• 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*** Australia in India 2017

OverratedSanity

Request Your Custom Title Now!
That whole hour was awful cricket. 150 lead was probably on if Australia batted sensibly, in which case India likely would've wilted. And then they wasted the new ball and gave the openers some confidence. It was that more than the Pujara/Rahane partnership that changed the game.
You still had us 30/4 though.
 

Spark

Global Moderator
So Aussies...let's be honest, you want to give Shaun Marsh a massive slap across the crops right now don't you? :ph34r:

Also for the stats enthusiasts out there. How many of the Test nations have never failed to win a test match when chasing a score below 200? There's one team I know for sure but I'm not sure if there are many others tbh.
holy ****
 

OverratedSanity

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Ben Horne‏ @BenHorne8 41m41 minutes ago
More
Match officials say only time they are aware of Australians looking up to dressing room for guidance was Smith incident today

Again, if Kohli isn't right on this...
Haha if he's wrong then it's just ridiculous. Probably deserves a ban.

Might be good for the team too
 

morgieb

Request Your Custom Title Now!
You still had us 30/4 though.
Yeah true.

I guess my point is even at that point I still felt that India might claw it back. And that throwing away a match-winning position also gave you guys confidence, which might not have happened if we closed the innings in more conventional fashion.
 

WindieWeathers

International Regular
Anyway during this test I questioned O'Keef and Lyon in comparison to Swann and Monty!!..their poor performance in India's second innings is the reason why we can't jump to conclusions imo. Yes Hazelwood was brilliant and Australia still should have won but the bottom line is if Lyon and O'Keef turn up then Aus could have been chasing 110-120 instead of 187 and mentally it would have been a totally different ball game.
 

Gnske

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Anyway during this test I questioned O'Keef and Lyon in comparison to Swann and Monty!!..their poor performance in India's second innings is the reason why we can't jump to conclusions imo. Yes Hazelwood was brilliant and Australia still should have won but the bottom line is if Lyon and O'Keef turn up then Aus could have been chasing 110-120 instead of 187 and mentally it would have been a totally different ball game.
How badly do you think they played in comparison with how Warrican and Bishoo would have?
 

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Anyway during this test I questioned O'Keef and Lyon in comparison to Swann and Monty!!..their poor performance in India's second innings is the reason why we can't jump to conclusions imo. Yes Hazelwood was brilliant and Australia still should have won but the bottom line is if Lyon and O'Keef turn up then Aus could have been chasing 110-120 instead of 187 and mentally it would have been a totally different ball game.
Very harsh imo. They created a lot of chances which didn't go to hand.
 

quincywagstaff

International Debutant
Ben Horne‏ @BenHorne8 41m41 minutes ago
More
Match officials say only time they are aware of Australians looking up to dressing room for guidance was Smith incident today

Again, if Kohli isn't right on this...
Again, in terms of Trump style tactics, whether it's partially true or false isn't the prime issue here. Kholi seems to want to drag the Aussies into a war of verbals and antagonism between Tests. A potentially distracting trap they could fall into.
 

Top