*Official* Australia in India 2010

[biased indian]

why they took the tea? there was an option to extent the session by 30 minutes rite ?

 

[howardj]

Yeah, I don't want him in the team anymore either, but he's continued his pattern of producing something really good just when the pressure is getting impossible on his place. It's tempting, but slightly unfair to just ignore the good things he does because of his inconsistency. For me, I'm not really convinced by any of the alternatives, or that they would do any better, whereas Marcus has at least shown he CAN produce, but just needs to work out how to get himself set more regularly.

Can produce after a string of failures.

20 Tests is a decent sample.

Still averaging in the 30s.

Let's get back to having some standards at the selection table.

 

[Matt79]

Australian plummet to 5th in the Test rankings.

Don't change the team, don't change the selectors.

It's all good. Mediocrity is fine.

Again, you're acting like there are obvious changes or management issues that need to be tackled that would have prevented this result, which I think is really debateable. It's not a question of "accepting mediocrity" which is an inaccurate comment about any Australian team IMO, it's a question about whether you have the troops to achieve the result. We've only managed one series win in India in recent times, at the near zenith of our previous champion team. Since then, we've weakened and India has improved. Not sure why this is a shocking, or even disappointing result - if anything we've done better than might have been expected going in, probably with the help of some good toss results.

 

[Matt79]

Can produce after a string of failures.

20 Tests is a decent sample.

Still averaging in the 30s.

Let's get back to having some standards at the selection table.

Put up some names that you reckon are being excluded because they're not "steady characters" then.

 

[Spark]

Embarrassing.

Wow, didn't really kick for me that Katich has been pretty **** as well this series. Between him and Clarke that's most people expectations being completely wrong.

 

[Matt79]

Embarrassing.

Yeah, Michael Clarke obviously can't bat!

 

[Johnners]

Honestly, all this talk of dropping, whilst obviously has it's merits, it's simply not going to happen before the Ashes. Only way I can see this team changing before the first test (apart from George/Dougy) is through Injury.

Hauritz may have been poor here, but he hasn't been helped by Ponting, nor by the fact that he's playing against India....IMHO he certainly hasn't been as poor as his figures suggest. Reckon he'll do just fine come Ashes time.

 

[Ruckus]

Nah, we were ok. India, especially at home, are just formidable opponents. Reckon we can fall into the trap of disrespecting our opponents sometimes if we solely attribute any loss to us playing badly. India have taken wickets when needed, and hung in when we looked like taking it away (North and Paine in the first, Ponting and Paine in the second). Their batsman have applied themselves and they've simply been the better team. That said, there are some positives here for us as well, in terms of a developing team, along with a couple of apparent problems. Hauritz has been disappointing, but I still think he is the best option for the fourth bowler going forward. Hussey and North are the bigger worries, although North played well in the 1st innings here.

I disagree, while India definately played well, I also think Australia played poorly. And its no suprise...the same problems we have had in the past are still there. I thought it was quite funny that in our unbeaten summer against the Windies and Pakistan we actually played pretty poorly then as well. We got away with it then because both those teams are obviously of pretty low calibre.

The Windies almost won a match against us, but we were lucky to force a draw. And Pakistan probably could have won a match against us if they didn't fix it. Many times Aus collapsed and were bowled out for ridiculous scores, and the same problems have been present in this series - but unlike in the Summer, these flaws in the team aren't going to go down well with a team of India's calibre. Hence they beat us 2-0.

 

[Spark]

I disagree, while India definately played well, I also think Australia played poorly. And its no suprise...the same problems we have had in the past are still there. I thought it was quite funny that in our unbeaten summer against the Windies and Pakistan we actually played pretty poorly then as well. We got away with it then because both those teams are obviously of pretty low calibre.

The Windies almost won a match against us, but we were lucky to force a draw. And Pakistan probably could have won a match against us if they didn't fix it. Many times Aus collapsed and were bowled out for ridiculous scores, and the same problems have been present in this series - but unlike in the Summer, these flaws in the team aren't going to go down well with a team of India's calibre. Hence they beat us 2-0.

How were we lucky to force a draw in Adelaide? One of the most obvious draws I'd seen once Clarke and Haddin got remotely set.

 

[Prince EWS]

Again, you're acting like there are obvious changes or management issues that need to be tackled that would have prevented this result, which I think is really debateable. It's not a question of "accepting mediocrity" which is an inaccurate comment about any Australian team IMO, it's a question about whether you have the troops to achieve the result. We've only managed one series win in India in recent times, at the near zenith of our previous champion team. Since then, we've weakened and India has improved. Not sure why this is a shocking, or even disappointing result - if anything we've done better than might have been expected going in, probably with the help of some good toss results.

Yeah, fully agreed.

It's the height of arrogance to assume you selected the wrong team merely because you lost the series. I mean, we were playing away from home in very foreign conditions against the best team in the world. If "accepting mediocrity" means being realistic and not assuming Australia have a god-given right to be dominant unless they're picking a team full of 12 year olds, and thinking that the only possible reason for a loss is poor selection, then I'll wear it like a badge.

 

[Johnners]

Again, you're acting like there are obvious changes or management issues that need to be tackled that would have prevented this result, which I think is really debateable. It's not a question of "accepting mediocrity" which is an inaccurate comment about any Australian team IMO, it's a question about whether you have the troops to achieve the result. We've only managed one series win in India in recent times, at the near zenith of our previous champion team. Since then, we've weakened and India has improved. Not sure why this is a shocking, or even disappointing result - if anything we've done better than might have been expected going in, probably with the help of some good toss results.

The most disappointing thing about this tour is the fact that we just aren't good enough to win away from home nearly as often as we used to be able to.

 

[howardj]

Again, you're acting like there are obvious changes or management issues that need to be tackled that would have prevented this result, which I think is really debateable. It's not a question of "accepting mediocrity" which is an inaccurate comment about any Australian team IMO, it's a question about whether you have the troops to achieve the result. We've only managed one series win in India in recent times, at the near zenith of our previous champion team. Since then, we've weakened and India has improved. Not sure why this is a shocking, or even disappointing result - if anything we've done better than might have been expected going in, probably with the help of some good toss results.

Fair enough, can see your viewpoint.

My view is that we have seen what Hussey and North offer - averaging in the 30s, clearly not on the improve, and at the centre of batting collapse after collapse (which is the chief reason why we are now regularly losing big-ticket series). Can Hughes/Khawaja etc (guys who average 50+ in FC cricket, also average at least 30 in Test cricket? I believe they can do better than that. And, what's more, those guys have upside. Hussey and North do not, in my opinion.

I believe we are accepting mediocrity by having Hussey and North in the team. Again, I point to the stats where there is a very significant sample of matches and series now. The cupboard is not bare like it was in the 1980s. There are other young, talented options that I really think the selectors should be exercising.

 

[Prince EWS]

Put up some names that you reckon are being excluded because they're not "steady characters" then.

Give him 10 minutes while he heads off the nearest preschool and swipes the class list.

 

[social]

Again, you're acting like there are obvious changes or management issues that need to be tackled that would have prevented this result, which I think is really debateable. It's not a question of "accepting mediocrity" which is an inaccurate comment about any Australian team IMO, it's a question about whether you have the troops to achieve the result. We've only managed one series win in India in recent times, at the near zenith of our previous champion team. Since then, we've weakened and India has improved. Not sure why this is a shocking, or even disappointing result - if anything we've done better than might have been expected going in, probably with the help of some good toss results.

There have been selectorial and management "issues" surrounding the team for a long time - they are simply magnified when the team is losing

 

[Spark]

Yeah, in all fairness the only ones who have really underperformed are Clarke, Katich and Hauritz. Watson, Ponting, Bollinger, Johnson, Paine were all above-expectations for mine, that's half a team right there.

 

[Johnners]

The most disappointing thing about this tour is the fact that we just aren't good enough to win away from home nearly as often as we used to be able to.

The only*

Been a very good effort otherwise to have been as close as we have.

 

[Ruckus]

How were we lucky to force a draw in Adelaide? One of the most obvious draws I'd seen once Clarke and Haddin got remotely set.

yeh 'lucky' as in the Windies were the clear favourites before those two saved us.

 

[Matt79]

Fair enough, can see your viewpoint.

My view is that we have seen what Hussey and North offer - averaging in the 30s, clearly not on the improve, and at the centre of batting collapse after collapse (which is the chief reason why we are now regularly losing big-ticket series). Can Hughes/Khawaja etc (guys who average 50+ in FC cricket, also average at least 30 in Test cricket? I believe they can do better than that. And, what's more, those guys have upside. Hussey and North do not, in my opinion.

I believe we are accepting mediocrity by having Hussey and North in the team. Again, I point to the stats where there is a very significant sample of matches and series now. The cupboard is not bare like it was in the 1980s. There are other young, talented options that I really think the selectors should be exercising.

I would like to see Hughes in the team, and I think it will happen soon. He was probably dropped too quickly, or left out for too long, esp. compared to North, but I certainly have no problem with them giving Hussey a bit more slack in terms of time to recapture form.

 

[Spark]

yeh 'lucky' as in the Windies were the clear favourites before those two saved us.

Well let's be honest before that it was because batsmen were playing **** shots trying to go for it. Once those two realised there was no chance and they should actually just play out the draw, looked pretty serene.

 

[howardj]

Yeah, fully agreed.

It's the height of arrogance to assume you selected the wrong team merely because you lost the series. I mean, we were playing away from home in very foreign conditions against the best team in the world. If "accepting mediocrity" means being realistic and not assuming Australia have a god-given right to be dominant unless they're picking a team full of 12 year olds, and thinking that the only possible reason for a loss is poor selection, then I'll wear it like a badge.

Geez, I thought I could go over the top from time to time.

Um no. Accepting mediocrity is accepting guys who are averaging in the 30s. Some may be happy with that, others rightly are not.