Do you want to see the Aussies lose the series in India ?

[Richard]

Yeah, but still, I don't think too many people would imagine McGrath's time wouldn't have come.

It all started with the WACA Test earlier that summer for him, IMO. Even his nemesis Atherton said the same (said McGrath was innocuous in the opener at The 'Gabba and returned and bowled much better in the final game). And even if Fleming had been fit as well for that tour, he lost fitness regularly enough all career and before long McGrath would've been in - presumably to stay. Maybe as early as the following summer.

BTW when I mentioned "played ahead of Reiffel" I meant earlier - I know he played a couple of games in 1993 and I can't remember off the top of my head whether it was because Reiffel was injured or whether Julien honestly was preferred.

EDIT: looking, he played twice in 1993 when Reiffel did not and also in 1995/96 for the same bowler. The latter would surely have been injury-related (not like Reiffel was a stranger to those either) but the former I suppose the only way to know would be reading a Wisden report.

 

[Top_Cat]

Yeah, but still, I don't think too many people would imagine McGrath's time wouldn't have come.

It all started with the WACA Test earlier that summer for him, IMO. Even his nemesis Atherton said the same (said McGrath was innocuous in the opener at The 'Gabba and returned and bowled much better in the final game). And even if Fleming had been fit as well for that tour, he lost fitness regularly enough all career and before long McGrath would've been in - presumably to stay. Maybe as early as the following summer.

Don't doubt any of that, just talking about that WI series tbh.

BTW when I mentioned "played ahead of Reiffel" I meant earlier - I know he played a couple of games in 1993 and I can't remember off the top of my head whether it was because Reiffel was injured or whether Julien honestly was preferred.

EDIT: looking, he played twice in 1993 when Reiffel did not and also in 1995/96 for the same bowler. The latter would surely have been injury-related (not like Reiffel was a stranger to those either) but the former I suppose the only way to know would be reading a Wisden report.

You probably answered you question, really; was almost certainly injury-related, don't recall BJ ever being preferred to Reiffel except in ODI's.

 

[JackPot]

we might end up seeing the other way around

 

[Richard]

What, Reiffel playing when Julien is injured? Bit late for that isn't it?

 

[SJS]

But of course!!

 

[JackPot]

But of course!!

right on

 

[Johnners]

Haha,

Didn't want to mention Symonds' name obvs. such was the disgracefulness of the decision.

 

[Ikki]

funny you should say that because for me, all along Australia have been the favourites for this series.. Inspite of the dire spinning options, they are still obviously the better side, for me...

Same. I don't know what the fuss is about. Australia to win the series and if India were to win I'd actually consider that a surprise.

 

[pskov]

I just want to see some good cricket and the best team win. But if I had to pick the side I'd most like to win it'd be Australia, if only so it feels even more special when we beat them in the Ashes next year.

 

[howardj]

For mine, I want a competitive series.

As an Aussie, that's what I've always yearned for after our period of unprecedented dominance.

 

[Redbacks]

Brad Hodge was dropped because the selectors look at how runs are scored, not simply a players average. Under extreme pressure, Love and Hodge and a host of others couldn't cut it.

 

[~DanVettoriFan~]

I'd love to see them lose

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

Interestingly (or not)... I'm wanting Australia to win this one, and win it convincingly. Anything to stick one in the general direction of the BCCI. I like some of the Indian players, but if there's one thing I'm all for at the moment, it's sticking it to those shameless ****s at the BCCI.

As such, I hope Australia grind India into the dust. Don't think that'll happen, but I'd raise a smile if it did.

In particular, I would like the Aussies to absolutely spank the Indians in the ODIs that they seem intent on cramming into the cricket calendar.

 

[Richard]

Brad Hodge was dropped because the selectors look at how runs are scored, not simply a players average. Under extreme pressure, Love and Hodge and a host of others couldn't cut it.

Or rather, it was presumed they couldn't with little to no real hard evidence to suggest such a thing.

 

[Richard]

In particular, I would like the Aussies to absolutely spank the Indians in the ODIs that they seem intent on cramming into the cricket calendar.

Well that won't be happening now, as that part was already done a year ago.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

Well that won't be happening now, as that part was already done a year ago.

Oh....kay....

So tours are now in two parts. Oh, I do love a great bit of efficiency.

 

[Richard]

Well... not all tours TBH, but Australia's last 2 tours of India have invovled ODIs one season (2003/04; 2007/08) and Tests the next (2004/05; 2008/09). An interesting way to go, but it's certainly added to the lustre of the Tests which have been played (not that Ind-vs-Aus in Tests usually needs much lustre added).

 

[GIMH]

Actually think it's a decent approach. Someone on here (Poker Boy?) suggested the England-Australia tours should be split in that way. Instead, the Aussies will tour here for Tests & ODIs next year, and just ODIs the year after

 

[pasag]

I agree with that, get rid of all limited overs cricket from Ashes tours.

 

[duffer]

I agree with that, get rid of all limited overs cricket from Ashes tours.

Reckon the ODI's beforehand helps us to be honest. Lots of players get used to England and the conditions before the real stuff starts.