***Official Australia in India***

[Top_Cat]

I am sure Watto would sweep his way out of trouble against spin.

And he would be headed back to the pavilion pretty quickly because if there's one shot he's pretty awful at, it's that one.

 

[silentstriker]

As an example, use up a few overs from Clarke, etc when guys like Dravid and Laxman come to the crease - they're unlikely to start hitting over the top right from the start

The downside to that is that a guy like Dravid is out of form, and you don't want to give him easy ways to get back into form. Not to mention a couple of loose overs to get his eye in. If I was the captain, I'd bring on my main strike bowlers as soon as Dravid or Laxman walk in, to try to get them when they are most vulnerable. I think part timers have a lot of use in this series, but I don't think using them when a wicket falls is the right thing.

 

[social]

The Andrew Symonds issue was handled quite well, and he has not been setting the world on fire in a recent Bulls tour either.



McGain was the obvious choice for this tour. There are no spinners in Australia that are even decent, let alone test class. What would be interesting is if they were aware of his injury.



Jaques has suffered an injury, but will probably be available for the first test. He actually ruled himself out of the tour match, and thought he was the obvious opener to partner Hayden after his terrific summer last time round. He has also been in top form in India, as shown below.

http://cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/184/184844.html
http://cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/127/127192.html
http://cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/127/127191.html

He has been batting well, no surprise there, and that is what got him into the Australian side in the first place. Note that Katich is not very good in Indian conditions. Whilst these are not the same pitches that the teams will compete on, they are very similar, and after only the first match, he was dropped for Jaques. He failed in that inning, with 22 in the only match he played. Jaques well and truly outperformed him by getting a chance in the second and third matches, and scoring 82, 136 and 152.

Also, Bollinger performed particualarly well, taking 13 wickets across 5 innings, including a spectacular 5/15 off 14.5. He deserves a spot in the side, as the fourth seamer.



I disagree. They do a good job, and with the spinners, we are short of options, and are trying to be creative. What would you do then?

The treatment of Symonds was a disgrace and his omission is the only reason why people are talking about Krezja and White.

McGain was injured on the A tour and just to make sure that he had minimal chance of recovery, they put him on a plane and flew him half way around the world and back again.

As anyone that has been on a long-haul flight would know (and I do it at least twice a month), that is the best way to ensure that a "frozen" joint or muscle DOESNT heal

Jaques was fit and available to play in the last match. Instead, he wasnt selected,Nielsen endorsed Katich BEFORE the match, and the latter then promptly failed.

Unfortunately, the selectors have now painted themselves into a corner because Jaques hasnt played in months and isnt match fit

These guys are seriously dumb

 

[howardj]

For mine, Bollinger would have more of an impact in the 1st Test than White.

Omitting Bollinger from the tour match just played was the worst selection of the lot.

 

[Johnners]

The treatment of Symonds was a disgrace and his omission is the only reason why people are talking about Krezja and White.

Haha, whatever. The guy was obviously causing angst among the team, and it's not the first time it's happened, his non-selection was hardly a disgrace.

 

[NZTailender]

Jaques has suffered an injury, but will probably be available for the first test. He actually ruled himself out of the tour match, and thought he was the obvious opener to partner Hayden after his terrific summer last time round. He has also been in top form in India, as shown below.

http://cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/184/184844.html
http://cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/127/127192.html
http://cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/127/127191.html

He has been batting well, no surprise there, and that is what got him into the Australian side in the first place. Note that Katich is not very good in Indian conditions. Whilst these are not the same pitches that the teams will compete on, they are very similar, and after only the first match, he was dropped for Jaques. He failed in that inning, with 22 in the only match he played. Jaques well and truly outperformed him by getting a chance in the second and third matches, and scoring 82, 136 and 152.

What relevance has matches played in 2007, in Pakistan, got to do with playing India in India this week? Also, Pakistani pitches are very different from Indian pitches, as they favour seam more than spin.

In India tour/A matches this year he has scored 22, 32, 73, 15 and 5.

On the last tour of India he scored 30, 7*, 81, 39, 36*, 9, 4, 99, 7 and 1. Tests bolded.

So, he's more than competent on Indian pitches, plus he's an excellent player of spin bowling. Why should Jaques, who hasn't had any match practice in India, or any test experience in India, get ahead of Katich? If you base it on the WIndies tests, Katich has him there as well.

 

[social]

Haha, whatever. The guy was obviously causing angst among the team, and it's not the first time it's happened, his non-selection was hardly a disgrace.

You know what causes problems in a team?







LOSING

 

[sanga1337]

You know what causes problems in a team?







LOSING

Exactly so you don't want players who aren't getting on well with each other in the team in there because in general, when players in the team aren't getting on well with each other they generally don't play as well because their playing as individuals rather than as a team.

 

[Top_Cat]

Exactly so you don't want players who aren't getting on well with each other in the team in there because in general, when players in the team aren't getting on well with each other they generally don't play as well because their playing as individuals rather than as a team.

And generally that's the case but in this case hardly applies. Symonds has been acting up since 2005 if reports are correct and in that time not only has the team beaten every Test opponent they've faced when he's been in the side, Symonds' personal form has been brilliant. He's even taken some wickets.

 

[Jakester1288]

On Ganguly's non-selection.

I can definitely see the logic behind the Indian selectors decision to not select Ganguly for this tour, his average in India against Australia is only 27.50, so it seems they have gotten the better of him in his home country. He only has 383 runs in 6 matches, with a top score of 66. Definitely not a convincing record to push for his selection. But in his favour, he has made 218 runs at 43.60 whilst not captain, compared to his 165 at 18.33 whilst skippering the side.

 

[honestbharani]

I thought he has been selected..



And to T_C:


I am not sure what your point is here.. Coz, unless you are suggesting that the whole thing is one big plan to get him out of the side, I don't see what you are trying to tell. Sure, Symonds may have had on and off problems which were affecting his team mates from circa 2005, but maybe they just felt this was the last straw when he went fishing.

 

[pup11]

On Ganguly's non-selection.

I can definitely see the logic behind the Indian selectors decision to not select Ganguly for this tour, his average in India against Australia is only 27.50, so it seems they have gotten the better of him in his home country. He only has 383 runs in 6 matches, with a top score of 66. Definitely not a convincing record to push for his selection. But in his favour, he has made 218 runs at 43.60 whilst not captain, compared to his 165 at 18.33 whilst skippering the side.

Mate he has been picked for this series, so i don't know what you are talking about!

 

[pup11]

And generally that's the case but in this case hardly applies. Symonds has been acting up since 2005 if reports are correct and in that time not only has the team beaten every Test opponent they've faced when he's been in the side, Symonds' personal form has been brilliant. He's even taken some wickets.

Tbh, Symonds deserved his punishment, nobody is bigger than the game and CA wanted to send out that message, so if Symonds would have been let off the hook then it would have set a bad precedent for other junior or less superior players, so it was the right decision to evict him from the squad for the series against Bangladesh, but i think not picking him for an important tour like India was a bit of foolish thing to do and blowing the thing a bit out of proportion.

 

[masterblaster]

On Ganguly's non-selection.

I can definitely see the logic behind the Indian selectors decision to not select Ganguly for this tour, his average in India against Australia is only 27.50, so it seems they have gotten the better of him in his home country. He only has 383 runs in 6 matches, with a top score of 66. Definitely not a convincing record to push for his selection. But in his favour, he has made 218 runs at 43.60 whilst not captain, compared to his 165 at 18.33 whilst skippering the side.

While he has been selected, one thinks he deserves his spot. After coming back since he has been dropped, he has been one of India's best performing and most consistent batsmen. When you right off Sourav Ganguly, you're flirting with danger because he is at his best when his back is against the wall and when he has something to prove. Case in point, you can go back to his 140 odd against Australia on a difficult Gabba pitch in 2003 or his fantastic double century against Pakistan last year. Ganguly has always been a fighter and if this is his last series, I'd expect him to have a fairly good one as he'll be fired up and will want to go out on his terms.

 

[Jakester1288]

I'd just did this for another forum, but I thought it would be useful here. Just a copy and paste of my own post.

Regarding someones comment about India being better in batting and bowling than Australia, I will reel out the stats.

These are just projected line ups btw. The Indian one is manee's line up, and the Australia is what I think we will run with, not what I want.

BATTING:

Openers:
Matthew Hayden - 53.51 - 61 in India
Gambhir - 37.11 - 22 in India
Simon Katich - 39.47 - 39.42 in India
Virender Sehwag - 52.62 - 54.90 in India
1 - 1 there
*Comments*
If you put Katich on Gambhir and Hayden on Sehwag, Australia takes it out 2-0. I would prefer Jaques to Katich.

Middle order - 3-6:
Ricky Ponting - 58.37 - 12.28 in India
VVS Laxman - 43.79 - 44.66 in India
Michael Hussey - 68.38 - Yet to play in India
Sachin Tendulkar - 54.23 - 54.95 in India
Michael Clarke - 47.06 - 57.14 in India
Rahul Dravid - 53.92 - 50.36 in India
Shane Watson - 20.25 - Yet to play in India
Sourav Ganguly - 41.74 - 42.00 in India
2 - 2 there
3 - 3 so far
*Comments*
I went off overall averages for Hussey and Watson, due to them not yet playing a test match in India thus far in their career.

Wicketkeepers:
Brad Haddin - 30.20 - Yet to play in India
MS Dohni - 33.76 - 34.20 in India
0 - 1 there
3 - 4 so far
*Comments*
Close here, hoping Haddin can have a big series. I have a bet over at CricketWeb that he will make a half century, so I'm hoping he can score some big ones.

The tail:
Cameron White: Debut - FC average 41.47
Anil Kumble: 17.66 - 21.50 in India
Mitchell Johnson - 33.40 - Yet to play in India
Harbahajan Singh - 15.30 - 11.32 in India
Brett Lee: 21.45 - Yet to play in India
Zaheer Kahn: 11.77 - 9.26 in India
Stuart Clark - 11.80 - Yet to play in India
Ishant Sharma - 18.40 - Yet to lose his wicket in India
3-1 there.
6-5 now.
*Comments*
Interesting to see Sharma with a better test batting average than Clark, Clark is easily the best batsmen out of the 2. Still, have to go with the stats.

Batting summary:
Australia = 396.79
India = 363.55
In the end, player average wise, Australia won 6-5.

Without White, Australia would have lost that, he just got us over the line. But that silences the critics over our batting line up.

Now for the bowling.

BOWLING:
*Comments*
These are specialist bowlers only, however I had to include a spinner - Michael Clarke (seeing as White has only played FC, cant judge him by a test record) - to make up for India having the extra bowler, who happens to be a spinner.

Brett Lee: 289 @ 29.58 - Yet to play in India
Ishant Sharma: 23 @ 36.21 - 10 @ 21.30
Stuart Clark: 81 @ 21.46 - Yet to play in India
Zaheer Kahn: 178 @ 34.06 - 42 @ 40.09 In India
Mitchell Johnson: 34 @ 32.88 - Yet to play in India
Anil Kumble: 616 @ 29.33 - 347 @ 24.27 in India
Michael Clarke: 16 @ 21.31 - 6 @ 2.16 in India
Harbhajan Singh: 291 @ 30.87 - 191 @ 26.26 in India

*Comments*
2-2 there, it should be Lee over Sharma and Singh over Clarke, but the stats never lie.

Bowling summary:
Australia = 86.08
India = 111.92

Once again, Australia dominate the statistics. We are clearly the better side, even without a top spinner.

I just hope you know I wasted over 3 hours of my evening to do that for you.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Ha ha. Thats commitment. Zaheer Khan must really hate bowling in India.

Anyway, is Lee the most experienced test bowler to have never bowled in a test in India (excluding those who never played here at all)?

 

[pup11]

I'd just did this for another forum, but I thought it would be useful here. Just a copy and paste of my own post.

Regarding someones comment about India being better in batting and bowling than Australia, I will reel out the stats.

These are just projected line ups btw. The Indian one is manee's line up, and the Australia is what I think we will run with, not what I want.

BATTING:

Openers:
Matthew Hayden - 53.51 - 61 in India
Gambhir - 37.11 - 22 in India
Simon Katich - 39.47 - 39.42 in India
Virender Sehwag - 52.62 - 54.90 in India
1 - 1 there
*Comments*
If you put Katich on Gambhir and Hayden on Sehwag, Australia takes it out 2-0. I would prefer Jaques to Katich.

Middle order - 3-6:
Ricky Ponting - 58.37 - 12.28 in India
VVS Laxman - 43.79 - 44.66 in India
Michael Hussey - 68.38 - Yet to play in India
Sachin Tendulkar - 54.23 - 54.95 in India
Michael Clarke - 47.06 - 57.14 in India
Rahul Dravid - 53.92 - 50.36 in India
Shane Watson - 20.25 - Yet to play in India
Sourav Ganguly - 41.74 - 42.00 in India
2 - 2 there
3 - 3 so far
*Comments*
I went off overall averages for Hussey and Watson, due to them not yet playing a test match in India thus far in their career.

Wicketkeepers:
Brad Haddin - 30.20 - Yet to play in India
MS Dohni - 33.76 - 34.20 in India
0 - 1 there
3 - 4 so far
*Comments*
Close here, hoping Haddin can have a big series. I have a bet over at CricketWeb that he will make a half century, so I'm hoping he can score some big ones.

The tail:
Cameron White: Debut - FC average 41.47
Anil Kumble: 17.66 - 21.50 in India
Mitchell Johnson - 33.40 - Yet to play in India
Harbahajan Singh - 15.30 - 11.32 in India
Brett Lee: 21.45 - Yet to play in India
Zaheer Kahn: 11.77 - 9.26 in India
Stuart Clark - 11.80 - Yet to play in India
Ishant Sharma - 18.40 - Yet to lose his wicket in India
3-1 there.
6-5 now.
*Comments*
Interesting to see Sharma with a better test batting average than Clark, Clark is easily the best batsmen out of the 2. Still, have to go with the stats.

Batting summary:
Australia = 396.79
India = 363.55
In the end, player average wise, Australia won 6-5.

Without White, Australia would have lost that, he just got us over the line. But that silences the critics over our batting line up.

Now for the bowling.

BOWLING:
*Comments*
These are specialist bowlers only, however I had to include a spinner - Michael Clarke (seeing as White has only played FC, cant judge him by a test record) - to make up for India having the extra bowler, who happens to be a spinner.

Brett Lee: 289 @ 29.58 - Yet to play in India
Ishant Sharma: 23 @ 36.21 - 10 @ 21.30
Stuart Clark: 81 @ 21.46 - Yet to play in India
Zaheer Kahn: 178 @ 34.06 - 42 @ 40.09 In India
Mitchell Johnson: 34 @ 32.88 - Yet to play in India
Anil Kumble: 616 @ 29.33 - 347 @ 24.27 in India
Michael Clarke: 16 @ 21.31 - 6 @ 2.16 in India
Harbhajan Singh: 291 @ 30.87 - 191 @ 26.26 in India

*Comments*
2-2 there, it should be Lee over Sharma and Singh over Clarke, but the stats never lie.

Bowling summary:
Australia = 86.08
India = 111.92

Once again, Australia dominate the statistics. We are clearly the better side, even without a top spinner.

I just hope you know I wasted over 3 hours of my evening to do that for you.

The hard work you put into this is definitely commendable, but tbh past records and performances don't mean much in a completely new series, but good effort nonetheless.

 

[Athlai]

Man a lot of those are sick calls. Had enough trouble with Hayden > Sehwag TBH.

Hussey > Tendulkar in India?
Clarke > Dravid in India??
Watson > Ganguly???

Dhoni >>> Haddin too.

Those statistics are pretty dodgy mate, particularly for those who have never played there, I know its a simple statistical comparison but they're just so dreadful.

 

[irfan]

Man a lot of those are sick calls. Had enough trouble with Hayden > Sehwag TBH.

Hussey > Tendulkar in India?
Clarke > Dravid in India??
Watson > Ganguly???

Dhoni >>> Haddin too.

Those statistics are pretty dodgy mate, particularly for those who have never played there, I know its a simple statistical comparison but they're just so dreadful.

Gotta love Jakester, he's good value. Passionate kid but has nfi half the time.

 

[Jakester1288]

Man a lot of those are sick calls. Had enough trouble with Hayden > Sehwag TBH.

Hussey > Tendulkar in India?
Clarke > Dravid in India??
Watson > Ganguly???

Dhoni >>> Haddin too.

Those statistics are pretty dodgy mate, particularly for those who have never played there, I know its a simple statistical comparison but they're just so dreadful.

I know, but they are just averages. Hussey has never played a test in India, so I had to go by his career average. I never said Watson was better than Ganguly though.