best team in world cricket right now

[S.Kennedy]

Nor did South Africa disgrace themselves in India.

They were beaten 3-0!!

 

[Zinzan]

Apparently England's 2-1 victory in South Africa did not happen now, for reasons which are not entirely clear.

Oh it happened, & the reasons were perfectly clear, SA were missing their two premier bowlers.

Be a bit like them playing India with Ashwin & Jadeja unavailable.

 

[centurymaker]

Now that India has started using DRS (which truly helps) and that Kohli will be captain in the away tours, you can almost see the away record improving to some degree at least, unless ofcourse couple of the seamers break down (including Shami), in which case it would be the same old.

At the very least I see India winning in NZ, but apparently India are not scheduled to tour NZ at all..

 

[Zinzan]

We'll need to wait and see obviously, but I can see India improving their overseas record massively under Kohli.

Also considering Shami and B Kumar's recent development, their fast bowling stocks are looking better.

 

[Burgey]

Now that India has started using DRS (which truly helps) and that Kohli will be captain in the away tours, you can almost see the away record improving to some degree at least, unless ofcourse couple of the seamers break down (including Shami), in which case it would be the same old.

At the very least I see India winning in NZ, but apparently India are not scheduled to tour NZ at all..

Why do you reckon DRS will help India away? Isn't it just the application of the same software for everyone, everywhere?

 

[Burgey]

We'll need to wait and see obviously, but I can see India improving their overseas record massively under Kohli.

Also considering Shami and B Kumar's recent development, their fast bowling stocks are looking better.

Yeah look, the away record thing may well improve, but if it does it won't be because of an improvement in pace bowling. The Wheel is Forever.

 

[Zinzan]

Why do you reckon DRS will help India away? Isn't it just the application of the same software for everyone, everywhere?

Jadeja in particular hits the pad an awful lot, I can see him getting more wickets under DRS, especially when batsmen are well forward.

 

[centurymaker]

Why do you reckon DRS will help India away? Isn't it just the application of the same software for everyone, everywhere?

Without DRS, the home tends to benefit more.. than the away team as the marginal decisions or the benefit of doubt (given by umpires) tends to go more in their favour even when the batsman is actually out. (ball hitting leg stump or impact being inside the line but due to benefit of doubt was adjudged to be too close/ risky to give out).

So the umpires are more cautious with LBWs and thus you see teams racking up bigger scores against the weaker Indian bowling which creates fewer chances away from Asia.

But with DRS, suppose Aus is 240/4 and a LBW decision is not given. Thanks to DRS now, India reviews and the decision is over-turned, so instead of it typically becoming 550/8 at SCG under the no DRS system, it changes to 400 all out..

Or the umpires are happier to give decisions or they can be more aggressive with their decisions, rather than playing on the safe side because there is a safety net with Drs

 

[smash84]

Without DRS, the home tends to benefit more.. than the away team as the marginal decisions or the benefit of doubt (given by umpires) tends to go more in their favour even when the batsman is actually out. (ball hitting leg stump or impact being inside the line but due to benefit of doubt was adjudged to be too close/ risky to give out).

So the umpires are more cautious with LBWs and thus you see teams racking up bigger scores against the weaker Indian bowling which creates fewer chances away from Asia.

But with DRS, suppose Aus is 240/4 and a LBW decision is not given. Thanks to DRS now, India reviews and the decision is over-turned, so instead of it typically becoming 550/8 at SCG under the no DRS system, it changes to 400 all out..

Or the umpires are happier to give decisions or they can be more aggressive with their decisions, rather than playing on the safe side because there is a safety net with Drs

 

[centurymaker]

Whats so confusing?

 

[Burgey]

Without DRS, the home tends to benefit more.. than the away team as the marginal decisions or the benefit of doubt (given by umpires) tends to go more in their favour even when the batsman is actually out. (ball hitting leg stump or impact being inside the line but due to benefit of doubt was adjudged to be too close/ risky to give out).

So the umpires are more cautious with LBWs and thus you see teams racking up bigger scores against the weaker Indian bowling which creates fewer chances away from Asia.

But with DRS, suppose Aus is 240/4 and a LBW decision is not given. Thanks to DRS now, India reviews and the decision is over-turned, so instead of it typically becoming 550/8 at SCG under the no DRS system, it changes to 400 all out..

Or the umpires are happier to give decisions or they can be more aggressive with their decisions, rather than playing on the safe side because there is a safety net with Drs

I don't actually agree with any of this, but thanks for explaining your reasoning. Dar gave Smith out here vs SA when he was a million miles down the track, as an example. I mean, there have been neutral umpires for over a decade now.

Do you now think India will start to go worse at home, because the marginal calls will begin to go against them with DRS?

 

[smash84]

You're cooking up really weird scenarios. India's bad bowling performance overseas isn't mainly about not getting decisions in their favor.

And of course you forget neutral umpires

Edit: beaten by burgey

 

[centurymaker]

To some degree, Indian bowling will benefit.

It may not make too much of a difference to the outcome though more often than not, but sometimes a single wicket can change the whole momentum.

And given how hopeless Indian bowling usually is away from home, any move or anything that can get them more wickets is gonna help, no?

 

[Burgey]

Possibly, but they're just as likely to get out decisions overturned on review as anyone else too.

I do like how India has come on board with DRS though. And they seem a far more positive looking unit than they were before, which is good.

These things pretty much confirm what everyone outside India had known for the better part of a decade - Tendulkar was holding India back from taking the next step, because everything was always about him. That applied to him, the team and the cricketing culture. Out, foul spot!

 

[TheJediBrah]

Without DRS, the home tends to benefit more.. than the away team as the marginal decisions or the benefit of doubt (given by umpires) tends to go more in their favour even when the batsman is actually out. (ball hitting leg stump or impact being inside the line but due to benefit of doubt was adjudged to be too close/ risky to give out).

So the umpires are more cautious with LBWs and thus you see teams racking up bigger scores against the weaker Indian bowling which creates fewer chances away from Asia.

But with DRS, suppose Aus is 240/4 and a LBW decision is not given. Thanks to DRS now, India reviews and the decision is over-turned, so instead of it typically becoming 550/8 at SCG under the no DRS system, it changes to 400 all out..

Or the umpires are happier to give decisions or they can be more aggressive with their decisions, rather than playing on the safe side because there is a safety net with Drs

lol wut

I don't think any of this has any basis in reality

To some degree, Indian bowling will benefit.

It may not make too much of a difference to the outcome though more often than not, but sometimes a single wicket can change the whole momentum.

And given how hopeless Indian bowling usually is away from home, any move or anything that can get them more wickets is gonna help, no?

I don't understand this logic at all. DRS will be available for both teams playing the game, not just for India. It's not going to help India any more than it helps the other team.

 

[centurymaker]

I don't actually agree with any of this, but thanks for explaining your reasoning. Dar gave Smith out here vs SA when he was a million miles down the track, as an example. I mean, there have been neutral umpires for over a decade now.

Do you now think India will start to go worse at home, because the marginal calls will begin to go against them with DRS?

Yup, Indian batsmen could suffer a bit, as they do benefit from the odd decision.

But Kohli has brought a shift in attitude & culture, so I don't think India will fare worse at home, unless opposition also has a quality spinner to really trouble the indian batsmen

 

[GIMH]

Oh it happened, & the reasons were perfectly clear, SA were missing their two premier bowlers.

Be a bit like them playing India with Ashwin & Jadeja unavailable.

Can we have half a point back for each of the first three tests here then where one of Anderson or Broad were unavailable?

 

[centurymaker]

lol wut

I don't think any of this has any basis in reality



I don't understand this logic at all. DRS will be available for both teams playing the game, not just for India. It's not going to help India any more than it helps the other team.

Yea, but I am comparing it to the scenario without DRS. Umpires were giving fewer LBWs, fewer decisions because there was benefit of the doubt thing.. which would slightly help batsmen, especially home batsmen.
It wasn't significant but the odd decision would 'tend' to go in their favor.
And when things are not going your way and a single decision can bring the bowlers back in the game.

This is just my opinion.

 

[centurymaker]

Can we have half a point back for each of the first three tests here then where one of Anderson or Broad were unavailable?

South Africa were without their top bowlers at "home", where they are twice as lethal.

Don't think England seamers could have done much and we have seen Anderson pick up 4 wickets in 3 games @54.

If Swann was still around and still quality bowler, and had to miss the series, then...

 

[Zinzan]

South Africa were without their top bowlers at "home", where they are twice as lethal.

Don't think England seamers could have done much and we have seen Anderson pick up 4 wickets in 3 games @54.

If Swann was still around and still quality bowler, and had to miss the series, then...

Fair point, hadn't realized Anderson's figures were so bad on that tour.