**Official** Australia in India Thread

[JustTool]

Didn't get my sarcasm either?

Touche ! I am out lbw and that was a good decision

 

[SquidAU]

Touche ! I am out lbw and that was a good decision

The wicket is graciously accepted.

 

[JustTool]

The wicket is graciously accepted.

Can we start our own Mutual Admiration and Appreciation Society - I need some support here for a non-Aussie point of view from someone in Australia

 

[Deja moo]

Er......Happy 100 pages ??

 

[JustTool]

Believe it or not I just watched the entire Indian 2nd innings (well, some one's gotta do it !) and at no point do any of the AUSSIE commentators say ANYTHING at all about the pitch not being up to par. It's all about how great Clarke is, and how great the fielding is and how great....well, you get the drift :-)

 

[Dydl]

Haven't you already said that 2 or 3 times?

 

[JustTool]

Haven't you already said that 2 or 3 times?

Yes. Would you like me to stop ?

 

[thirdumpire]

the Mumbai pitch has broken a 100 year record :

The least number of overs (202.1) bowled in a result-ending Test match.

 

[Deja moo]

is that a record for all pitches or just for Mumbai ?

 

[Dydl]

I don't know, so this is a guess but I presume that it is for all pitches everywhere.

 

[thirdumpire]

All test matches ever played. I dont catch the show out here, but I recieved an email from a friend in India, that it was discussed on INDIAN TV in a show called "Cricketing Controversies" with Navjot Sidhu as the guest ....

 

[Son Of Coco]

By 'eck, you lot aren't half good at making arguments out of nowt, are you?

To summarise, as a neutral - in that I dislike Australia and India almost equally
1) India lost at home, most amusing in that it shoots down a fairly large tranche of hyperbole
2) Australia implode chasing 107, very, very funny
3) Cracks in Indian cricket papered over by the win in the fourth Test - it happened to England so often in the 90s, and it's being repeated. The series was lost, and the BCCI should pay scant attention to the win on the minefield.

If you dislike both you're not neutral.....

 

[Son Of Coco]

That's nonsense. Ricky is behaving like a schoolboy brat (thet he used to be, not many years ago) just because he can't bat against spin. Everyone in India has lost a lot of respect from him (see recent comments by Bedi).Ponting is just whining because Gilchrist won without him and Australia lost with him. Ouch. I think he hsould be canned as captain and Gilchrist made permanent. Then, like Atherton said, at least Aussies can practice hypocirtical 'walking'

I think something was mentioned earlier about the wicket in Oz vs Sri Lanka and how no-one had complained then, so here we go...........

You're right though, Ponting never said anything about it - he wasn't even in the team (out through injury). Gilchrist, the stand in captain, had a bit to say however.

http://ind.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/CRICKET_NEWS/2004/JUL/008731_AUSSL2004_03JUL2004.html

"Dyson also added his opinions to the debate. "When Australia gets bowled out twice for 200 that should tell you something about the wicket. When a Test match finishes in under three days it also tells you something about the wicket. There were seven class batsmen in either team and they got bowled out twice. The highest score in the game was 207. In a good game of Test cricket you are expected to go into the fifth day. You can draw up your own conclusions from that."

 

[Son Of Coco]

This is the best article on how unsporting Australia have been. Khalid Ansari is a very long time sportswriter.

That's being unsporting, Mr Ponting
By: Khalid A-H Ansari
November 9, 2004
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since he is no man’s fool, Ricky Ponting must have an exceedingly low opinion of Rahul Dravid’s intelligence as also a vainglorious estimation of his own powers of persuasion.

How else can one explain the Aussie captain’s reported suggestion to the India stand-in captain to join him in a formal protest over the Wankhede Stadium wicket, which the tourists querulously blame for their defeat in last week’s Mumbai Test?

Upon his return to Sydney on Sunday, Ponting, in an outburst of injured self-righteousness, said he would register his dissatisfaction with the wicket in his official captain’s match report to the International Cricket Council (ICC).

And, believe it or not, Ponting actually believes that he can “enlist the support of Dravid to impress on the need to have more genuine Test pitches.”

“Genuine” Test pitches? Please enlighten us, skipper: what is a “genuine” Test pitch as against a counterfeit one?

Mr Ponting: Is a “genuine” wicket one on which the ball rears menacingly at head and torso, terrifyingly whistling past the chins and ears of hapless batsmen, unaccustomed to fiery pace and pronounced lift as at Perth or in New Zealand, making a mockery of the sporting concept of a level playing field?

For a long time now, batsmen from around the world, unaccustomed to playing on such minefields, have been easy meat for Australia’s gleeful lethal fast bowlers, who have terrorized them on home turf to set the stage for victory.

The strange aspect is that Ricky Ponting cannot possibly have forgotten the shellacking received at the hands of the New Zealand pace bowlers on hazardous wickets during the drawn series in that country in 2001-02.

Nor, indeed, have the Indians completely overcome the nightmare of the 2002-03 tour of NZ, and South Africa of the 2003-04 series there.

Sourav Ganguly’s side took the “sub-standard” wickets in their stride without whingeing. And, if memory serves one right, so did the Aussies.
So why the whining now?

Perhaps because they were denied the desperately wanted 3-0 victory? Perhaps because this would have enabled the captain himself to claim credit for a Test win in the series?

If Ponting had his way, he would have all Indian wickets similar to the vexed one at Nagpur, which, resembled the green tops in Australia, thanks to the illogical obduracy of Nagpur officials and grounds man Kishor Pradhan, who had no compunction in cutting their noses to spite their faces.

Ponting has the temerity to pontificate gratuitously that “India’s cricket would be better served with wickets such as the seamer-friendly one at Nagpur”, which, we may add, caused Messrs McGrath, Gillespie and Kasprowicz to rub their eyes in disbelief and salivate in anticipation, upon first setting eyes upon it.

The Aussie pacemen capitalised gleefully upon the manna from heaven offered by India’s feuding officials and sent the Indian batsmen to the cleaners to carve out an emphatic, impressive win that enabled their team to breach what Steve Waugh termed the Final Frontier.

It is very possible that – the grounds man’s gift apart – but for rain and the benevolence of wicket-keeper Parthiv Patel, the series could have been drawn 2-2, enabling India to retain the Border-Gavaskar Trophy. But, then, this is in the realm of “If my aunt had been a man, she would have been my uncle” ifs and buts.

One would have thought that Ponting, with his 80-Test experience would have fathomed by now that any home team in the pantheon of international cricket, from almost the advent of the game of cricket, has had the acknowledged right to prepare wickets to suit its own bowlers.

Thus it has been and so it shall remain, unless the ICC decrees otherwise.

***************
For Ponting to attribute his team’s 13-run defeat solely to a wicket he describes as “sub-standard”, without regard for his team’s remarkable gutless capitulation in the second innings is unsporting, in poor taste and smacks of sour grapes.

After all, it is not as though two separate wickets – one for the Aussies and one for the home side – were prepared for the Test.

The assured manner in which Sachin Tendulkar and VVS Laxman batted on the third (and last morning) of the Test while putting on 91 runs in 119 minutes in positive fashion to lay the foundation for a shock victory, expose Ponting’s diatribe for what it is.

Australia’s batsmen were the victims of their own incompetence against top-class spin bowling brought on by needless, self-induced panic through sheer fear of what the Indian spinners would do on a crumbling wicket, after the unexpected success of part-time spin bowler Michael Clarke (six wickets for nine runs), caused, again, by some inept batting on the part of India’s lower-order batsmen.

Former Test captain, Polly Umrigar, who supervised the preparation of the controversial wicket, has stated that “Ponting dug his own grave” in that the exaggerated turn which the wicket produced in the fourth innings was the result – or folly – of the Aussie skipper who should have known, as even Mumbai maidan captains do, that the use of the half-tonne heavy roller by him twice would break up the hard wicket.

There were simply no ghouls in the wicket. All the kerfuffle is nothing but what we were taught at school about a bad workman blaming his tools or naach na jaane aangan teda (the bad dancer blames the dance floor).

Ponting is reported as saying, “It’s the sort of wicket where you’re always in two minds about what to do”.

He goes on to add, “If you try to stand there and defend, you’re eventually going to get out. If you try to play a shot here and there you’re a good chance of getting out as well. You can’t fault any of the guys. We tried our hardest and we ended up getting close.”

How’s that for tautology?

But then, Mr Ponting, doesn’t unpredictability of wickets make cricket the gloriously uncertain game it is renowned to be? Surely, you don’t expect the rest of the world to tailor-make green-top wickets for your bowlers and batsmen to perpetuate your status as world champions?

Mr Ponting, you are the leader of an awesome team that is, undeniably, in a class of its own. Your demeanour should, therefore, be in keeping with your mighty deeds on the field.

We are tempted to believe that Adam Gilchrist, your deputy who so ably led your team to victory, could never be guilty of the kind of churlishness and indiscretion that you have shown.

This reminds one of the rather simplistic story that was in vogue when we were at school: This mother takes her six-year old son to a psychiatrist and explains that he stealthily puts anything he likes in the supermarket into his pocket.

“What could the problem be, doctor?” she asks with great concern.

“There’s no problem, ma’m. Your son is just a thief.”

Don’t look for scapegoats in the wicket, Mr Ponting. Your batsmen were gauche last Friday. And, with death staring them in the face, the Indian spinners bowled superbly. It’s as simple as that.

and he's Indian.............so definately not biased unlike those dastardly Australians you talk of. If he honestly believes there was nothing in the wicket and it was just the spinners bowling superbly then good luck to him. Michael Clarke must have been simply magnificent in the second innings and not just the beneficiary of a helpful wicket like i thought he was, given that it was due to the Indians magnificent bowling that we collapsed in the innings immediately after.

I don't think Ponting's comments looked good considering they lost, but then you'll notice from the article I posted that we also commented on the Darwin wicket we won on so, not as hypocritical as you suggest.

Using an article by an Indian journalist to prove some case against Ponting etc is laughable as it's obvious where the bias lays.

Your name is still missing an 'a'...........

 

[JustTool]

and he's Indian.............so definately not biased unlike those dastardly Australians you talk of. If he honestly believes there was nothing in the wicket and it was just the spinners bowling superbly then good luck to him. Michael Clarke must have been simply magnificent in the second innings and not just the beneficiary of a helpful wicket like i thought he was, given that it was due to the Indians magnificent bowling that we collapsed in the innings immediately after.

I don't think Ponting's comments looked good considering they lost, but then you'll notice from the article I posted that we also commented on the Darwin wicket we won on so, not as hypocritical as you suggest.

Using an article by an Indian journalist to prove some case against Ponting etc is laughable as it's obvious where the bias lays.

Your name is still missing an 'a'...........

And Murali is a chucker and the ONLY country that's nasty to him is Australia where he is mistreated, maligned and insulted. And Australia would rather do that and win than face the BEST spinner in the world.

Mate, go see what Holding (the greatest fast bowler ever - better than Lille since he took wickets overseas in all countries unlike Lillee) has written and said about BIASED Aussie umpiring and Press. The vindictiveness and ruthlessness of the Aussie Press is well documented and understood by all. They have no credibility anywhere but in Australia.

What ever my name may be missing - if you must get personal - you are a "Son of" all right but not of 'Coco' You feel better now ? Come on you guys are all a bunch of whiners. And you prove it everytime you lose. Or win.

 

[JustTool]

"Dyson also added his opinions to the debate. "When Australia gets bowled out twice for 200 that should tell you something about the wicket. When a Test match finishes in under three days it also tells you something about the wicket. There were seven class batsmen in either team and they got bowled out twice. The highest score in the game was 207. In a good game of Test cricket you are expected to go into the fifth day. You can draw up your own conclusions from that."

That's a stupid, self-centered opinion. So if India, or Pakistan get out for under 200 on a bouncy wicket at Perth does that mean the wicket is unfit for Test. Or does it only apply when Australia fails.

To an objective observer (that would be non-Aussie) your posts are proving exactly the opposite of what you are trying to show. They are showing the self-centered view of Aussies of what Test pitches should be i.e. ones that the Aussies are used to....

 

[Son Of Coco]

And Murali is a chucker and the ONLY country that's nasty to him is Australia where he is mistreated, maligned and insulted. And australia would rather do that and win than face the BEST spinner in the world.

Mate, go see what Holding (the greatest fast bowler ever - better than Lille since he took wickets overseas in all countries nlike Lillee) has written and said about BIASED Aussie umpiring and Press. The vindictiveness and ruthlessness of the Aussie Press is well documented and understood by all. They have no credibility anywhere but in Australia.

What ever my name may be missing - if you must get personal - you are a "Son of" all right but not of 'Coco' You feel better now ? Come on you guys are all a bunch of whiners. And you prove it everytime you lose. Or win.

Ok mate, I'll read what Holding says about Australia and see what it is about other people's opinions (when they match yours) that you treat as gospel. Holding also refused to choose Murali for the World XI due to doubts he has about his action, so according to your line of thinking that makes Murali a confirmed chucker!?

If you think its only Australia who have had people come out with problems with Murali's action then your eyes and ears must be painted on. If we had a problem facing Murali then we probably wouldn't have gone to Sri Lanka would we?

I might change my reading habits and read English and subcontinental press exclusively from now on as the complete lack of bias and support for cricketers as a whole is unequalled anywhere else in the world.

Are you suggesting 'god'?

Of course we're all a bunch of whiners.............so now anyone over here who generalises about the qualities of people from your part of the world can relax knowing that it's tit-for-tat can they not?

 

[JustTool]

Ok mate, I'll read what Holding says about Australia and see what it is about other people's opinions (when they match yours) that you treat as gospel. Holding also refused to choose Murali for the World XI due to doubts he has about his action, so according to your line of thinking that makes Murali a confirmed chucker!?

And how did the doubts arise - who has most vocally questioned Murali's action ? And not Brett Lee's ?

 

[Son Of Coco]

That's a stupid, self-centered opinion. So if India, or Pakistan get out for under 200 on a bouncy wicket at Perth does that mean the wicket is unfit for Test. Or does it only apply when Australia fails.

To an objective observer (that would be non-Aussie) your posts are proving exactly the opposite of what you are trying to show. They are showing the self-centered view of Aussies of what Test pitches should be i.e. ones that the Aussies are used to....

Dyson coaches Sri Lanka, and was complaining about the wicket from that position.......Gilchrist also said it was unsuitable. Dyson commented that both sides had a number of quality batsmen yet neither team managed to score 200......incredibly self-centred that, you're right.

I think the general comments made suggested that you wouldn't see two quality teams be dismissed for low scores on a decent wicket (which kind of dismisses the bouncy Perth wicket thing - Australia will probably score highly yes, but they're not the only ones to do so).

You're an objective observer!?

Get someone to sit you down and read my posts to you. I've never suggested anything other than the fact that the pitch was the same for both teams and there's no reason to complain.

 

[Son Of Coco]

And how did the doubts arise - who has most vocally questioned Murali's action ? And not Brett Lee's ?

The doubts had arisen well before he arrived in Australia for his first tour.....but of course Michael Holding, not being able to think for himself, would have simply followed what was presented to him on TV and in the press!?

The difference is Brett Lee did something straight away..............

I'm not going to get into a debate about Murali though, it's been done before, and I'm not convinced either way as to whether he chucks or not. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt as he's been tested a number of times by people who would know much more about biomechanics than me.