• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

***Official*** India in Australia 2011/12

Black_Warrior

Cricketer Of The Year
There doesn't always have to be a reason. Sometimes you're just not as good as the opposition in the conditions you face. Fitness has definitely played a part in Zaheer progressively tailing off, and this has been pretty big for India given he's usually such a good old ball bowler, but for the mostpart I reckon they've just been outplayed. People said the same thing about the England series; they blamed all sorts of issues but the fact of the matter is that England are much better at cricket than India currently.
I am not doubting that for a second. What I am saying is, when batsmen like Sehwag, Dravid, Tendulkar, Gambhir and Laxman, all with batting averages over 40 get bowled out for 190, then you have to look at these 'reasons'. Yes Australia is a better team than India in Australia but not so good that a batting line up with those guys would get bowled out for 190. Pattinson, Hilfenhaus and Siddle are good bowlers, not great. Pattinson could be great, but he just hasn't played enough.
 

Spark

Global Moderator
I don't like this idea of the "oh, they're only good bowlers" being used as an excuse/argument rather than actually focussing on the quality of bowling actually produced. An unplayable jaffa is still an unplayable jaffa whoever bowls it.
 

Black_Warrior

Cricketer Of The Year
I don't like this idea of the "oh, they're only good bowlers" being used as an excuse/argument rather than actually focussing on the quality of bowling actually produced. An unplayable jaffa is still an unplayable jaffa whoever bowls it.
Yepp that's true but great bowlers can do that a bit more frequently than good bowlers.
 

Spark

Global Moderator
Of course, but that shouldn't be a factor in analysing the bowling actually produced in matches that have already happened IMO.
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
I dunno about other things but it really did annoy me when Sachin fields at first slip. AT one end, the batsman is new and they get in 3 slips and Sachin is at first slip. At the other end, a set batsman is there and we need only two slips. So off goes Sachin to field in the deep... FFS, Dravid is a MUCH better slipper than Sachin. Keep him at first. If Sachin has to field in the slips, let him be the third slip. It is this kind of little things that annoys me with this side... There is no real rhyme or reason for this flip flop of Dravid between first and third..
 

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
Dravid has been really dire at first slip for ages now. If it was a specialist role he wouldn't been dropped from it over a year ago now. I think India are just trying out other options there.
 

Black_Warrior

Cricketer Of The Year
I dunno about other things but it really did annoy me when Sachin fields at first slip. AT one end, the batsman is new and they get in 3 slips and Sachin is at first slip. At the other end, a set batsman is there and we need only two slips. So off goes Sachin to field in the deep... FFS, Dravid is a MUCH better slipper than Sachin. Keep him at first. If Sachin has to field in the slips, let him be the third slip. It is this kind of little things that annoys me with this side... There is no real rhyme or reason for this flip flop of Dravid between first and third..
Really silly but apparently Tendulkar wants to field in the slips..and he calls the shots about where he fields :ph34r:
 

Ruckus

International Captain
The reason for Indian's poor batting peformance is pretty clear I reckon. Sehwag and Gambhir have awesome stats etc., but for me they both have big technical problems against a moving ball (plus Gambhir isn't in good form anyway), and against any bowling that is reasonably adept they just aren't good enough unless the pitch is flat imo. Sounds harsh, but I think both of them are pretty massive FTBs tbh. So if you've got two openers who aren't likely to get you off to a good start in these conditions, more pressure is put on the lower order. Dravid simply doesn't look to be in good form to me, even the runs he made in the first game looked very edgy. He could well be on his last cricketing legs. Tendulkar has performed well, but he can't do it alone. Laxman doesn't look to be in as bad a form as Dravid, but perhaps he is just having a bad series. Has been the recipient of some very good deliveries and well planned bowling spells as well. Probably more credit has to go the Aus bowlers against him. Dhoni just simply isn't a good enough batsman. Kohli might be ok in the future, but atm he looks to be absolutely at sea in these conditions. So in summary, 4 batsmen who just aren't good enough in these conditions, and 2 out of the 3 crucial batsmen not performing = batting failure.
 

Xuhaib

International Coach
Aus has bowled well but its been an equal case of India batting poorly. Watch Melbourne 2nd innings I could atleast count 7 dismissals where its the batsman who has given it away sure its not always the delivery that gets the wicket tat matters the setup to the wicket also plays a part but you expect such legendary batsman to absorb a period of pressure cricket. There is no doubt in mind the Indian legends are in a decline and are making a good bowling attack look great.
 

Black_Warrior

Cricketer Of The Year
Aus has bowled well but its been an equal case of India batting poorly. Watch Melbourne 2nd innings I could atleast count 7 dismissals where its the batsman who has given it away sure its not always the delivery that gets the wicket tat matters the setup to the wicket also plays a part but you expect such legendary batsman to absorb a period of pressure cricket. There is no doubt in mind the Indian legends are in a decline and are making a good bowling attack look great.
That's exactly what I was trying to say.
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Dravid has been really dire at first slip for ages now. If it was a specialist role he wouldn't been dropped from it over a year ago now. I think India are just trying out other options there.
Well, what you said will make sense if Sachin was first slip all the time. It really is only because I think Sachin feels more comfortable fielding at first slip than third slip when he has to be in the slips...
 

Son Of Coco

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I don't like this idea of the "oh, they're only good bowlers" being used as an excuse/argument rather than actually focussing on the quality of bowling actually produced. An unplayable jaffa is still an unplayable jaffa whoever bowls it.
Yeah exactly, it's a ridiculous line of argument. If you're bowling well then you're bowling well, whether you've played one test or one hundred. A bloke who has 25 wickets at an average of 18 over 4 tests will have done a fair bit of damage in those tests, regardless of whether he's a great or not.

Bowling's relatively simple, you put in the right spot and you generally get wickets. That's what Australia have been doing the past few tests, and it's what they weren't doing for about 2 years prior to McDermott coming on board. It's also what England have been doing for the last 2 years or so and doing it very, very well. It's no coincidence that batting teams struggle against consistent bowling.
 
Last edited:

Daemon

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Dravid has been really dire at first slip for ages now. If it was a specialist role he wouldn't been dropped from it over a year ago now. I think India are just trying out other options there.
Yeah but amongst those drops he's been taking some really sharp catches as well. Odd.
 

benchmark00

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Yeah exactly, it's a ridiculous line of argument. If you're bowling well then you're bowling well, whether you've played one test or one hundred. A bloke who has 25 wickets at an average of 18 over 4 tests will have done a fair bit of damage in those tests, regardless of whether he's a great or not.

Bowling's relatively simple, you put in the right spot and you generally get wickets. That's what Australia have been doing the past few tests, and it's what they weren't doing for about 2 years prior to McDermott coming on board. It's also what England have been doing for the last 2 years or so and doing it very, very well. It's no coincidence that batting teams struggle against consistent bowling.

It's funny what can transpire when you pitch the ball up and let it swing later.

The last 24 months or so it was as if the Australian bowlers were aiming to get their wickets caught in front of the wicket 100% of the time.
 
Last edited:

Ruckus

International Captain
Pitching it up is going to be good with the new ball and on wickets doing a bit, but I'd be interested to know what McDermott has instructed the bowlers to do on absolute roads.
 

Spikey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
were trying to get them caught by hussey at gully actually
Which tbf worked first over of the ashes.


hey remember when we picked doherty in a test match, and some people thought it was the right call. those were the days...
 

Top