***Official*** India in New Zealand 2013/14

[Jono]

the 2009 side looked fine on paper at the time flem 1st Test: New Zealand v India at Hamilton, Mar 18-21, 2009 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

I forgot about this great moment:

Sachin Tendulkar celebrates India's win with a banana, New Zealand v India, 1st Test, Hamilton, 4th day, March 21, 2009

 

[Flem274*]

McIntosh - not as bad as some, still not really test standard
Guptill - no where near good enough then
Flynn - was a joke then
Taylor - good
Ryder - good
Franklin - norounder
McCullum - good WK bat
Vettori - good batsman
Mills - poor at tests
O'Brien -
Martin - awful bowler during this period

Then we replaced Mills with Jeets for Napier. Hari Kari much...

Tbf India gave us a hand by playing one bowler, but even then the collective direness of the 2009 side couldn't dispatch them. Pretty sure that was the series Marto put Harby back over his head though. WAFG.

We didn't really have a good team though, and in 20/20 hindsight they stood no chance against Zaheer and some great batsmen.

 

[Flem274*]

Anyone want to join me at this test?

I hope there's an earthquake ****

 

[Jono]

I hope there's an earthquake ****

So that's a no?

 

[Prince EWS]

Nah Mills was a decent Test bowler by then. He was never great and he wasn't going to do much on those pitches but from 2006-2009 he was not ****. A bit unlucky not be selected more really.

 

[Flem274*]

New ball bully and ridiculously injury prone tbh. I wub him but he's never really worked out how to bowl once the shine is gone and he kept running out of puff. Line and length at 125-130kph doesn't really cut it.

 

[Prince EWS]

New ball bully and ridiculously injury prone tbh. I wub him but he's never really worked out how to bowl once the shine is gone and he kept running out of puff. Line and length at 125-130kph doesn't really cut it.

Yeah, that's why he was never going to be great, but he was decent enough. I certainly wouldn't describe him as "poor" in the 2006-2009 period. He was just average. If you want to see Mills bowling poorly in Tests, go watch his debut again.

 

[Prince EWS]

I do agree with your overall point though. Even if Mills is deemed decent/average rather than poor, you only had four decent batsmen (none of whom were any better than "good" and only two of whom actually batted in the top six) and two decent bowlers in that side at the time. Martin if I recall was bowling complete crap.

I often make the point about New Zealand sides that they often look so much better at the time than they do when we look back at them, but even if things go a bit pear-shaped with some of the 50/50 or unproven players in the current side, I definitely think we'll look back and say that Williamson, Taylor, McCullum, Southee and Boult were decent international cricketers which makes the current side better.

 

[Jono]

I do agree with your overall point though. Even if Mills is deemed decent/average rather than poor, you only had four decent batsmen (none of whom were any better than "good" and only two of whom actually batted in the top six) and two decent bowlers in that side at the time. Martin if I recall was bowling complete crap.

I often make the point about New Zealand sides that they often look so much better at the time than they do when we look back at them, but even if things go a bit pear-shaped with some of the 50/50 or unproven players in the current side, I definitely think we'll look back and say that Williamson, Taylor, McCullum, Southee and Boult were decent international cricketers which makes the current side better.

True. But I think that's countered by the fact that no matter how much you rate the promise of Pujara, Kohli and Rahane and their overseas ability, they aren't anywhere near as good as Tendulkar, Laxman and Dravid were overseas. Not yet anyway. So this team is definitely no where near the 2009 team. Add to the fact that Zaheer, Sehwag and Gambhir (who saved the 2nd test in that series with his Kirsten-like batting) were in the peak of their careers, and really I think that Indian team of 2009 is far far better than this team touring NZ.

So NZ may have been worse back then, but India were better back then as well. They'd have beaten most teams NZ put out (at least on the pitches that were served up). I mean they were a bee's dick and some better weather away from 2-0 as well.

This time, whilst India are coming off a reasonably good South African tour, they still lost the series. Still a lot for this team to prove. And its kind of unknown how good Zaheer will be still imo.

 

[hendrix]

I think O'Brien is looked back on with rose tinted glasses, tbh. He was ok but I'd usually take Martin over him.

 

[Hurricane]

Williamson, Taylor, McCullum, Southee and Boult were decent international cricketers which makes the current side better.

They had o'brien and vettori so clearly the bowling is better now
But the batting was better then ryder, taylor, baz who didn't suck and vettori. Today it is just taylor and kw.

 

[Bahnz]

Martin - awful bowler during this period

This was actually one of Marto's better series though. Don't know whether getting dropped for the WI series earlier in the summer gave him a kick up the arse, but he was our best bowler across the three tests by a distance.

 

[Prince EWS]

True. But I think that's countered by the fact that no matter how much you rate the promise of Pujara, Kohli and Rahane and their overseas ability, they aren't anywhere near as good as Tendulkar, Laxman and Dravid were overseas. Not yet anyway. So this team is definitely no where near the 2009 team. Add to the fact that Zaheer, Sehwag and Gambhir (who saved the 2nd test in that series with his Kirsten-like batting) were in the peak of their careers, and really I think that Indian team of 2009 is far far better than this team touring NZ.

So NZ may have been worse back then, but India were better back then as well. They'd have beaten most teams NZ put out (at least on the pitches that were served up). I mean they were a bee's dick and some better weather away from 2-0 as well.

This time, whilst India are coming off a reasonably good South African tour, they still lost the series. Still a lot for this team to prove. And its kind of unknown how good Zaheer will be still imo.

Yeah I do fully agree with this. When I said I agreed with Phlegm's overall point I meant his overall point about the quality of the NZ side in 2009 compared to now, not the overall point of his post (which seemed to change about nine times ).

That 2009 side was basically the peak of Indian Test cricket in history. Indian fans can definitely be optimistic about the current lot and their potential to eclipse that but they've got a lot to prove before they get there.

 

[Zinzan]

This was actually one of Marto's better series though. Don't know whether getting dropped for the WI series earlier in the summer gave him a kick up the arse, but he was our best bowler across the three tests by a distance.

Bahnz defending Chris Martin?

 

[Flem274*]

Haha, I think this might be a stalemate because I don't see many of the Indian posters daring to believe, and I can understand that. When India went to SA though I was expecting a bloodbath because with the greatest respect to the previous generation, if you put them in certain situations they tended to fall to pieces. Especially blokes not called Dravid and Tendulkar (though they had their moments). They were excellent players but there were chinks in the armour. When I watched how well Vijay, Pujara and Kohli left the ball (I didn't get to watch much of Sharma or Rahane sadly because I had to come home to stone age internet halfway through the first test) and applied themselves I was surprised and impressed. This lot are definitely more aware of how to succeed overseas than their forebears, and it's more impressive when you consider history tells us the first tour to South Africa or a similarly nasty country can be messy for young Indian batsmen.

When you couple that with the bowling attack which is just genuinely good and much better than the 2009 side with the exception of Ishant then India are well placed to be better overseas than perhaps they have ever been.

 

[Bahnz]

Just statin' the facts brah.

 

[Prince EWS]

They had o'brien and vettori so clearly the bowling is better now
But the batting was better then ryder, taylor, baz who didn't suck and vettori. Today it is just taylor and kw.

I definitely don't think McCullum was a better batsman then than he is now. Just seemed like it because he wasn't playing as a specialist batsman IMO. The difference is Vettori I guess - better than the current fourth best batsman which is Watling, but it's offset a bit by the better batsmen being a bit higher in the order this time. Having your contributing players at 3, 4, 5 and 7 is healthier than having them at 4, 5, 7 and 8. Plus, Taylor has gone to another level now. I don't think there's much difference in the batting even if we assume that Fulton, Rutherford and Anderson are going to become the next McIntosh, Guptill and Franklin, which really is very much a worst case scenario thing, and the bowling is much stronger now.

 

[Flem274*]

I think O'Brien is looked back on with rose tinted glasses, tbh.

Nah most of us were on here during his main career and while we rubbished him at first, he won us over in England and we loved him ever since. Heef always believed.

They had o'brien and vettori so clearly the bowling is better now
But the batting was better then ryder, taylor, baz who didn't suck and vettori. Today it is just taylor and kw.

Taylor now is a bit of a level up, but while the engine room was good back then they also had bigger passengers. Fulton, KW, Watling and Anderson as they are now would stroll into the 2009 side.

This was actually one of Marto's better series though. Don't know whether getting dropped for the WI series earlier in the summer gave him a kick up the arse, but he was our best bowler across the three tests by a distance.

I'm struggling to remember here but wasn't 2009 right in the middle of his 2007-2010 "I'm going to bowl 10km outside off and switch to around the wicket every two balls" phase?

 

[hendrix]

Nah as impressive as it's been from Vijay, Gambhir at that point in his career was an absolute monster. He left the ball exceptionally well and was a more natural leaver than Vijay, it didn't look forced at all. No bowler in the world knew how to get him out.

 

[Zinzan]

Just statin' the facts brah.

Truth be told, Martin was comfortably NZs best bowler in that series.