*Official* India Tour of Australia 2018/19

[Hicheal Michael]

i really think "couldn't beat bangladesh in bangladesh" should have long since stopped being a sledge. they're a legit team at home.

Pretty sure most teams have failed to win a series in Bangladesh now?

NZ - 2013
IND - 2015
SA - 2015
ENG - 2016
AUS - 2017

 

[OverratedSanity]

With respect to Spark and TJB's revolving argument, I think there is a lot to the batting writing their own demise. Yes the bowling was very disciplined but it was also the same old story of being able to rotate the strike and relying on boundaries, particularly from Khawaja who just seems to spend all his time marooned at one end. Even when the Indian batsmen were encountering difficulties Pujara always seemed to be getting something, and he's not a brilliant runner between the wickets. As I pointed out earlier is a thing deeper than just this team, the Shield seems to be full of these average 35 with a strike rate of 60 batsmen who rely on boundaries and can't rotate the strike, and the English have a lot of the same type of batsmen (such as Vince). They always play hard shots straight to fielders and can't work it into gaps, and try too many low-percentage shots. With Warner we'd have had a player much better at being aggressive and better between wickets, and with Smith a much better worker of the ball. There's no way he'd have let Ashwin settle into the rhythm he did and with all due respect to Spark's point about the Indian pace bowling it was Ashwin who did the damage in the first innings in Adelaide, as batsmen let him settle then got out to him, when he should have with good footwork been nudged for a couple every over.

See, I don't think Pujara necessarily was. I don't think his starts were any quicker than they were in other overseas tours he's failed in. He generally got bogged down just as much as Khawaja did. The difference was he wasn't bothered by it one bit and was willing to wait it out.

The two big improvements in Pujara's batting overseas have been him improving his square of the wicket scoring game (actually manages to punch the ball through point on occasion now, and played the upper cut to great effect), and him being comfortable in his role and not buying the #intent meme. He constantly got himself in a tangle in SA trying to up the rate early on in his innings instead of just being his own obdurate self.

 

[Starfighter]

tbh I think Cummins series bowling has been overrated a bit. He was great in Melbourne but I think he was no more than solid in the first two Tests as I think he got into the habit of pitching it short of a length or bounces too often which gets the crowd and comes excited but doesn't lead to wickets that often, as his stars showed.

I think he needs a go with the new ball and needs to learn to swing it again. He used to have a beautiful outswinger but now just bowls with the seam straight down the pitch or some wobbly variation. He's a skiddy bowler for his height and doesn't really move it off the wicket.

I reckon he's been down on pace since part of the way through the Ashes but he was quicker in Melbourne.

 

[OverratedSanity]

i still think it was bumrah who was the key man at adelaide

Pujara got half our runs in the first innings. Nothing bumrah did would've mattered if Pujara had gone early.

 

[social]

Australia has become England of the mid-80s in that they can win the Ashes but very little else. Last summer's Ashes is the only series they've won out of their last six. In fact they've only won two Test series in almost three years.

You’re talking about the Australian selectors

Both are talented

Behrendorff provides variation while Stanlake has X factor

On 2nd thoughts, Richardson is a real chance as he’s from WA and took 8 wickets recently

Unfortunately, I doubt that they consider Curtis despite scoring a ton in the same match because something

 

[morgieb]

Australia has become England of the mid-80s in that they can win the Ashes but very little else. Last summer's Ashes is the only series they've won out of their last six. In fact they've only won two Test series in almost three years.

Ehhh...bit simplistic when you consider that this is the only other home series in the time. I don't think we'd go to England and win there like they did in 86/87, for example.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Pretty sure most teams have failed to win a series in Bangladesh now?

NZ - 2013
IND - 2015
SA - 2015
ENG - 2016
AUS - 2017

Tbf, some of those were down to them producing disgraceful flat decks to get draws or the rain saving them. But yeah, the ones against England and Australia were good series.

 

[morgieb]

You’re talking about the Australian selectors

Both are talented

Behrendorff provides variation while Stanlake has X factor

On 2nd thoughts, Richardson is a real chance as he’s from WA and took 8 wickets recently

Unfortunately, I doubt that they consider Curtis despite scoring a ton in the same match because something

Problem is neither of them have been playing FC cricket recently. The fact they're in the ODI squad suggests they'd be in the frame if they were but can they handle bowling 20 overs day in day out? Even Pattinson worries me in this regard.

Right now I'd drop Starc for Sri Lanka (has been very poor since the Durban Test, seems useless against good batsmen sans reverse) and give Hazlewood one more shot (I don't think he was all that bad here but still could be better and needs to improve as he's not Cummins/Starc pace), with Richardson and Tremain in the squad (I'd pick Jhye first as I think he's got more about him than the Tremain types who to me seem like excellent FC bowlers who are merely "OK" at Test level)

Wasn't that Kurtis's first Shield ton in like ages?

 

[vcs]

You guys couldn't even beat Bangladesh away ffs. Then again neither could India so it's forgivable.

Because of the rain. Becoming a bit of a recurring theme now for India against minnows with this Sydney Test as well...

 

[Spark]

Pujara got half our runs in the first innings. Nothing bumrah did would've mattered if Pujara had gone early.

oh yeah i mean bowling wise. obviously you can't do a lot if you get shot out for 150ao

 

[social]

i still think it was bumrah who was the key man at adelaide

Nope

Paine failing to review Pujara in Adelaide decided the series

India are waaaaaaaay better but Australia wins if not for that ****up

 

[Spark]

Nope

Paine failing to review Pujara in Adelaide decided the series

India are waaaaaaaay better but Australia wins if not for that ****up

see previous post

 

[Top_Cat]

That's actually something else you can pot Paine for too. Yeah yeah, it's hard in real-time, etc. but one of the reasons to have an older head running the team, especially since he's not doing anything with the bat, is decision-making. Keeping has been up and down, skippering has been sorta average and that decision (and others) have had a significant impact on the series.

 

[NotMcKenzie]

To follow up on the idea, much mentioned, of our inability to rotate the strike and a tendency to hit balls straight to fielders, there's something I've noticed that bodes rather poorly for the future of cricket in this country, although we can only hope the other countries will follow suit to even things out.


While watching tour matches particularly, showcasing a still younger generation of players, I've notice that a lot of them seem to swat the ball rather than driving through it in the classical fashion. The way they play looks as if they they are all using really short backlifts even though they actually aren't, so they all seem to play the ball in a short amount of time with a short, sharp flick or swing of the wrists and finish with a low backlift. 'Swing' seems an inappropriate term to describe this motion, as does the modern 'push' or 'punch' which I so hate; it really is a 'swat'.

The result of this is that they can really drill a ball away (usually accompanied by a great amount of noise), but when it reaches a fielder, there is no posibility of taking singles as it is hit too hard.

I remember during the ODI series against S. Africa, Kerry O'Keefe criticised the use of the sidearm or 'whanger' or whatever it's called, saying it produced players with hard hands, and I think I can see his point. At my grade training, whenever somebody has gone into a net to face one of those things, they begin playing in this manner with a a very-quick 'last minute' motion creating a large amount of noise at contact, and they also have an exaggeratedly low position whilst playing the shot, which is another thing I have noticed in the matches above.

I have not noticed this as mutch at the highest levels of cricket, and can only assume that players who make it so far up are not quite so exaggerated in the way they do this, although hard hands and belting the ball straight to the fielders is clearly a problem.



If this is true, we can only hope that the sidearm thingy is relegated to its proper role of throwing balls to dogs.

 

[Starfighter]

The concerning thing I find is that it looks like this slide in batting depth and general quality is not going to be arrested soon. The standard of the Big Bash has slid further and is really quite horrible, the Shield is gets the same neglect year after year and the one day competition may as well not exist for all the influence it has on selection. People only know how to bat up to 40 and the leg side long hop seems to have been settled upon as both the main runscoring and wicket taking delivery in limited overs, with a disastrous effect on our international batting and death bowling. I saw nary a yorker bowled in the JLT cup while India has a bowler - Bumrah - who excels at them, and the ease with which SA was able to tie the batsmen down even with Pretorius' mediums was very concerning. I expect India to sweep the one day series easily.

 

[morgieb]

Some series ratings:

Rahul 2 - one good knock in Adelaide, pretty much nothing else otherwise. Looked a walking wicket and it'll be a while before we see him again.
Vijay 1 - probably didn't look as bad as Rahul did, but had nothing to show for it. A sad end to a career which at its best was really useful for India.
Pujara 9.5 - misses the 10 as he failed at Perth. Otherwise was basically perfect. Reminded me of Cook 2010/11, except this time on somewhat friendlier surfaces and against a more consistent bowling attack. Any concerns about his away record have to be addressed now.
Kohli 7 - kinda underwhelming, but still managed a brilliant ton and a few other good knocks. Plus his captaincy was very good, with excellent use of his bowlers and bowling tactics.
Rahane 5 - like Rahul managed a key knock second innings at Adelaide, but was quiet otherwise. Might be time to look at other options, especially given his struggles in India.
R Sharma 5.5 - actually managed two decent contributions - his 37 at Adelaide was key in avoiding getting blown out for 150-odd by building a partnership with Pujara and the 60-odd was also key in making sure Australia didn't get much momentum - but still not sure if he's actually good.
Pant 7 - still needs work keeping wise, but looks a really dangerous batsmen. Impressively found a way to reign in his slogging instincts in the later Tests and got rewarded with a crucial ton that set up a series win.
Ashwin 7 - tempted to strike him of all of his points for being a fat and lazy prick, but he did bowl rather well at Adelaide.
I Sharma 7 - unlike Bumrah he was merely good but still bowled rather well before showing signs of wear at Melbourne.
Shami 7 - looked fairly dangerous throughout but also threw in some pies for good measure.
Bumrah 9.5 - misses the 10 as I can't realistically give him more than Pujara and he bowled pies first morning at Perth. Otherwise was amazing, looked likely to take a bag of wickets every time he bowled.
Vihari 4 - looks decent but not much by the way of substance. Will get more chances I hope as he might just need some easy home runs to lock down a place.
Umesh Yadav 2 - poor. Just looked a total liability. Had things gone differently picking him ahead of Jadeja would be an ATG clanger.
Agarwal 8.5 - the short ball will cause him some grief and he'll need to work on that. But otherwise a very impressive start to his career. Made a real difference to having Rahul and Vijay up the order.
Jadeja 6 - looked dangerous with lots of rough at Melbourne, but still was far from perfect. The 80 was one of the easier 80's I've ever seen, but it's still runs.
Kuldeep Yadav 8 - on a very flat deck (even against a demoralised and **** batting lineup) looked pretty dangerous. If he can work on his batting probably has the #1 spinner spot locked down for the forseeable future (and I'd probably be picking him ahead of Ashwin at this point).

Harris 6 - the only batsman with two 70+ scores, which says a lot. Did look pretty good unless India pitched it short, but would want a ton against Sri Lanka to lock down a slot.
Finch 2 - good 50 at Perth, but even that relied on some poor bowling from India. Otherwise was useless. Simply not a Test opener in these conditions and that should've been obvious from the first time they saw him.
Khawaja 4 - probably deserves a pass due to his brother's arrest and his knee injury, but apart from glimpses looked fairly bereft of confidence and didn't show much ability to put the pressure back on the Indians....unlike Pakistan for example.
Shaun Marsh 4 - can't even convert his starts to scores of substance these days. Should be time to go but probably won't be.
Handscomb 2 - walking wicket as long as India pitched it full. Looked a little bit better at Sydney but even then didn't kick on.
Head 5.5 - looked fairly OK throughout, but was kinda symbolic of all of Australia's batting problems recently. Needs to find a way to get through the tough periods to kick on to great things.
Paine 5 - kept well, but his captaincy seemed underwhelming (though the quality of side couldn't have helped) and his batting did little (in contrast to a few of his other series).
Cummins 8.5 - looked arguably Australia's most solid bat, which given he was batting 8 is pretty sad. Bowling excellent (especially at Melbourne), though looked tired at Sydney which sees him lose some marks.
Starc 4 - weak link. A few good balls but otherwise was largely trash. Looked especially bad at Melbourne and Sydney. Time to give him a kick up the ass.
Lyon 7.5 - wonderful in the first two Tests, but his figures weren't pretty when India got on top in the last two Tests and seemed a bit bereft of confidence and options for getting them out. Looked a better bat than a few of our specialists.
Hazlewood 6 - underwhelming but still bowled plenty of good spells. Just needs to reduce the number of bad balls quite a bit.
Mitch Marsh 1.5 - at least he kept things tight with the ball. But really should be the last Test he plays for a while.
Labuschagne 4 - did look pretty decent out there, but it's still only a 38. And his bowling was awful, despite getting picked largely on it.

 

[Starfighter]

I'd generally agree with that.

Saves me from doing my own.

 

[Burgey]

To follow up on the idea, much mentioned, of our inability to rotate the strike and a tendency to hit balls straight to fielders, there's something I've noticed that bodes rather poorly for the future of cricket in this country, although we can only hope the other countries will follow suit to even things out.


While watching tour matches particularly, showcasing a still younger generation of players, I've notice that a lot of them seem to swat the ball rather than driving through it in the classical fashion. The way they play looks as if they they are all using really short backlifts even though they actually aren't, so they all seem to play the ball in a short amount of time with a short, sharp flick or swing of the wrists and finish with a low backlift. 'Swing' seems an inappropriate term to describe this motion, as does the modern 'push' or 'punch' which I so hate; it really is a 'swat'.

The result of this is that they can really drill a ball away (usually accompanied by a great amount of noise), but when it reaches a fielder, there is no posibility of taking singles as it is hit too hard.

I remember during the ODI series against S. Africa, Kerry O'Keefe criticised the use of the sidearm or 'whanger' or whatever it's called, saying it produced players with hard hands, and I think I can see his point. At my grade training, whenever somebody has gone into a net to face one of those things, they begin playing in this manner with a a very-quick 'last minute' motion creating a large amount of noise at contact, and they also have an exaggeratedly low position whilst playing the shot, which is another thing I have noticed in the matches above.

I have not noticed this as mutch at the highest levels of cricket, and can only assume that players who make it so far up are not quite so exaggerated in the way they do this, although hard hands and belting the ball straight to the fielders is clearly a problem.



If this is true, we can only hope that the sidearm thingy is relegated to its proper role of throwing balls to dogs.

Kohli swats his cover drives by cutting across them like an axe swing, and everyone blows a load over them.

 

[Starfighter]

Kohli swats his cover drives by cutting across them like an axe swing, and everyone blows a load over them.

They were blowing a load over Kohli's farts this series. There just seemed to be a complete love in over everything he did from the entire Channel 7 crew. It was ridiculous at points.

 

[the big bambino]

Congratulations to India on their meritorious win. I think they would've still had an even chance even if we had all our players available. Like most of the Indians here I was concerned about their batting except I thought they would do well. After a hard year of play they were at their best here and were better suited to our wickets than those in SA or England. Of course Kohli was the main danger and i expected Rahane as his support. Turns out Pujara was the star and Kohli supporting him. After losing a clatter of wickets on day 1 in Adelaide, India adjusted and proved you can score off our excellent attack if you play with patience. India's bowling has improved over the year due to the inclusion of Bumrah and the continued improvement of Sharma. Shami had the luck here he that he didn't in England. They have variety in spin.

The bans on our players seemed to have an effect on every part of our team. The batting was too unstable to win a series. I once made a jokey reference to players scoring beta centuries. That is they are capable of them in the company of great players but can't score them in their absence, as this series illustrated. Marsh was predictably a let down. We were too reliant on Khawaja who isn't so good he can cover for 2 great players on his own. Even without his brother's predicament distracting him. The batting was so weak it effected our bowlers. They didn't have enough rest between innings and it must have impacted their confidence. Neither did the batsmen provide a viable 5th bowling option that could've given them a breather. I don't blame them for blowing up in the heat of Melbourne and then shortly after in Sydney. They are still easily the best part of our team and world class. I wouldn't drop any of them against SL, especially as Starc has a great record against that side.

I do blame our administrators for their unjust decisions to ban the sandpaper trio and causing the weakness of the side. I don't think the coaching offers any value to the team or meaningful advice to inexperienced and over matched players looking for guidance. The selection of the team seems a mixture of nepotism and spite. The deceitful way they treated Maxwell before the UAE tests is insightful as to how toxic the relationship between players and selectors must be. NCN's complaint about lack of communication is further evidence. The inexplicable maltreatment extended to Joe Burns and also Wade. Setting up Finch to fail as opener when it was known his best and only chance was in the middle order meant they squandered our remaining resources. Then picking a squad for a home series meant they didn't give themselves the opportunity to correct mistakes. Plus its just bloody lazy. It meant the selectors could just mentally check out with the excuse they were showing faith with the team. Overall an Indian side in good form after a year's of hard cricket was just too good. We have a lot to address.