*Official* India in Australia Thread

[Mister Wright]

IMO India should make VVS Laxman and Rahul Dravid watch tapes on how they dismantled Australia at Kolkatta and prove they can score runs and this attack is much weaker then that one.

Or they could do like the New Zealand Warriors and pay tens of thousands of people to go to the game so it can feel more like home.

 

[rajat]

I think aus. selectors have some obsession with warne. tat's the reason they are not giving Macgill a chance. they know if he performs well, it wont be that easy for them to take warnie into the side.

 

[iamdavid]

Or they could do like the New Zealand Warriors and pay tens of thousands of people to go to the game so it can feel more like home.

Or copy the Springboks & make them run around naked & beat each other up for a week

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

IMO India should make VVS Laxman and Rahul Dravid watch tapes on how they dismantled Australia at Kolkatta and prove they can score runs and this attack is much weaker then that one.

But that was done on a dead wicket. Rather they should look at tapes of them scoring runs against Australia in more significant bowling conditions (if such tapes exist - too lazy to research).

 

[bennyr]

I think aus. selectors have some obsession with warne. tat's the reason they are not giving Macgill a chance. they know if he performs well, it wont be that easy for them to take warnie into the side.

I think the obsession is more along the lines of selecting pseudo all-rounders i.e. Hogg, because he can bat a bit or Katich because he can bowl a bit.

IMO it's a dangerous ploy, and if they go into tests with Katich as their major spinner and a still understrength pace attack we could see a more even contest than we expect.

Cheers,
Ben

 

[Gaijin-san]

Well in that case I say in with Katich for Brisbane! The sooner he fails the sooner... Well, you know.

 

[garage flower]

IMO India should make VVS Laxman and Rahul Dravid watch tapes on how they dismantled Australia at Kolkatta and prove they can score runs and this attack is much weaker then that one.

I think the major concern is with the bowling. The batsmen clearly have the potential to trouble a below strength Aussie attack, but there's little cause to be optimistic about the chances of India's bowlers making a dent.

 

[bennyr]

Well in that case I say in with Katich for Brisbane! The sooner he fails the sooner... Well, you know.

But the point is if he gets carted around the Gabba (as is to be expected - he averages over 36 bowling in first class), it's hardly fair to consider this a failure.

This is great for Clarke (except that the same fate may await him if it goes this way), but it ain't real good for Australia. I just think that if it's a bad idea to include Clarke or Katich on the strength of their bowling (or Hogg on the strength of his batting, for that matter) if there are better specialised options available, and at this point I reckon there is in MacGill.

 

[Neil Pickup]

I can see the sense in that selection to be honest - there are very few spinners who have troubled India of late, and Bracken and Williams both caused them trouble in the TVS Cup.

 

[TendulkarFan]

I agree with NP, India never gets troubled by the spinners. Playing four fast bowlers on a bouncy pitch will be tougher for Indians than playing a spinner on any kind of pitch.

Australia's game is based on pure pressure which creates one problem: if the Indians are able to play past Gillespie with confidence, the other bowlers may not cause a major headache for them. This is where a lack of variety (i.e., lack of genuine spin) may hurt the Aussies.

If it's up to me though, I'd take four fast bowlers because picking MacGill would be playing to India's strength. And more often than not, Australia are relentless in applying pressure to the opposition so the Indians would have to build up very well after fending off Gillespie.

Question for all you Aussies out there: how is the Brisbane wicket expected to change over the course of five days?

 

[marc71178]

Yeah I read that article, I think it's disgraceful how much faith Trevor Hohns has in Simon Katich's bowling. He's really not that great.

Reading the article it suggests to me that they feel the 4 pacemen is enough to get the Indian's out, and having a spin bowling number 6 as the back-up makes 4 seamers a better option (with a bit of variety in them) then playing 3 and MacGill.

 

[marc71178]

IMO it's a dangerous ploy, and if they go into tests with Katich as their major spinner and a still understrength pace attack we could see a more even contest than we expect.

I'm not so sure, they're playing 4 seamers. One could argue that with only 3, that would be understrength, so the 4th adds variety (left armer) that exploits a potential Indian weakness.

The way I read it is that Katich is back-up (as Lehmann has been for the last 12 months or so)

 

[marc71178]

Well in that case I say in with Katich for Brisbane! The sooner he fails the sooner... Well, you know.

Love will get his place back (or Lehmann, or even B C-H)

 

[Salamuddin]

Rik's accuses me of trotting out old excuses ...
that's a laugh...

What about "oh our England fast bowling boys -- they were so inexperienced
when they played India"

Get over it, Rik mate -- when India toured England, none of their seamers had every played in England before.
And when England toured India, both Khan and Nehra were still recovering from injuries and didn't play -- and the Poms still couldn't win !!!

The inexperience issue works both ways.

 

[bennyr]

I'm not so sure, they're playing 4 seamers. One could argue that with only 3, that would be understrength, so the 4th adds variety (left armer) that exploits a potential Indian weakness.

The way I read it is that Katich is back-up (as Lehmann has been for the last 12 months or so)

You're right about Katich being back-up, but the thing that concerns me is that with Williams and Bracken in the side it lacks test experience. In that circumstance I would hate to think that the only option for variety is Katich.

Even considering Bracken's being a left armer as significant variety, it still leaves the attack somewhat inexperienced.

One would think that Williams is in, so the selectorial conundrum becomes MacGill vs Bracken, and given the balance of the attack and notwithstanding the ability of the Indians to handle spin, I'd pick MacGill.

But Trevor Hohns rarely listens to me anyway.

Cheers,
Ben

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

My XI would be:

ML Hayden
JL Langer
RT Ponting
DR Martyn
SR Waugh *
AC Gilchrist +
AR Bichel
BA Williams
JN Gillespie
NW Bracken
SCG MacGill

Yes a long tail, but surely Australia can afford it. If you are playing MacGill, he should not play at the expense of a seamer considering the opposition.

 

[bennyr]

I like the look of that team, Mr M.

Playing Bracken needs to be a priority given that he is the only bowler that you could seriously consider to be young, and Australia needs to be looking that way.

With the injury worries over anyone who is even remotely considered to be an Australian bowling hopeful, I think five bowlers is probably the smartest option.

 

[Rich2001]

AR Bichel
BA Williams
JN Gillespie
NW Bracken
SCG MacGill

Yes a long tail, but surely Australia can afford it.

It's not particulary a tail is it anyway... Bichel, Gillespie are both no mugs with a bat in their hands.. MacGill is a rabbit, not to sure on the other two. Can't be worse than McGrath with the bat

 

[Gaijin-san]

Williams is an 'exciting tailender', Bracken is a bit of a rabbit, but internationally he has staved off dismissal as yet.

Having seen the way Bracken and MacGill bowled in contrast today, the selectors might still be pressured to keep MacGill.

 

[rajat]

What's the update for today's match .