***Official Australia in India***

[Precambrian]

Yeah exactly, Ponting hasn't said Lee bowled brilliantly at all, just that he looked more dangerous which he did. He's still putting everything together and might not by Nagpur but there's little doubt he looked more likely to take wickets.

Again, though, don't know why everyone's piling on the bowling. The pitches have been the pathetic part of the equation, the two best bowlers from either side have averaged 35, the rest much more. It's been a batsman's series for both sides, Aus's Mohali batting was not great and India's bowlers were good. This Test and the first, everyone has had to work damn hard for them and have long periods where they didn't look likely to take any.

Let's face it, the Aussie bowling overall has only been a little worse than India's in terms of stats and the respective positions in the series and figures back that up. The pitches have ensured the bat-dominated series we've seen and on just about any other pitches Lee, Clark, Zaheer and Sharma would have gotten decent figures. Just surprises me that the focus is all about the Aussie bowling when the Indian bowling has only been a little better.

DWTA. The bowling averages are as below for Australia

[B]Player	      Mat	Overs	Mdns	Runs	Wkts	Ave	Econ	SR[/B]

M Johnson	3	 120.0 	15	415	12	 34.58 	 3.45 	 60.00 
B Lee	        3	 122.0 	19	404	7	 57.71 	 3.31 	 104.50 
S Watson	3	 80.0 	13	237	5	 47.40 	 2.96 	 96.00 
C White	        3	 81.0 	7	303	5	 60.60 	 3.74 	 97.20 
P Siddle	1	 43.0 	6	176	4	 44.00 	 4.09 	 64.50 
S Clark	        2	 73.0 	24	161	2	 80.50 	 2.20 	 219.00 
M Clarke	3	 79.3 	17	227	2	 113.5 	 2.85 	 238.50 
S Katich	3	 16.0 	3	65	1	 65.00 	 4.06 	 96.00 
R Ponting	3	 2.0 	0	11	0	 - 	 5.50 	 - 
M Hussey	3	 8.0 	0	38	0	 - 	 4.75 	 - 

[B]G Total	        3	 624.3 	104	2037	38	 53.61 	 3.26 	 98.61 [/B]

For India

[B]Player	       Mat	Overs	Mdns	Runs	Wkts	Ave	Econ	SR[/B]

I Sharma	3	 103.0 	23	311	11	 28.27 	 3.01 	 56.10 
Z Khan	        3	 109.5 	23	350	10	 35.00 	 3.18 	 65.90 
A Mishra	2	 87.2 	22	252	9	 28.00 	 2.88 	 58.20 
H Singh	        2	 117.0 	25	275	8	 34.37 	 2.35 	 87.70 
V Sehwag	3	 60.0 	12	156	5	 31.20 	 2.60 	 72.00 
A Kumble	2	 98.3 	15	286	3	 95.33 	 2.90 	 197.00 
S Tdulkar	3	 1.0 	0	2	0	 - 	 2.00 	 - 

[B]G Total	       3	 576.4 	120	1632	46	 35.48 	 2.83 	 75.22 [/B]

Except for Kumble, all the averages are 35 or below, while for Aus, except for Johnson, all averages are above 45. The difference is huge.

 

[NZTailender]

Again, though, don't know why everyone's piling on the bowling. The pitches have been the pathetic part of the equation, the two best bowlers from either side have averaged 35, the rest much more. It's been a batsman's series for both sides, Aus's Mohali batting was not great and India's bowlers were good. This Test and the first, everyone has had to work damn hard for them and have long periods where they didn't look likely to take any.

What about Sharma and Mishra?

 

[Precambrian]

The difference in no. of wickets, bowling average, SR, eco.rate everything is immensly large. I can't see any reason why India's bowling has been anyway similar to that of Australia. Not even comparable as you see.

 

[Top_Cat]

Ah, my mistake. I thought I remembered looking at the bowling tables and seeing different. Must've got it mixed up in my brain with another series.

Still, the series is only 1-0 because of the Aus batting in the second Test. The batting is driving the dymanic of the series, not the bowling. Even if Aus had bowled better, I'd hazard that the results would be the same.

 

[Precambrian]

Ah, my mistake. I thought I remembered looking at the bowling tables and seeing different. Must've got it mixed up in my brain with another series.

Still, the series is only 1-0 because of the Aus batting in the second Test. The batting is driving the dymanic of the series, not the bowling. Even if Aus had bowled better, I'd hazard that the results would be the same.

Not really, batting 1st has not really affected the series as the pitches have behaved more or less similarly allt hrough the days. The failure of Aus bowling so far has been the pivotal thing that has determined the results in India's favor, and had Kumble not been involved, India could have done much better. However that is pure IF.

 

[Top_Cat]

Not really, batting 1st has not really affected the series as the pitches have behaved more or less similarly allt hrough the days. The failure of Aus bowling so far has been the pivotal thing that has determined the results in India's favor, and had Kumble not been involved, India could have done much better. However that is pure IF.

You reckon? I just can't believe that if the Aussies had bowled better they'd be in a better position nor that if they'd batted to potential at Mohali, the series wouldn't be 0-0. Considering the pitches, I'm shocked we've had a result at all.

 

[Precambrian]

Just looking at the tables, the current series bowling average of Australia (54) is the seventh worst average by any team in India in history. Since 1995, it is the third worst average. by any team in India.

 

[Precambrian]

You reckon? I just can't believe that if the Aussies had bowled better they'd be in a better position nor that if they'd batted to potential at Mohali, the series wouldn't be 0-0. Considering the pitches, I'm shocked we've had a result at all.

No it could have been 1-1. Bangalore test would have gone Aus way.

 

[krkode]

You reckon? I just can't believe that if the Aussies had bowled better they'd be in a better position nor that if they'd batted to potential at Mohali, the series wouldn't be 0-0. Considering the pitches, I'm shocked we've had a result at all.

Maybe the Mohali pitch wasn't a result-producing pitch but I think that game had a great deal to do with a few periods of stand-out performances from the Indians and the lack thereof from the Australians. Letting Mishra walk over them in the first innings, letting the 2nd Indian innings proceed at almost 5 runs per over, and going from 49/0 to 58-5. That last bit probably having the biggest impact in making sure the match produced a result. Who knows, if that had happened to the Indians, maybe we would've lost at Delhi.

 

[Top_Cat]

No it could have been 1-1. Bangalore test would have gone Aus way.

I didn't think so. The pitch was good and India held off pretty well, I thought. I didn't find the Aussie bowling particularly good or awful, just not penetrative enough.

Tell ya what, though, would have turned the Nagpur game into a cracker if it'd gone down that way.

 

[pasag]

Not really, batting 1st has not really affected the series as the pitches have behaved more or less similarly allt hrough the days. The failure of Aus bowling so far has been the pivotal thing that has determined the results in India's favor, and had Kumble not been involved, India could have done much better. However that is pure IF.

You're right about our bowling not being great, although with these pitches and against such high quality batsmen it's not a huge surprise. However had Aus batted first in Mohali it is much, much more likely it would have been a draw as well. India's bowling hasn't been that great itself - it had the one great match where they took advantage over demoralised batsmen but in the first and third there isn't that much in it overall.

As TC said, India are winning this series because they batted better then Aus.

 

[Prince EWS]

If Australia bowled to potential, they definitely would have won the Bangalore Test, for mine. The lack of a quality spinner on the fifth day really proved costly and the quicks didn't really aim up either.

Let me put it this way - I would have backed India's attack to force the result in that final innings against their own batsmen.

 

[pup11]

If Australia bowled to potential, they definitely would have won the Bangalore Test, for mine. The lack of a quality spinner on the fifth day really proved costly and the quicks didn't really aim up either.

Let me put it this way - I would have backed India's attack to force the result in that final innings against their own batsmen.

Obviously the bowling attack's capability to take 20 wickets in a game has been a real worry and it has been an obvious problem right through the series, going into the last test the same problems persists, Lee has shown signs of improving and we all know what to expect from Clark, Johnson has done well to get the wickets that he has and i can see him continuing doing that even in the last test, Watson has probably been Australia' best seamer on display through this series, despite his stats not being too flash, he has bowled very well, but then the real cause of concern has been due to the lack of any sort of variety in the bowling attack, the slow bowling options are at best part-timish and that is hardly gonna trouble a world-class batting line-up on placid tracks, and to make matters worst Ponting's tactics at times been have been left a lot to desired.

 

[pup11]

If there is no green covering of grass on the pitch in Nagpur this is the Aussie XI i would like taking the field:
1.M.Hayden
2.S.Katich
3.R.Ponting
4.M.Hussey
5.M.Clarke
6.S.Watson
7.B.Haddin
8.J.Krezja
9.B.Lee
10.M.Johnson
11.S.Clark

I think there is no point picking a fourth seamer because of the kind of bowling form Watto has shown in this series, therefore i think its a worthwhile taking a punt with Krezja.

 

[Speersy]

If there is no green covering of grass on the pitch in Nagpur this is the Aussie XI i would like taking the field:
1.M.Hayden
2.S.Katich
3.R.Ponting
4.M.Hussey
5.M.Clarke
6.S.Watson
7.B.Haddin
8.J.Krezja
9.B.Lee
10.M.Johnson
11.S.Clark

I think there is no point picking a fourth seamer because of the kind of bowling form Watto has shown in this series, therefore i think its a worthwhile taking a punt with Krezja.

Yep thats the line up I want to see. White can't be picked as an all rounder, if he wants to play test cricket again either start bowling a hell of a lot more for Victoria or just concentrate on his batting (which he has probably been doing anyway).

Krezja should be given a chance, we need an aussie spinner to step up and take this spot in the team. By not bowling defensively, and giving it some flight and trying to get as much turn as possible. Who cares if there are some loose deliveries in each over, we have to look to the future.

 

[social]

The difference in no. of wickets, bowling average, SR, eco.rate everything is immensly large. I can't see any reason why India's bowling has been anyway similar to that of Australia. Not even comparable as you see.

India's bowling has been much better than Australia's - end of story

 

[biased indian]

If there is no green covering of grass on the pitch in Nagpur this is the Aussie XI i would like taking the field:

The little what have been heard so far about the Nagpur pitch says it will be the best batting track of the series

 

[biased indian]

India's bowling has been much better than Australia's - end of story

No i will say the aussie bowlers failed to drive home the advantage given by there batsmen at bangalore.you have to remeber it was the last 4 wickets that scored runs for india in the first inngs which have to be termed as failrue of the bowling side

 

[biased indian]

so all these are pretty positive signs for the Aussies heading into the 4th test at Nagpur.

Ya the same way they headed for the mohali test after the simillar bangalore performance

 

[Top_Cat]

No i will say the aussie bowlers failed to drive home the advantage given by there batsmen at bangalore.you have to remeber it was the last 4 wickets that scored runs for india in the first inngs which have to be termed as failrue of the bowling side

That's essentially what he was saying........