*Official* India Tour of Australia 2018/19

[harsh.ag]

Vihari is actually not a bad part timer. Would like for him to be given a go.

 

[ankitj]

Anyone who says with a straight face that Rohit offers more to India than Ravindra Jadeja is wrong. Bring him or Vihari in next test no matter the result tomorrow.

Bring in Kuldeep. Look at number of left handers in Australian team.

 

[vcs]

India have enough depth to put out a 2nd XI that would hold their own fairly well in world cricket right now.

Dhawan
Shaw
Agarwal
Pandey
Nair
Pandya
Saha
Kuldeep
Jadeja
Umesh
Bhuvi

Would expect that team to beat SL/Bangladesh/WI, and be quite competitive vs. NZ and Pakistan. Might even give SA/Aus/Eng a game if they win the toss and get to take advantage of favourable conditions. Okay the batting's a bit iffy, but still.

Don't think our bench strength has ever been this good. However, we don't have 11 absolute elite players who can deliver in all conditions. So we still can't win series outside Asia.

There's also that Siraj bloke who's been tearing it up for the A-team against pretty good opposition.

 

[Prince EWS]

India have enough depth to put out a 2nd XI that would hold their own fairly well in world cricket right now.

Dhawan
Shaw
Agarwal
Pandey
Nair
Pandya
Saha
Kuldeep
Jadeja
Umesh
Bhuvi

Would expect that team to beat SL/Bangladesh/WI, and be quite competitive vs. NZ and Pakistan. Might even give SA/Aus/Eng a game if they win the toss and get to take advantage of favourable conditions. Okay the batting's a bit iffy, but still.

Don't think our bench strength has ever been this good. However, we don't have 11 absolute elite players who can deliver in all conditions. So we still can't win series outside Asia.

Weirdly enough I think the batting would probably only really compete in Asia/WI, but the bowling attack isn't really too far off the first choice one. Not too often you'd have been able to say that about India's bench strength without actually just intending to take a swipe at the first choice bowling attack.

 

[Prince EWS]

Vihari is actually not a bad part timer. Would like for him to be given a go.

I think it might have factored in more if he bowled something other than off spin. Two offies in Australia is only ever really any use if one of them is really unorthodox or the first one ends up bowling rubbish. Neither are true here so he would've just ended up bowling the overs Vijay did with similar non-success IMO.

 

[silentstriker]

Lol there is so much more to umpiring than that. I just know the kind of detail and work required for Associate level and it's already quite demanding - I don't image Test Level umpiring would be any easier.

I'd elaborate but it's not like any of you care, you just wanna **** on Dharnasena for what you see on TV lol. And fair enough, umpiring is a thankless task. I don't know how good he is at the other tasks his role involves, or even how much more there is to do at Test level when compared to Associates, so I'll hold off judgement on him. Just letting you know there is a lot more to umpiring than what you see.

Hold the hat and get the decisions correct. Thanks.

 

[andmark]

Lol there is so much more to umpiring than that. I just know the kind of detail and work required for Associate level and it's already quite demanding - I don't image Test Level umpiring would be any easier.

I'd elaborate but it's not like any of you care, you just wanna **** on Dharnasena for what you see on TV lol. And fair enough, umpiring is a thankless task. I don't know how good he is at the other tasks his role involves, or even how much more there is to do at Test level when compared to Associates, so I'll hold off judgement on him. Just letting you know there is a lot more to umpiring than what you see.

How bad would a test umpire need to be for you to give them a negative judgement? Does Steve "missing middle" Bucknor get away with his performances?

 

[Daemon]

How bad would a test umpire need to be for you to give them a negative judgement? Does Steve "missing middle" Bucknor get away with his performances?

Nah no way. He gave very good lectures at the elite umpiring panel conferences, could recite some laws by heart and once gave a stern telling off to a few mischievous players.

He also never failed to ensure powerplays were taken on time and always kept the players jumpers in pristine condition. What more can you ask?

 

[cnerd123]

How bad would a test umpire need to be for you to give them a negative judgement? Does Steve "missing middle" Bucknor get away with his performances?

You can't really say without knowing the full grading criteria and full extent of the task at hand. And like selecting a test team, sometimes the option available isn't great, but the alternatives aren't better, so you stick with the known quantity even if they are poor.

At Associate level apparently incorrect decision making is one of the easiest forgiven errors, as long as it was due to human error (not seeing the ball well, didn't hear the nick) and not incorrect application of the laws. If the errors follow a predictable pattern, and the match referees and assessors note it, then you will be marked down harshly because that is a clear flaw that needs fixing. But if it's just being incorrect a lot, especially on tough decisions, then there is a lot of leeway.

The worst offences are incorrect application of laws and playing conditions, poor communication with the match officials and team representatives, and inconsistent decision making during the game. Oh, and composure and conduct are hugely important. Those are probably the real deal breakers - if you are anything less than a consummate professional with your behaviour on the field you may never umpire again.

There are also a lot of adminstrative tasks before and after the game that umpires get judged on, and they are also responsible for things you wouldn't imagine - like making sure the pitch is marked out correctly, stumps are aligned right, bats are to the ICC conditions, the rolling and watering of the pitch, practice on the field, etc etc. Just a whole ton of little things that, if you mess up, could lead to serious consequences because of how it relates to conditions of play and fairness and such. And none of this actually ever seen by TV audiences, so we don't get to appreciate umpires that are really good at it.

For all we know a gun decision-making umpire like Aleem Dar might be a total slacker at everything else but gets away with it.

 

[Daemon]

Dharmasena can stick to all that then sit in the third umpires box during the cricket

 

[h_hurricane]

I think it might have factored in more if he bowled something other than off spin. Two offies in Australia is only ever really any use if one of them is really unorthodox or the first one ends up bowling rubbish. Neither are true here so he would've just ended up bowling the overs Vijay did with similar non-success IMO.

Kuldeep along with Ashwin could be a potent combination in Sydney given that one of them is unorthodox. Wouldn't play both of them in Perth or Melbourne though. Vihari should be brought in instead of Rohit for the next match.

Vijay's lack of success with the ball (and bat of course) makes it all the more easier for him to be dropped whenever Shaw is ready. A win-win situation here.

 

[vcs]

***** word salad

TBF, this does make sense. Judging people purely on the acuity of their hearing and vision is kinda messed up.

As more and more of that part of umpiring gets automated, they'll eventually become glorified hat/sweater stands.

 

[harsh.ag]

Not surprised to find ***** considers the bureaucratic side of umpiring more important than the skill side.

 

[cnerd123]

Dharmasena can stick to all that then sit in the third umpires box during the cricket

TBF I'm sure if you actually sat down and calculated the % of decisions he gets right it would be like 90+%. The ICC did this in 2017 and found a decision making accuracy of 94% without DRS and 98.5% with for the entire panel:

https://www.google.com.hk/url?sa=t&...AxAB&usg=AOvVaw3rtTQMWixeQYC4oZcgn10Q&ampcf=1

Dharnasena himself is at least 80% if that's what the whole panel is on.

But then again they probably did something sneaky like count all those half hearted appeals when a bowler beats the bat as an actual decision the umpire had to make. Probably included wides and **** too.

 

[slippy888]

Probable Mitch Marshes last chance to prove he was the all rounder he was hyped up to be the next flintoff or botham, he must score a match winning 80 score.

 

[slippy888]

Travis Head is the best batsman in Australia he will put up a decent showing day 5 will he get any support from the other batsman

 

[h_hurricane]

Nah no way. He gave very good lectures at the elite umpiring panel conferences, could recite some laws by heart and once gave a stern telling off to a few mischievous players.

He also never failed to ensure powerplays were taken on time and always kept the players jumpers in pristine condition. What more can you ask?

Bucknor in the later part of his umpiring days was a master in making bad decisions look incredibly stupid given the time he takes to judge them, then conduct as if nothing happened before giving the next howler. A pity really, as he was such a good umpire in his earlier days.

 

[cnerd123]

TBF, this does make sense. Judging people purely on the acuity of their hearing and vision is kinda messed up.

As more and more of that part of umpiring gets automated, they'll eventually become glorified hat/sweater stands.

Not surprised to find ***** considers the bureaucratic side of umpiring more important than the skill side.

Actually the trend over history has been that umpires have gone from purely being decision makes to being match managers first, and decision makers second

There were already big shifts made once umpires could start reviewing run-outs, and now with DRS an umpire isn't actually required to make good decisions - just consistent ones. Be precise not accurate - DRS will fix up the accuracy as long as your behaviour is predictable to the player.

As technology improves, umpiring will eventually be reduced to setting up a game, deciding on fair and unfair play, and only stepping in to make actual decisions in lower levels of cricket that don't have technology. Oh, and calling no-balls, because technology will never ever ever solve that.

 

[h_hurricane]

I am all for usage of technology in order to help umpires eliminate howlers. Nothing Dharmasena did today was more moronic than Ishant over stepping( he has been doing this for 11 years FFS) or Finch not reviewing his dismissal. Poor usage of reviews and not focussing on basics like front foot overstepping let them teams down more than umpiring decisions.

 

[GRAB]

Probable Mitch Marshes last chance to prove he was the all rounder he was hyped up to be the next flintoff or botham, he must score a match winning 80 score.

How does he do that when he isn't playing???