***Official*** India in Australia

[Salamuddin]

And SL's attack > India's, easily.

How so ?

Sri Lanka have a better spinner. I can't see how Sri lanka have a better pace attack though.
India's seamers were good enough to win them tests in JoBurg and dismantle a good quality England batting lineup at Trent Bridge.

I definitely rate their attack overall as better than Sri Lanka's.

 

[Richard]

Eh?

Chaminda Vaas > Zaheer Khan, easily.

Laaasith Maaalinga > all of India's seamers

Farveez Maharoof and Dilhara Fernando = the-rest-of-the-brigade (Irfan Pathan, Rudra Pratap Singh, S Sreesanth, etc.) They're all decidedly average but have their odd moments.

And obviously Murali >>>>>>>>>> Kumble.

Can't see how India's attack comes close to SL's really. If SL couldn't trouble them, it's highly unlikely India's will.

That said, there's also no way that Australia's batsmen can play as well as they did in the opening 2 Tests forever. So India could still bowl them out cheaper than SL managed to.

 

[AKkAz]

I hope for this series that India really take the best squad based on both domestic cricket and recent Test form.

I'd say that Ganguly, Laxman and Jaffer should all not be immune from a drop if they perform badly in Pakistan. Likewise, none of the bowlers barring perhaps Zaheer Khan (and Kumble of course) should have any sort of guaranteed tenure,

For the opening slot, I feel that Virender Sehwag, who has always been a stronger unlimited overs batsman than limited overs batsman will be pushing for a place if he is impressive for Delhi. Gautam Gambhir has performed just as well as Sewhag for Delhi in the past years, the difference being that Gambhir opens for Delhi whilst Sehwag is a middle order batsman for them. His partner Chopra is also a fine batsman but one feels that he is not quite up to the standard to deal with and score off the good line and length of Test match bowling.

For the middle order, Subramaniam Badrinath is a fantastically strong contender with 3887 FC runs at 58.01 (not too far behind Dravid or Tendulkar's pure FC averages). Furthermore, Yuvraj Singh cannot be kept away from the Test team much longer. He is the strongest ODI batsman in the team and rarely is your strongest ODI batsman not good in Tests. In his limited time in Tests, he has performed fine and showed no difficiencies with 830 runs at 33.20. This is not to mention Manoj Tiwary who topped the averages in last year's Ranji Trophy at 99.50 off 10 innings and Uthappa who topped the run scorers list with an average over 50!

For the pace bowling, the competition is much less stiff but with Munaf Patel having already put two very impressive FC performances - his anhiliation of Mumbai in the Irani Trophy and impressive 2 for 29 off 22 against Tamil Nadu. If India choose two spinners, it is anyone's guess who will play out of Chawla (youngest but most talented), Powar (good batsman) and Harbhajan (was superb for Surrey in 4 day cricket),

India cannot afford to stick with the formula who scraped past England. Australia, even post McGrath, Warne and Langer are twice the team that India beat 1-0.

I proclaim an opening combination of Gambhir and Sewhag...both work well in partnership.. Place Ganguly at first drop then place Tendulkar at fourth...Dhoni and Yuvraj should be playing at the next two positions..Have shown solid partnership ability especially in the ODI series..As far as bowlers are concerned: Pathan, Zaheer, RP and have a spinning combination of Singh and Karthik

 

[Athlai]

Eh?

Chaminda Vaas > Zaheer Khan, easily.

Laaasith Maaalinga > all of India's seamers

Farveez Maharoof and Dilhara Fernando = the-rest-of-the-brigade (Irfan Pathan, Rudra Pratap Singh, S Sreesanth, etc.) They're all decidedly average but have their odd moments.

And obviously Murali >>>>>>>>>> Kumble.

Can't see how India's attack comes close to SL's really. If SL couldn't trouble them, it's highly unlikely India's will.

That said, there's also no way that Australia's batsmen can play as well as they did in the opening 2 Tests forever. So India could still bowl them out cheaper than SL managed to.

Copycat.

 

[Prince EWS]

Eh?

Chaminda Vaas > Zaheer Khan, easily.

Laaasith Maaalinga > all of India's seamers

Farveez Maharoof and Dilhara Fernando = the-rest-of-the-brigade (Irfan Pathan, Rudra Pratap Singh, S Sreesanth, etc.) They're all decidedly average but have their odd moments.

And obviously Murali >>>>>>>>>> Kumble.

Can't see how India's attack comes close to SL's really. If SL couldn't trouble them, it's highly unlikely India's will.

That said, there's also no way that Australia's batsmen can play as well as they did in the opening 2 Tests forever. So India could still bowl them out cheaper than SL managed to.

I hate to break it to you Richard, but Chaminda Vaas doesn't have a patch on Zaheer Khan anymore. If they both retired now, we'd most certainly look back on their careers and say "Vaas was the superior bowler" but once we take into account Zaheer's recent rise from mediocrity and Vaas's decline into it, there's no doubt in my mind that Zaheer is the better bowler at the moment. I'm not just talking about form, either; it's been going on for too long in the case of both bowlers.

 

[Pratters]

Was just looking at this thread. The usual dismissing India before the tour of Australia. Are people still living in the 90s? India has improved as a test side and aren't lions at home and lambs abroad any more. Questions over the Indian bowling and whether they can take 20 wickets was raised last time too. They did do that and more in Adelaide last time - win the test (the only team to win a test in Australia in the last 10 years in non dead rubbers).

India has been consistently performing well abroad. Australia are great at home and sure it is not easy to beat them or even draw against them at their own backyard but it isn't impossible. Australian attack without McGrath and Warne cannot be as strong as one with them.

I expect a competitive series between the 2 best sides in the world.

 

[Athlai]

Was just looking at this thread. The usual dismissing India before the tour of Australia. Are people still living in the 90s? India has improved as a test side and aren't lions at home and lambs abroad any more. Questions over the Indian bowling and whether they can take 20 wickets was raised last time too. They did do that and more in Adelaide last time - win the test (the only team to win a test in Australia in the last 10 years).

India has been consistently performing well abroad. Australia are great at home and sure it is not easy to beat them or even draw against them at their own backyard but it isn't impossible. Australian attack without McGrath and Warne cannot be as strong as one with them.

I expect a competitive series between the 2 best sides in the world.

The three factors to consider when looking at India's odds.

1. This is Australia at home. They play their best cricket here.

2. Australia's batting lineup is better.
Hayden and Jaques rock solid openers (though Jaques could get some stick)
Ponting the best in the world.
Hussey centuries galore.
Clarke a fantastic player of spin, one of the top bats in the world.
Symonds arguably the worst of the lot yet still better than several Indians IMO. Gun fielder.
Gilchrist averages more than 50 and will destroy you if given the chance.

3. Australia's attack is better (especially considering the home factor).
A four pronged seam attack may just be the way to go for the Aussies.


An uphill battle for India they need to play past themselves to come away with a series win IMO.

 

[Top_Cat]

And obviously Murali >>>>>>>>>> Kumble.

Not in Australia, Rich. Here, Kumble >>>>>>>>> Murali. Any comparison you can make, Kumble has done better, even on first innings wickets when pitches aren't the best for spin. His first tour wasn't great but his second was just outstanding on even flatter decks.

 

[Jono]

Just looking at Vaas and Zaheer nowadays I can't understand how anyone could think the Vaas that bowled in the first test is a better test bowler. He's just not anymore, simple.

 

[Pratters]

The three factors to consider when looking at India's odds.

1. This is Australia at home. They play their best cricket here.

2. Australia's batting lineup is better.
Hayden and Jaques rock solid openers (though Jaques could get some stick)
Ponting the best in the world.
Hussey centuries galore.
Clarke a fantastic player of spin, one of the top bats in the world.
Symonds arguably the worst of the lot yet still better than several Indians IMO. Gun fielder.
Gilchrist averages more than 50 and will destroy you if given the chance.

3. Australia's attack is better (especially considering the home factor).
A four pronged seam attack may just be the way to go for the Aussies.


An uphill battle for India they need to play past themselves to come away with a series win IMO.

Clarke is a fantastic player of spin and? The India bowling attack abroad, for your information, is fast bowler centric and not spinner centric.

You point Gilchrist's average. He doesn't average more than 50 any more. He averages 49.27 and his record versus India is ordinary. Gilchrist might still be destructive but this is an Indian team which keeps coming back at you. I don't know why you give me the respective repetoires of the Aussie batsmen and all. I do know that they are a strong side.

Regarding the four pronged attack - I will be happier if Australia play four fast bowlers instead of three fast bowlers plus Hogg from an Indian point of view. The faster bowlers would get tired faster (despite Symonds and Clarke being in the team) and Hogg can be dangerous at times given his form.

I keep hearing India will be defeated badly (often thrashed). We heard it when India toured South Africa and when we toured England. Hell, no one expected us to defeat the West Indies in West Indies either. This Indian side doesn't just crumble series after series abroad. I will be very surprised if we don't give a fight in the series.

 

[iamdavid]

That had a lot to do, though, with "just the way the cookie crumbled". You can't say they bowled poorly; the nicks just didn't come. There's no more that they could have done, really..

I didnt say they bowled poorly though, to be completely honest I thought Maharoof bowled out of his skin, Vaas bowled well in Brisbane, Murali bowled as well as he usually does the whole series, Malinga was very good in patches and average in others, and Fernando was rubbish virtually the whole time... And at times in Brisbane and early in Hobart conditions were quite helpful... Yet still the cookie didnt crumble for them...so I dont rate India's chances of the cookie crumbling favourably with an inferior attack on likely even flatter pitches with less favourable weather.

 

[Dasa]

Was just looking at this thread. The usual dismissing India before the tour of Australia. Are people still living in the 90s? India has improved as a test side and aren't lions at home and lambs abroad any more. Questions over the Indian bowling and whether they can take 20 wickets was raised last time too. They did do that and more in Adelaide last time - win the test (the only team to win a test in Australia in the last 10 years).

India has been consistently performing well abroad. Australia are great at home and sure it is not easy to beat them or even draw against them at their own backyard but it isn't impossible. Australian attack without McGrath and Warne cannot be as strong as one with them.

I expect a competitive series between the 2 best sides in the world.

Exactly my sentiments.

 

[iamdavid]

They did do that and more in Adelaide last time - win the test (the only team to win a test in Australia in the last 10 years)

Nar England won at Melbourne in 98/99 and Sydney in 02/03

 

[Pratters]

Nar England won at Melbourne in 98/99 and Sydney in 02/03

Yeah. In tests which weren't dead rubbers...

 

[silentstriker]

First of all, I think India are going to get clubbed. But aside from that:

Chaminda Vaas > Zaheer Khan, easily.

Not anymore. I would certainly take Zaheer over Vaas right now.

Laaasith Maaalinga > all of India's seamers

Yes, probably.

Farveez Maharoof and Dilhara Fernando = the-rest-of-the-brigade (Irfan Pathan, Rudra Pratap Singh, S Sreesanth, etc.) They're all decidedly average but have their odd moments.

I think RP Singh and Sreesanth are better than Maharoof and Fernando. Pathan, I have no idea.

And obviously Murali >>>>>>>>>> Kumble.

No, and in fact its completely the opposite when you're talking about Australia. Australia play Murali much much better than they play Kumble. He averages 27 vs. them overall, and though he averages 40 against them in Australia, he averaged 29 on the last tour.

 

[adharcric]

Eh?

Chaminda Vaas > Zaheer Khan, easily.

Laaasith Maaalinga > all of India's seamers

Farveez Maharoof and Dilhara Fernando = the-rest-of-the-brigade (Irfan Pathan, Rudra Pratap Singh, S Sreesanth, etc.) They're all decidedly average but have their odd moments.

And obviously Murali >>>>>>>>>> Kumble.

Can't see how India's attack comes close to SL's really. If SL couldn't trouble them, it's highly unlikely India's will.

That said, there's also no way that Australia's batsmen can play as well as they did in the opening 2 Tests forever. So India could still bowl them out cheaper than SL managed to.

Looks like you haven't watched these bowlers much of late. Zaheer >>> Vaas, at the moment. Malinga + Fernando = RPS + Sreesanth, at the moment (note that I'm comparing pairs and not individuals, as Malinga is clearly the best of the lot). Murali >>> Kumble of course, but Murali in Australia is a different story.

EDIT: Looks like all of my points have already been made ...

 

[pasag]

I could swear I had the exact same Zaheer argument like two days ago. The guy is criminally underrated, I don't think he's the second coming or anything but if you just watched him bowl since his comeback instead of looking at his cricinfo page...

 

[Laurrz]

Kumble>Murali in Aus

unlike Murali, Kumble will keep trying more and more... if things arent going his way...ive always thought Kumble would do better in Aus than Murali

 

[Jono]

Bit harsh on Murali there, I reckon Murali tried his guts out this tour, he just had no answers.

The Aussies were more determined against him then against Anil last time he toured Aus. That being said, good to see Kumble get his due in this thread. Such a champ.

 

[Laurrz]

yea that came out a bit wrong...

Murali does always try.. its just when u watch Kumble he seems to try ultra hard no matter what the score.. its just his fighting capabilities are so good (not that Muralis is bad)
and u prolly need that on dead wickets and good batsmen