*Official* Australia in India 2010

[Dissector]

So when was the last time Australia has lost three tests in a row? Perhaps 1984 against the West Indies?

 

[Spark]

I tell you one thing though. They'll be a storm of cricinfo comments whingeing about how Clarke should be dropped, he can't score hard runs, he's soft etc. etc. etc. and not a word about how Katich has only averaged 23 with a high score of 43. Because obviously Katich, not being blonde and pretty-faced, is by default a hard nosed, tough player without question and would never score 80 odd, throw it away and leave the team vulnerable to 200ao. Because he, unlike Clarke, is a hard player.

 

[Xuhaib]

Damien Martyn's tweet

dmartyn30 Damien Martyn
Are we going to Lose another test match ? How sad

Lol

what are you doing stalking Marto off all the people.

 

[Top_Cat]

Heh so in four knocks he has a 98, a double and a 50.* This guy can score Test centuries for a few years yet.

Big deal. Batsmen don't win Tests (apparently).

 

[howardj]

I'm sure you're right but it shouldn't be a monty that this is the batting line-up come November. That it's a big series should have little to do with it. I mean, before the '92 series against the WI, the selectors dropped Dean Jones, their best performed bat in the previous series, shoehorned Boon up to open and picked a young gun (Marto). It's been done before.

Agreed.

Actually, the fact it is a big series is a reason to be bold at the selection table.

The biggest risk is to do nothing, and keep selecting the order that's brought you collapse after collapse (in big-ticket series against good opposition).

 

[social]

Reckon Mitch has been very good in this series and has been unlucky to only pick up 8 wickets

 

[duffer]

Sweeeeeeettttttttttt!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Athlai]

How many Tests do India play in the rest of this calender year?

 

[Prince EWS]

To be honest, dropping a bloke who just made a ton isn't without precedence (Hodge, Love and Jones say hi) so I don't think North would feel like he can put his feet up (neither should he).

The Love and Hodge droppings were completely different circumstances to what a theoretical North one would be though.

Love had only come in for injury and his ton was against Bangladesh, so he was always going to make way when the injured player returned. It wasn't really a dropping as he was never really in the team, as such.

Hodge was given another three Tests after his ton so it's not even a remotely comparable situation.

Don't know exactly what you're referring to with Jones, but I get the feeling it was Hodge-like because he didn't score a ton in his last Test either.

I can't think of a past example at all of what dropping North would actually be - a player scoring a ton and immediately being dropped in the next Test match for reasons other than a player returning from injury. You don't pick someone as part of your full-strength eleven, watch them hit a ton and then drop them the next game. If you don't rate them enough after they made the ton you sure as hell wouldn't have rated them enough before they made it and hence you wouldn't have picked them in the first place.

If North doesn't score any runs at the Gabba he'll open himself up to a Hodge-like dropping, if you like, but there's no logic for selecting him in this game and dropping him now.

 

[GotSpin]

I'm sure you're right but it shouldn't be a monty that this is the batting line-up come November. That it's a big series should have little to do with it. I mean, before the '92 series against the WI, the selectors dropped Dean Jones, their best performed bat in the previous series, shoehorned Boon up to open and picked a young gun (Marto). It's been done before.

Different selection panels then. This one clearly feels the need to either have themselves proven right or let Australian cricket suffer

 

[Contra]

never seen him this animated. Geez he's really enjoying this #1 in the world business.

 

[Matt79]

I also think Smith should replace Hauritz, because I really don't see Hauritz ever being much more than a mediocre bowler. Smith might not be great either, but at least he would dramatically boost out batting. Imagine have a number 7 who can average 40 or more.

So your solution is to drop a guy for a much less experienced player who you admit would probably be of much the same standard? Smith has potential, but he's not a test bowler. Hauritz, I would argue, is, albeit a moderate-to-serviceable one. Prior to this match, he's taken 60 test scalps at <33, going for just over three an over. He's a decent number 9 batsman as well, so it's not like Smith would be replacing a bunny. In any case, selecting bowlers for their batting is a bad idea.

 

[Teja.]

****in' Get in!

 

[social]

Well played Sachin

 

[Ruckus]

I tell you one thing though. They'll be a storm of cricinfo comments whingeing about how Clarke should be dropped, he can't score hard runs, he's soft etc. etc. etc. and not a word about how Katich has only averaged 23 with a high score of 43. Because obviously Katich, not being blonde and pretty-faced, is by default a hard nosed, tough player without question and would never score 80 odd, throw it away and leave the team vulnerable to 200ao. Because he, unlike Clarke, is a hard player.

Any complaints about Kat and Clarke and jusy simply unwarranted. Its one series ffs!

 

[alternative]

Awesome game from Sachin.

 

[Jono]

Yes!

 

[alternative]

Yes!

 

[GotSpin]

Sigh. Hopeless

 

[pasag]

Hussey has had too many 20-30 average series over the past two years. Clarke really needs to step up as well, is playing as poorly as ever.

As it stands England will retain the Ashes.

Anyways, really good series. Kudos to the BCCI for making it happen.