***Official Australia in India***

[Mister Wright]

Yeah, Watson should keep his place. I think the only changes to the side will be through injury. Unless Australia decide to drop White, but I don't think that will happen.

Anyway, Australia have not really dropped players from the team and brought guys from outside the touring party, and as much as it would be great to have Symonds in the team, I think the only way he'll play is by covering for an injured player.

 

[Woodster]

I know India have a decent record at Mohali, that in itself may suggest that spin plays its part here. Last Test played here was against England in March 2006, when several players made a start but nobody managed to reach three figures, to imply that it is a track that you can never really feel in on. In fact 7 batters (that were dismissed) passed 50.

Both spinners and quicker bowlers enjoyed success in this Test, with Kumble picking up match figures of 9-146, Munaf picked up 7 wickets in the match and Freddie took 4-96 in the 1st innings.

 

[Woodster]

Incidentally, all of India's top 6 from the first Test average over 50 at Mohail.

 

[Burgey]

Aussie Media talking out of their ass :-

http://www.smh.com.au/news/sport/cr...ttack-in-return/2008/10/12/1223749845365.html

Haddin spoils for fight and cops Zak Attack in return



"...Zaheer's outburst evoked memories of Trent Bridge last year, when the Indian paceman waved his bat angrily at Kevin Pietersen after the English side tossed jelly beans on the pitch and Pietersen later bowled his country to victory."

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24486671-5015684,00.html

"Clarke was roundly condemned for it, with some justification, yet this did not stop two of India's finest, Sachin Tendulkar and Virender Sehwag, doing the same thing on Saturday.
Sehwag, in particular, is in danger of having the finger of hypocrisy pointed at him. It has already started twitching.
Before the Test Sehwag suggested the Australians were cheats because they had claimed catches that bounced during the second Test, a suggestion Ponting described as "insulting".
On Saturday, Sehwag sliced a wide, full delivery from Johnson to be brilliantly caught by Matthew Hayden at slip and then waited for the umpire's decision."


So waiting for Umpire's decision is same as claiming bump-catches ?

No it isn't.

Must say though I had a quiet chuckle when both Sehwag and Tendulkar stood there and waited for the finger to go up after hitting the ball to slip and cover respectively, after what Clarke (rightfully) copped for the same thing in Sydney.

 

[archie mac]

I good Test match, which I was lucky to watch or listen to almost every ball.

I thought it a hard wicket to score really quickly on especially once the ball became soft (which I understand is a problem with the balls they are using in this series?), the only time that anyone scored quickly was when the Aussies tried to blast two batsman out with the new ball. And the opener who can't help himself!

I do not like time wasting in Test cricket, regardless which side is at fault, and I think the ICC should do something about it

It was India at fault in this Test (but I know the Aussies have also done it in the past), can someone explain why they need to wait for the new batsman to come in, take block, and then, stop the game set the field and waste 5 mins

 

[Burgey]

The Aussies were a bowler short but what really cost them was the defensive mindset. I agree with Zaheer. Despite being a bowler short, they were in the game. Yet, they decided to set defensive fields to Zaheer and Harbhajan and declared late (that's what Ponting does). Chappelli was right. He said in one of the studio shows that 'there are two type of declarations - one which gives the opposition a sniff and is a real declaration while the other is the closure which gives the other team no chance to win. There are captains of both kinds with Taylor and Warne (had he captained Australia) being in the declaration class while Waugh and Ponting being in the closure class.' Lovers of Steve Waugh will jump on that but I never rated him as a high calibre captain and agree with Chappelli (though Chappelli's hatred towards S.Waugh is quite well known). The Steve Waugh bit is a digression from the point I want to make here ---

In the end you need 10 wickets to win the game. As Australia were a bowler short, they needed more time and not less time to bowl India out. Katich playing defensively and Australia not going on the attack on the fourth day itself and not declaring earlier probably hurt them a lot and cost them the match or at least a better chance in the match.

All true, but what's India's record in fourth innings when they're trying to survive rather than in with a shot at winning? I think Ponting was influenced by their recent troubles in fourth innings. If he'd declared earlier and India got the runs, he'd have been slaughtered, and rightfully so.

We need to bear in mind he couldn't use his main bowlers as much on day 5 as he'd liked because of the light. Our spinners are clearly inferior to India's, mind you the latter only took 3 for the match between them anyway.

 

[Burgey]

No way. Thought he got poked in the eye if anything.

This test proved we are a bowler short. White was no better than Clarke and doesn't deserve to keep his spot.

Actually DWTA.

It depends on his role. They knew coming in here the spinners they had weren't much chop, so their role I imagine is to bowl tidily and maintain some form of pressure while the main strike bowlers (in this case the quicks) have a rest. To that end I thought White did his job. The batsmen were playing him with some respect in the 2nd dig (albeit not trying to score).

The test for him will, of course, come when India are forcing the pace and he has to bowl a decent spell. At least his quickish pace through the air may help him keep some batsmen at home.

I'm not saying he's a medium to long term answer, I'm saying he's what we've got in India right now, and he'll be given a job to tie up an end. He may just be able to do it.

As for the talk (not by yourself BTW) of India's batsmen getting out to poor shots and the criticism of Australia's field placings with boundary riders etc., the tactic clearly worked in both innings by in part inducing those shots - you had India reduced to 4/just over 100 in each dig. Zaheer and Harbajan batted very well in the 1st innings to dig India out of a hole. I'd have thought the tactics actually worked well.

 

[silentstriker]

No it isn't.

Must say though I had a quiet chuckle when both Sehwag and Tendulkar stood there and waited for the finger to go up after hitting the ball to slip and cover respectively, after what Clarke (rightfully) copped for the same thing in Sydney.

I think that's why they did it. They didn't do it during the SL series.


Clarke has a.....reputation (claiming catches, doing stuff like that), but IMO he is just doing what it takes to get his side to win. I can't fault that.

 

[silentstriker]

Before the series, I thought Australia playing a spinner was stupid. And this Test showed why. Some said that Johnson would be much worse than a spinner. Well Johnson played as was great, so why can't Bollinger come in for White?

 

[irfan]

Before the series, I thought Australia playing a spinner was stupid. And this Test showed why. Some said that Johnson would be much worse than a spinner. Well Johnson played as was great, so why can't Bollinger come in for White?

There's no question that Bollinger >>> White as a bowler but over rates are a big issue. In the 1st innings Australia opened with Lee & Clark and had Johnson and then Watson as first and second change, respectivley. As a result they had to bowl Clarke and White for extended periods of time to make up for the slow over rate.

If Bollinger comes in, this only exacerbates the problem. Sure you might only get fined initially for slow over rates, but Ponting may get suspended if he is a repeat offender - which Australia definitely can't afford at the tail end of the series.

 

[duffer]

No it isn't.

Must say though I had a quiet chuckle when both Sehwag and Tendulkar stood there and waited for the finger to go up after hitting the ball to slip and cover respectively, after what Clarke (rightfully) copped for the same thing in Sydney.

Meh, they saw Ponting get away with scooping one straight back at Kumble claiming it was a bump ball and thought they could try their luck. Nothing to do with Sydney here.

 

[Top_Cat]

Zaheer's recent comments really lack tact. Even if the Aussies were defensive on the last day, for most of the match they were the ones driving the progress of the match. I know he's just trying to gee up his team but his comments reek of distraction from India's very real problems.

The Aussie bowling was always going to be a problem for them (not because they lack ability, just that it's still a relatively new bowling unit with Lee the only one with more than two seasons Test experience and not one of them with Test experience in India) yet they managed to keep the Indian top-order relatively quiet in the first dig. Kumble's ineffectiveness on this pitch is being dismissed as the pitch's fault when his last two tours of Australia, on even flatter pitches, he's taken plenty of wickets (was their only bowler in 2004, really). The man knows how to get wickets on roads.

As I said before the start of the series, the team that bats better will win and this match has done nothing to dissaude me. India was in worse shape with the bat in this match and were fighting to stave off a loss on day 5. If they bat better they'll be in better shape but they'll still have to find a way to dismiss the Aussie batters too. For sure we can imagine that India will bat better but I think it's pretty safe to say the Aussies, particularly Lee, will bowl better as the series goes on. It's look like it'll be close.

 

[duffer]

I think the whole "no Test experience in India" is tremendously overrated. The biggest challenge is getting used to the actual country and the environment there. Just about the whole squad has played ODI/IPL/A Tour games in the subcontinent so the biggest hurdles should well and truly have been conquered for most of them already.

The Aussies bowled well untill they got the 7th wicket and then got complacent and they were defensive against two guys whom they shouldn't have been defensive against.

 

[Top_Cat]

I think the whole "no Test experience in India" is tremendously overrated. The biggest challenge is getting used to the actual country and the environment there. Just about the whole squad has played ODI/IPL/A Tour games in the subcontinent so the biggest hurdles should well and truly have been conquered for most of them already.

The Aussies bowled well untill they got the 7th wicket and then got complacent and they were defensive against two guys whom they shouldn't have been defensive against.

Yeah true, that's not really an experience issue is it? It's more of a "These blokes'll just get themselves out eventually" issue. The inexperience of the bowling unit just in bowling with each other is an issue, though. That'll obviously change the more they bowl together and I would think they'll take heart from having put the Indian top-order under pressure.

Best thing they can say in response to Zaheer is nothing at all, though.

 

[Johnners]

Best response to Zaheer would be to win by an innings next match.

 

[mikeW]

Yeah, Watson should keep his place. I think the only changes to the side will be through injury. Unless Australia decide to drop White, but I don't think that will happen.

Anyway, Australia have not really dropped players from the team and brought guys from outside the touring party, and as much as it would be great to have Symonds in the team, I think the only way he'll play is by covering for an injured player.

Would Symonds really add that much to the team that they don't already have? Tbh the only place he'd take in the team would be Watson who had a very decent 1st test. Doubt they'd be inclined to pick him ahead of White as the spinning choice.

 

[Athlai]

Would Symonds really add that much to the team that they don't already have? Tbh the only place he'd take in the team would be Watson who had a very decent 1st test. Doubt they'd be inclined to pick him ahead of White as the spinning choice.

Probably would to be honest. Better batsman, better fielder and will fire in a few quick overs. Not like they're really expecting White to win matches for them.

 

[Johnners]

Considering Symonds was generally seen as the preferred spinning option ahead of Clarke (after Hogg/Macgill), and given that it seems White is considered to be Clarkes equal at best, I think the selectors would very much consider Symonds a better spinning option than White (Actully, I don't think White would stand a chance if the selectors were considering recalling Symonds).

 

[Prince EWS]

Australian selectors are going to have some selection drama's for the second test. If Stuart Clark aggravates his injury, Bollinger will easily slot in. That said, I think Bollinger needs a spot in the side regardless.

Is it possible to get Symonds over, or do we have to stick with what we have? If we can't, I think we need to run with a line up like this:

1. Jaques
2. Hayden
3. Ponting
4. Hussey
5. Clarke
6. Katich
7. Haddin
8. Lee
9. Johnson
10. Clark
11. Bollinger

With Watson in for Clark if he isn't fit to play.

Being a seaming wicket, that is the best line up possible, and most likely to get us 20 wickets. Mohali doesn't take a lot of spin, so Clarke and Katich will be sufficient. Bollinger thrives in these conditions, and will take a lot of wickets. The batting is very strong, Jaques, Hayden, Ponting, Hussey and Clarke has to be the top 5 in the world. Katich, Haddin, Lee, Johnson, Clark etc are no slouches with the bat either.

That's the exact same team you named for the first Test (and in fact the one I named). You have to learn, though, that you can't just keep naming that team if the players you would be dropping have done well - nothing has changed to suggest they should be dropped, much less after just one Test. They're not going to drop Watson after the game he had, and rightly so really.

 

[Julian87]

1 Hayden
2 Katich
3 Watson
4 Hussey
5 Clarke
6 Watson
7 Haddin
8 Lee
9 Johnson
10 Clark/Siddle
11 Bollinger

IMO