*Official* - Road to India in England 2011

[Bun]

Maybe you're looking and comparing their overall careers, but if you compare the players in English conditions in the recent past then they aren't really in different leagues imo. Swann>Harbhajan atm, and the English pace attack is good enough such that our best pacer might be the 3rd seamer for them.

Swann is just overhyped and we all saw how he's dealt with by the Indian batsmen in the WC. I do agree there isn't much of distance between him and Harby though but come on, for a lineup that has despatched the likes of Warne and Murali to the cleaners, frankly, Swann is just going to be business as usual.

Massive respect for the guy though. Anyone tosses it up in today's era deserves respect, **** Harby, he used to be great when he used to do that.

Yes, God forbid people rate a side that hasn't lost a series in over two years

We just went and beat Aus by an innings three times. I don't care how much they might have fallen, that's stand up and take note form. And no-one ever comes here and dominates us these days, especially with the quality we have now.

England's bowlers are a class above India's. In England, you need good bowlers to compete. We will win, we'll win well.

Nobody is discounting your innings wins in Australia. But fact is that Australian team is now ranked no.5 in test cricket, below yours. How many times have that happened in the past? Beating this Australia is nothing as compared to beating this Indian side.

Anyway this illusion of "being in form" was blown to smithereens during the WC, when they came out as the worst bowling lineup. I know ODIs can't be directly compared to tests, but if you take history, a dominant test side has been successful in ODIs as well.

Good luck on you thinking your bowlers are a class ahead of India's. Please be around when I quote this come September

 

[Spark]

What is the smiley about?

I do know they're reliant on Zak. All champ teams are reliant on one or two top class performers. What's so wrong with that?

And with a pissweak bowling lineup as they're reputed to be, India IS no.1 in tests and WC winner.

Yes, because they've been able to rely on their batting lineup to bail them out whenever the **** really hits the fan.

The thing about the English attack is that they don't bowl bad overs. At all. Seriously on Boxing Day you could count the number of bad balls on your fingers. They kept Ricky Ponting - one of the finest players to have ever lived - and Michael Clarke - one of the most consistent Test bats in the preceding four years and a standout in the last series - to under 30. In a way they're better than SA's attack because with SA you knew if you could sit out Steyn and Morkel (no easy feat, granted), you could cash in on the greatly inferior change bowlers. We found out to our cost that you can't do that with England.
This is not to say England have weaknesses (prone to collapse, weakness vs. spin, bad on fast decks) but I don't know if India can exploit it.

As I said in the earlier thread, India are in my books very slight favorites because they have an awesome batting lineup, but only slight.

 

[Bun]

Wow, that's news to me.

Aye,

Sidin Vadukut: What does India have to do to get some respect? | Page 2 | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[Spark]

FWIW I don't think Swann will have a statistically brilliant series. For one, India's lineup doesn't have enough LHers and two, they're India vs. spin. He'll be best off doing the same job he did down here - bottling up and end and chipping in every now and then, whilst letting the quicks rotate..

 

[Bun]

Yes, because they've been able to rely on their batting lineup to bail them out whenever the **** really hits the fan.

The thing about the English attack is that they don't bowl bad overs. At all. Seriously on Boxing Day you could count the number of bad balls on your fingers. They kept Ricky Ponting - one of the finest players to have ever lived - and Michael Clarke - one of the most consistent Test bats in the preceding four years and a standout in the last series - to under 30. In a way they're better than SA's attack because with SA you knew if you could sit out Steyn and Morkel (no easy feat, granted), you could cash in on the greatly inferior change bowlers. We found out to our cost that you can't do that with England.
This is not to say England have weaknesses (prone to collapse, weakness vs. spin, bad on fast decks) but I don't know if India can exploit it.

As I said in the earlier thread, India are in my books very slight favorites because they have an awesome batting lineup, but only slight.

Massive lol at that.

first of all, why make those two sit out in the first place? When you compare two bowling sides, you compare their best attacks against each other, not their second XIs.

I do ackowledge your points that they dominated the Aussie side. Nobody is denying that. But the quality and standing of the Aussie side was nowhere near the 07 side.

 

[Spark]

Errrrr

Way to completely miss the point. By "sit out" I meant see off their spells without losing your wicket. Which is possible.

 

[Bun]

FWIW I don't think Swann will have a statistically brilliant series. For one, India's lineup doesn't have enough LHers and two, they're India vs. spin. He'll be best off doing the same job he did down here - bottling up and end and chipping in every now and then, whilst letting the quicks rotate..

Yep,

but going by precedence, expect him to be targeted and smashed out off the park by the Indian batsmen. I am sure he'll not be allowed to settle in and give in his quota of tight overs.

 

[Spark]

Yep,

but going by precedence, expect him to be targeted and smashed out off the park by the Indian batsmen. I am sure he'll not be allowed to settle in and give in his quota of tight overs.

We tried that. And were actually very successful with it.

Didn't help.

 

[Bun]

Errrrr

Way to completely miss the point. By "sit out" I meant see off their spells without losing your wicket. Which is possible.

Again too much respect to the English change bowlers on the back of what? 1 series?

I do agree that in Anderson and Swann, they've two World class bowlers who can run amok on their days. I do fear Anderson as he has demonstrated in the past he can cause trouble for this batting lineup. For me he'll be the bowler to be carefully dealt with. Once that is done, I realistically don't see any other bowler causing massive problems for a batting lineup of this calibre.

 

[GIMH]

Bun, your posts in this thread are all ****, is this what we can expect all summer long?

 

[Bun]

We tried that. And were actually very successful with it.

Didn't help.

Sorry to break this,

but Australia <<<<<<<<<< India when it comes to dealing with spinners. Atleast this side.

 

[Bun]

Bun, your posts in this thread are all ****, is this what we can expect all summer long?

would help if you were more specific. Can't please all though.

 

[Spark]

Again too much respect to the English change bowlers on the back of what? 1 series?

I do agree that in Anderson and Swann, they've two World class bowlers who can run amok on their days. I do fear Anderson as he has demonstrated in the past he can cause trouble for this batting lineup. For me he'll be the bowler to be carefully dealt with. Once that is done, I realistically don't see any other bowler causing massive problems for a batting lineup of this calibre.

Assuming a first pick attack of:

Anderson
Swann
Tremlett
Broad

You have Bresnan, Onions, Finn (who averages something truly absurd still, although he bowls a hell of a lot of four-balls) on the side.

The thing about the English attack is they're disciplined. They don't rely on their wrecking ball in Anderson.

 

[Bun]

Assuming a first pick attack of:

Anderson
Swann
Tremlett
Broad

You have Bresnan, Onions, Finn (who averages something truly absurd still, although he bowls a hell of a lot of four-balls) on the side.

The thing about the English attack is they're disciplined. They don't rely on their wrecking ball in Anderson.

With all due respect, Tremlett and Broad aren't going to make Indian batsmen have sleepless nights. Not even the change bowlers in Onions and the like (assuming they're going to be selected of course, Onions is coming back from a long layloff isn't he?).

Please, my point is clear and precise, Australian batsmen (the current lot atleast) aren't the benchmark when it comes to measuring the Indian batsmen. They're a different breed altogether.

 

[Spark]

The Indian batting lineup isn't exactly invincible either, you know.

 

[Daemon]

Please, my point is clear and precise, Australian batsmen (the current lot atleast) aren't the benchmark when it comes to measuring the Indian batsmen. They're a different breed altogether.

Forgetting the closely fought recent 2 test series at home are we?

 

[Bun]

The Indian batting lineup isn't exactly invincible either, you know.

They're heads and shoulders above the rest of the world atm...

 

[Bun]

Forgetting the closely fought recent 2 test series at home are we?

The one which we whitewashed 2-0?

 

[vcs]

Aye,

Sidin Vadukut: What does India have to do to get some respect? | Page 2 | ESPN Cricinfo

Haha, nice article, especially the "Indian cricket was ritually human-sacrificed at Bukhatir's Pakistani Altar of Friday Humiliation in Sharjah" line. Couldn't be farther from the truth about the chest-thumping Indian media, though.

 

[Spark]

And if Billy Bowden wasn't such a blind ****, or Smith had hit, would have been drawn at a minimum. Going on about a whitewash makes you look a bit one-eyed to say the least.