***Official*** India in Australia 2014-5

[Tangles]

who's writing off rogers?

apart from benchmark00 pty ltd limited

I'm sure I saw someone mention dreading Watto opening in England again. Unless they were meaning dreading him at 3 in those conditions. I can see Rogers retiring after the Ashes but I can't see us going back to Watto. I would hope there would be other better options by then.

 

[viriya]

Kohli breaks the Test batting top 10 for the first time:
cricrate | Current Top Test Batsmen

 

[Midwinter]

David warner isn't involved mate.

Forgotten this one already ?

 

[Spikey]

Kohli breaks the Test batting top 10 for the first time:
cricrate | Current Top Test Batsmen

what a honour

 

[Daemon]

How did Warner drop 8 spots after scoring a hundred

 

[Dan]

All of that list is bizarre.

 

[Burgey]

what a honour

So good

 

[OverratedSanity]

Gautam Gambhir is the 34th best batsman in the world.

 

[Jono]

let them do what they want, we won the series convincingly and the only reason 4-0 wasn't really on was because we couldn't ****ing catch for ****e.

Fixed.

Mediocre posting. India dropped catches too, and the only reason India lost Adelaide is because they didn't want to draw it. The scoreline was 2-0 because of a lot of stuff, including the fact India batted very well at times against quality bowlers

 

[Prince EWS]

Catching is part of cricket anyway; it's no more mitigating than if a Bangladesh fan said "the only reason we didn't win this series was the fact that couldn't bat or bowl for ****e" after every single series.

 

[Gnske]

Mediocre posting. India dropped catches too, and the only reason India lost Adelaide is because they didn't want to draw it. The scoreline was 2-0 because of a lot of stuff, including the fact India batted very well at times against quality bowlers

This, it has to be said regardless of how awful the pitches reacted to fast bowling Rahane and Kohli responded skillfully to the tighter bowling, although dropped catches certainly helped the 400+ scores the Indian teams scored to a great extent.

Although in Rahane's case he could have been helped a lot more by better decisions.

 

[Jono]

Catching is part of cricket anyway; it's no more mitigating than if a Bangladesh fan said "the only reason we didn't win this series was the fact that couldn't bat or bowl for ****e" after every single series.

This, it has to be said regardless of how awful the pitches reacted to fast bowling Rahane and Kohli responded skillfully to the tighter bowling, although dropped catches certainly helped the 400+ scores the Indian teams scored to a great extent.

Although in Rahane's case he could have been helped a lot more by better decisions.

Indeed to both posts.

I don't really like getting into debates about whether a series score is fair or flatters one team anyway. It was 2-0 because, among other reasons, Australia were disciplined with their bowling for long periods, India wasted opportunities when they were doing okay and bowled like crap a lot of the other time, Australia batted brilliantly when India dropped their heads and looked impenetrable, and India batted well enough to push Australia but not well enough to ever be in a winning position without help from Australia declaring to give them a sniff.

Saying India would have lost 4-0 if not for catching is just silly. I mean Indian fans could claim that catching cost them a series almost every series ffs, they are so rubbish in the field. Dropped Baz before triple ton costing them draw in NZ etc.

Australia well deserved winners and by far the better test team in home conditions. But to walk away thinking this was a 4-0 series really and India were just let off by Australia dropping catches is misleading.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Gautam Gambhir is the 34th best batsman in the world.

Hamilton Masakadza is a better Test batsman than Faf du Plessis and Chris Rogers

 

[Maximas]

Hamilton Masakadza is a better Test batsman than Faf du Plessis and Chris Rogers

This guy!

 

[Swingpanzee]

Indeed to both posts.

I don't really like getting into debates about whether a series score is fair or flatters one team anyway. It was 2-0 because, among other reasons, Australia were disciplined with their bowling for long periods, India wasted opportunities when they were doing okay and bowled like crap a lot of the other time, Australia batted brilliantly when India dropped their heads and looked impenetrable, and India batted well enough to push Australia but not well enough to ever be in a winning position without help from Australia declaring to give them a sniff.

Saying India would have lost 4-0 if not for catching is just silly. I mean Indian fans could claim that catching cost them a series almost every series ffs, they are so rubbish in the field. Dropped Baz before triple ton costing them draw in NZ etc.

Australia well deserved winners and by far the better test team in home conditions. But to walk away thinking this was a 4-0 series really and India were just let off by Australia dropping catches is misleading.

Yeah agreed. Tbh that post was more just venting my frustration at Australia's poor fielding. One can't really say what would have happened if Australia had held on to their catches, it's all speculation of course.

 

[Jono]

Yeah agreed. Tbh that post was more just venting my frustration at Australia's poor fielding. One can't really say what would have happened if Australia had held on to their catches, it's all speculation of course.

Fair enough, we all make posts frustrated at the teams we support every now and then. Australia's dropping of Kohli in Melbourne and Sydney definitely pivotal in those matches.

 

[Antihippy]

Australia well deserved winners and by far the better test team in home conditions. But to walk away thinking this was a 4-0 series really and India were just let off by Australia dropping catches is misleading.

I dunno about that, I'd say india are probably better against australia in home conditions than australia being better than india at home.

 

[Jono]

I dunno about that, I'd say india are probably better against australia in home conditions than australia being better than india at home.

Sorry, I just meant Australia are clearly far better than India in Australia.

 

[Antihippy]

Ah alright. Gotcha.

 

[TheJediBrah]

I dunno about that, I'd say india are probably better against australia in home conditions than australia being better than india at home.

I agree. Though mostly because Indian home conditions are a lot more beneficial to them than the Australian home conditions have been for the Australians.