• 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*** India in Australia 2011/12

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
By declaring when they did, it gave them a tricky period before tea, and the final session to get a couple of cheap wickets.

It also gave them the most amount of time to bowl them out, and given they were very very unlikely to make enough to set a remotely decent total, it was all about maximising time to bowl the opposition out when you know you have enough on the board.
If they needed the extra time to bowl them out they were going to end up behind though, which means that although the time was left in the game, it didn't give them more time to win. You can argue the double crack thing although I think it's vastly over-stated in general, but they certainly didn't give themselves more time to win the match as the time left in the match would produce more runs than what the lead was every single time.
 

Son Of Coco

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
For me declarations aren't about backing your side, having what you think is "enough" or getting more recovery time; they're about giving your team more chance to win the match. If a declaration doesn't do that; don't make it.

I'm obviously in a minority there though because Clarke certainly isn't alone in declaring earlier than I thought necessary. It's an ideological difference that I have with a lot of captains; not a specific criticism of Clarke; which is why I didn't actually post about the declaration at the time.
I'd assume, given he'd just scored 300+, Ponting 100+, and Hussey 150, that Clarke thought the pitch wasn't too difficult to bat on and that he'd prefer more time to get India out. India were never going to set Australia a target given how they'd gone so far, and if they did then it'd take so long it would've been a draw anyway. As far as I see it, the declaration did give Australia the maximum chance of victory. Racking up a win on the afternoon of day 4 is far better than going into the last session on the last day needing 3-4 wickets to win and the pressure slowly being applied to the bowlers to get wickets.

We won by an innings and a bit...I have no idea why the timing of the declaration is even an issue. Given we've been in a decent position after the first innings a few times over the past few years and then failed to bowl a team out, I can understand why they gave themselves so much time. If India were going to set us a target to try to win the match, they needed to take risks. Maybe giving them a hint of being able to do so with the extra time meant more chances for the bowlers...as Benchy said, if you don't back your bowlers in with a 400+ lead then you never will.
 
Last edited:

Spark

Global Moderator
I also don't think he was expecting us to bowl like drains for large sections either side of tea and parts of this morning - Pattinson especially (he might not have been aware of the injury). When we did put the squeeze on, wickets fell or looked like falling, predictably.
 

Cabinet96

Hall of Fame Member
Devestating news about Pattinson. Harris was on the field yesterday and has been with the squad. Would he be fit enough for Perth? And what's the state with Cummins? Out for the season?
 

Spark

Global Moderator
Devestating news about Pattinson. Harris was on the field yesterday and has been with the squad. Would he be fit enough for Perth? And what's the state with Cummins? Out for the season?
Harris will play at Perth barring last-minute disasters. Cummins is being treated with silk gloves as best as I can tell, they're definitely not going to rush him back.
 

benchmark00

Request Your Custom Title Now!
If they needed the extra time to bowl them out they were going to end up behind though, which means that although the time was left in the game, it didn't give them more time to win. You can argue the double crack thing although I think it's vastly over-stated in general, but they certainly didn't give themselves more time to win the match as the time left in the match would produce more runs than what the lead was every single time.
Nah there's no way in hell Clarke could accurately predict how fast India were going to score. They had to go worst case scenario and think what if India went at 2 an over. Factor in rain then bam.
 

KungFu_Kallis

International 12th Man
I'd assume, given he'd just scored 300+, Ponting 100+, and Hussey 150, that Clarke thought the pitch wasn't too difficult to bat on and that he'd prefer more time to get India out. India were never going to set Australia a target given how they'd gone so far, and if they did then it'd take so long it would've been a draw anyway. As far as I see it, the declaration did give Australia the maximum chance of victory. Racking up a win on the afternoon of day 4 is far better than going into the last session on the last day needing 3-4 wickets to win and the pressure slowly being applied to the bowlers to get wickets.

We won by an innings and a bit...I have no idea why the timing of the declaration is even an issue. Given we've been in a decent position after the first innings a few times over the past few years and then failed to bowl a team out, I can understand why they gave themselves so much time. If India were going to set us a target to try to win the match, they needed to take risks. Maybe giving them a hint of being able to do so with the extra time meant more chances for the bowlers...
Yes we won... The declaration wasn't really an issue...

But the man DESERVED 400.... poor guy outdid himself for niceness with the team spirit thing.... couldn't have been more warm and fuzzy if he made a cup of tea for MS Dhoni's mummy.... it's like the sorry for walking thing quote all over again
 

Spark

Global Moderator
Nah whether you agree with PEWS or benchmark on whether that time or not was the best time to declare, there's no way the record should have even been the slightest factor in it.

In the end though this may be one of the most insignificant debates I've ever seen on CW.
 

benchmark00

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Let me go on the record and say that I was disappointed that Clarke declared when he did, but that was purely for selfish reasons. I was at the ground and would have loved for him to have a crack at 400 etc, but I've always loved the bloke so whatever.
 

Son Of Coco

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Yes we won... The declaration wasn't really an issue...

But the man DESERVED 400.... poor guy outdid himself for niceness with the team spirit thing.... couldn't have been more warm and fuzzy if he made a cup of tea for MS Dhoni's mummy.... it's like the sorry for walking thing quote all over again
Doubt it was about 'team spirit' at all really, I think he just wanted to win the game. If he scored 400 and India were 9/500 at the end of day 5 he would've been crucified.
 

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
Nah there's no way in hell Clarke could accurately predict how fast India were going to score. They had to go worst case scenario and think what if India went at 2 an over. Factor in rain then bam.
Fair enough. If you think there was a chance of India drawing the game without passing our score if Clarke batted on, then he should have declared. Don't agree with that view but don't have any problem with it.
 

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
I've gone from being dissapointed to simply demoralized. I can handle losing by an innings, but I'm a little ashamed that in this age of professionalism, a Test team can just give up like this.

India need an 'Allan Border moment'. Make it a requirement that you need to be a good fielder to make into the Test side. If you stop running and diving at the end of the day, or because you're down 400 runs, you won't be selected. If you don't keep yourself fit by working out and eating right - you will be dropped, whether you're Sehwag or Rohit Sharma or Zaheer Khan. The replacement might be worse but you can't have people coasting by thinking they're too valuable to drop and they don't have to care about working out or eating right. You may lose more in the short term but it'll send a message all through the levels about what they need to do to earn the Test cap. The body language was depressing - it was the 90s all over again and while I don't think it'll ever get that bad, it's pretty pathetic to see. Makes me embarrassed to call myself a fan of this team. I don't know why Indians keep watching - I am not sure why I do. It's a culture change that's needed.

People who read my posts know that I don't usually get very upset with losses - dissapointed surely but not demoralized. I'm used to dissapointing and they're part of the game. I can accept a bad team and I can accept a team that's always an underdog, but in 2012, I shouldn't have to accept a lazy team. You can't control whether you have the ability to bat like Bradman, but you sure as hell control how many cheeseburgers you stuff down your fat disgusting throat. You can't control when you break your arm, but you sure as hell can control your ability to take those quick singles after being out in the field for 50 overs.
 

Son Of Coco

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I've gone from being dissapointed to simply demoralized. I can handle losing by an innings, but I'm a little ashamed that in this age of professionalism, a Test team can just give up like this.

India need an 'Allan Border moment'. Make it a requirement that you need to be a good fielder to make into the Test side. If you stop running and diving at the end of the day, or because you're down 400 runs, you won't be selected. If you don't keep yourself fit by working out and eating right - you will be dropped, whether you're Sehwag or Rohit Sharma or Zaheer Khan. The replacement might be worse but you can't have people coasting by thinking they're too valuable to drop and they don't have to care about working out or eating right. You may lose more in the short term but it'll send a message all through the levels about what they need to do to earn the Test cap. The body language was depressing - it was the 90s all over again and while I don't think it'll ever get that bad, it's pretty pathetic to see. Makes me embarrassed to call myself a fan of this team. I don't know why Indians keep watching - I am not sure why I do. It's a culture change that's needed.

People who read my posts know that I don't usually get very upset with losses - dissapointed surely but not demoralized. I'm used to dissapointing and they're part of the game. I can accept a bad team and I can accept a team that's always an underdog, but in 2012, I shouldn't have to accept a lazy team. You can't control whether you have the ability to bat like Bradman, but you sure as hell control how many cheeseburgers you stuff down your fat disgusting throat. You can't control when you break your arm, but you sure as hell can control your ability to take those quick singles after being out in the field for 50 overs.
It seems to me that India want to improve, but they don't want to actually change anything they're doing to do so...if someone comes in and suggests big changes then it ruffles some feathers and nothing happens. It's something I can relate to a little as it basically describes the Korean English education system :)
 
Last edited:

Top