is nothing wrong in trying either him or some of the other part time bowlers for a couple of overs. But Kohli probably didn't wanted to take the risk. It was a very close match and a big over (in case the Kiwis can score 20 runs from it) can change the course of the match. Anyway, we don't know what could have happened if Kedar was given an opportunity to bowl.

Why was India fined for slow over rate? They lost 80% of their fee and previous lost 40% and 20%. Is the fine only paid by the captain or the entire team?

After losing 2 back-to-back matches against NZ (one last year and this year), I am feeling that it's history repeating. Willaimson will be back in the third ODI while their team of batsmen is similar to their WC squad. India most likely will go with the same order but our opening batsmen are not good enough to sustain till the 10th over.

Most exchanges consider 3 confirmations secure enough to consider a transaction as final. This website uses 6 confirmation as an example but it perfectly shows how secure the Bitcoin network is, compared to altcoins: https://howmanyconfs.com/

I've seen many Android-powered smartwatches out there with capabilities to run apps in the same way (almost) as an ordinary smartphone would. On the other hand, we have the Apple Watch which runs its variant of the iOS system. Imagine being able to install a lightweight wallet like Electrum on a smartwatch to send/receive Bitcoin transactions. After all, most of these (if not all) smartwatches have Wi-Fi capabilities, Bluetooth, and more. By integrating Bitcoin wallets into smartwatches, you can truly send/receive transactions anywhere with ease. I'm sure not if this is possible yet (as I don't own a smartwatch). But if a developer decides to create Bitcoin wallets for smartwatches, I'll be a big hit within the mainstream world.

What are your thoughts? Is something like this practical/secure? Or is it better to continue using smartphones for Bitcoin transactions?

I am not expecting any resistance from Bangladesh as India is much superior in all fields they will win this easily but if Bangladesh have good day then may be we will able to have some good match but until now for me its all about India as all boys giving very good performance in field bowling and batting this is perfect winning combination.