***Official*** India in Australia 2011/12

[Uppercut]

That is true in some respects but you will notice how good fielders get fat and lazy and become complacent too. Raina, Rohit Sharma, etc...once they get the call up, their fitness falls by the wayside. Yes, a few players maintain it, but too many people are carried. And that doesn't even begin to address the defeatist attitude that seems to take hold.

It's got to be a result of the senior players. Why should you put the effort and energy into improving your ground fielding when guys like Sehwag and Tendulkar are so lethargic? Especially bearing in mind that those are the players every young batsman in the country looks up to.

 

[Prince EWS]

Who would've though a man who 22 FC fifties and just 6 tons before being selected would be the next North?

He really does just look so ridiculously spaced out when he first gets to the crease sometimes, though. You can just tell he's going to go cheaply sometimes.

 

[Burgey]

It was bad enough putting up with it at number six, it's a nightmare in a number three

 

[Burgey]

It's got to be a result of the senior players. Why should you put the effort and energy into improving your ground fielding when guys like Sehwag and Tendulkar are so lethargic? Especially bearing in mind that those are the players every young batsman in the country looks up to.

Tendulkar isn't a bad fielder tbf

 

[Ruckus]

What's the actually reason for Marsh's lethargy? Is it anxiety or something?

 

[Son Of Coco]

****'s averaging three ffs.

You're flattering him, I think he's actually averaging 1!

 

[Furball]

On the Clarke declaration, there's a few factors at play IMO:

The game at the time wasn't really going anywhere and the only 2 reasons to continue batting were to get the lead past 500, and for Clarke to have a crack at Lara's record/Hussey getting a crack at a double ton. The first point is pretty much irrelevant, as Australia had piled on enough for the lead to be academic, the second should always come secondary to the needs of the team. There's a time and a place for allowing an individual to reach a milestone - declaring on Ponting when he was in the 90s would have been a poor move - but it wasn't needed in this instance. It also allows Clarke to properly introduce a "team first" culture - no-one in the future can have a moan about being declared on when Clarke himself has sacrificed a shot at the Test batting record.

I reckon the Cape Town innings also played a subconscious role as well. No way was Clarke prepared to risk his 300 not being part of a match winning effort after what he said about his 151 in Cape Town. He might have erred on the side of caution, but when you're more than 450 runs to the good I'd be backing my bowlers to ensure that you won't be needed to bat again.

 

[benchmark00]

Tendulkar isn't a bad fielder tbf

Yep, beat me to it.

Would be in India's top two or three.

 

[Burgey]

You're flattering him, I think he's actually averaging 1!

Sorry. Quite right. Mixed his aggregate with his average.

Tbf they're disarmingly close.

 

[Spark]

On the Clarke declaration, there's a few factors at play IMO:

The game at the time wasn't really going anywhere and the only 2 reasons to continue batting were to get the lead past 500, and for Clarke to have a crack at Lara's record/Hussey getting a crack at a double ton. The first point is pretty much irrelevant, as Australia had piled on enough for the lead to be academic, the second should always come secondary to the needs of the team. There's a time and a place for allowing an individual to reach a milestone - declaring on Ponting when he was in the 90s would have been a poor move - but it wasn't needed in this instance. It also allows Clarke to properly introduce a "team first" culture - no-one in the future can have a moan about being declared on when Clarke himself has sacrificed a shot at the Test batting record.

I reckon the Cape Town innings also played a subconscious role as well. No way was Clarke prepared to risk his 300 not being part of a match winning effort after what he said about his 151 in Cape Town. He might have erred on the side of caution, but when you're more than 450 runs to the good I'd be backing my bowlers to ensure that you won't be needed to bat again.

Definitely think the Cape Town point could well be a factor, yeah. Said so myself yesterday.

 

[Burgey]

On the Clarke declaration, there's a few factors at play IMO:

The game at the time wasn't really going anywhere and the only 2 reasons to continue batting were to get the lead past 500, and for Clarke to have a crack at Lara's record/Hussey getting a crack at a double ton. The first point is pretty much irrelevant, as Australia had piled on enough for the lead to be academic, the second should always come secondary to the needs of the team. There's a time and a place for allowing an individual to reach a milestone - declaring on Ponting when he was in the 90s would have been a poor move - but it wasn't needed in this instance. It also allows Clarke to properly introduce a "team first" culture - no-one in the future can have a moan about being declared on when Clarke himself has sacrificed a shot at the Test batting record.

I reckon the Cape Town innings also played a subconscious role as well. No way was Clarke prepared to risk his 300 not being part of a match winning effort after what he said about his 151 in Cape Town. He might have erred on the side of caution, but when you're more than 450 runs to the good I'd be backing my bowlers to ensure that you won't be needed to bat again.

Brian Charles would have batted on.

Just saying.

 

[Uppercut]

Tendulkar isn't a bad fielder tbf

I wouldn't say any of them are bad fielders, apart from maybe Dravid. They all hold their catches, which is the important thing.

But they're lethargic fielders. When they're at cover or mid-on they seem totally indifferent to whether the batsman takes a single, even when the ball is hit straight at them.

 

[Spark]

It's got to be a result of the senior players. Why should you put the effort and energy into improving your ground fielding when guys like Sehwag and Tendulkar are so lethargic? Especially bearing in mind that those are the players every young batsman in the country looks up to.

Sehwag was actually one of India's best fielders IMO - stopped a few certain fours at gully with divind saves.

Helped that he was at gully ofc

 

[benchmark00]

I wouldn't say any of them are bad fielders, apart from maybe Dravid. They all hold their catches, which is the important thing.

But they're lethargic fielders. When they're at cover or mid-on they seem totally indifferent to whether the batsman takes a single, even when the ball is hit straight at them.

Tendulkar doesn't field at covers though, and is pretty energetic when he gets a boundary riding task. Moves bloody well for a 60 year old.

Sehwag is horrible though in the ring. Laxman not much better.

 

[Spark]

Tendulkar isn't a bad fielder tbf

Did you see his expression after catching Ponting? Looked seriously pissed off.

 

[Nate]

India in Australia 2011-12: Injured James Pattinson out of series | Cricket News | Australia v India | ESPN Cricinfo

Lol Mr Clarke... 1. You call India's run rate of 3.60 as restricting the scoring and building pressure? Fact is they got themselves out most of the time due to poor concentration, and possibly some of them are just sadly on the decline.

2. Well played for 329* but I think you may regret for the rest of your life declaring when you did... you prefer to have an extra day off than be the number 1 le...gend... even 66% of oz viewers voted on the vodafone app that they would have gone for record.

3. I think a lot of people will be happy this pattinson guy is injured... he is the brand new (and one of the worst) example of the dark side of ozzy - yobbo boorish behaviour. No respect for the game of cricket, opposition, or even umpires or own team mates (e.g. when a catch was dropped). Good riddance yobbo please come back when you have grown up some more. And stop trying to act like an even badder version of brett lee and peter siddle, this snarling is just not a good look.

 

[NUFAN]

James Pattinson, ruled out of the series, that's a blow. It makes the selectors job easier though bringing in Ryan Harris into the XI. I wonder if Mickey Arthur thought about giving Michael Beer a match instead of Lyon since it's at his home ground? It's not something I would have done, but I wouldn't have been surprised if the old selectors had done it.

 

[Daemon]

Think they may have gone with an all pace attack if he didn't get injured.

 

[Crazy Sam]

I wonder if Mickey Arthur thought about giving Michael Beer a match instead of Lyon since it's at his home ground?

It'll be interesting to see how Harris goes, we don't have much of a recent form guide for him.

 

[NUFAN]

It's not completely out of the question though for Arthur the former WA coach to think that the reserve spinner on Australia's most recent tour could perform better than Lyon's 2/180 (wickets of Sharma and Yadav) so far this series.

The change isn't necessary, but it's a 'funky' decision that the old selectors would have probably made with much annoyance from the general public.