Australia v India
-
@NTA yeah sure, I think so too, especially with Lyon, but I can see why he didn't.
But yeah good point. We just saw Aussie out beaten by a team who basically stared them down and out believed them. That is rare - God knows we've failed abysmally everytime we've tried it, world cup final, last test series
Edit: snap!
@Siam said in Australia v India:
@NTA yeah sure, I think so too, especially with Lyon, but I can see why he didn't.
But yeah good point. We just saw Aussie out beaten by a team who basically stared them down and out believed them. That is rare - God knows we've failed abysmally everytime we've tried it, world cup final, last test series
Edit: snap!
Just like Luke Skywalker trying to lift his sinking X wing, when it comes to playing Australia in big cricket games we don't believe
-
@MN5 said in Australia v India:
Yeah I dunno, they've been quite shite in the past and they've had about the same amount of people to select from.
Really?
Look at the last decade:
I count 20 series wins out of 30, and 1 drawn. That isn't too shabby, even if they've struggled in swing-friendly New Zealand
(in the same period, NZ haven't won in India).Over the same period, Australia have won 15 series from 33 (or 34) with 4 drawn. The days of Steve Waugh's legendary sides is long gone.
They've obviously got the coaching set up right.......they've always had the batsmen but they actually have some decent fast bowlers for once as well.
And I think that is actually a product of realising their weaknesses away from home. In England against the Duke, and on green seamers in New Zealand, they weren't doing that well. In Australia we provided them roads to bat on but their bowling wasn't consistent enough.
But it is definitely improving.
@NTA said in Australia v India:
@MN5 said in Australia v India:
Yeah I dunno, they've been quite shite in the past and they've had about the same amount of people to select from.
Really?
Look at the last decade:I count 20 series wins out of 30, and 1 drawn. That isn't too shabby, even if they've struggled in swing-friendly New Zealand
(in the same period, NZ haven't won in India).Over the same period, Australia have won 15 series from 33 (or 34) with 4 drawn. The days of Steve Waugh's legendary sides is long gone.
They've obviously got the coaching set up right.......they've always had the batsmen but they actually have some decent fast bowlers for once as well.
And I think that is actually a product of realising their weaknesses away from home. In England against the Duke, and on green seamers in New Zealand, they weren't doing that well. In Australia we provided them roads to bat on but their bowling wasn't consistent enough.
But it is definitely improving.
It's weird mate but perhaps there isn't so much swing in NZ of late as one would assume. In the Dravid years when we were shit, the cold and green tops made them give up - so much so that they paid us to cut the grass - true story!
Now we have Aussie type drop ins (or, more accurately, you have kiwi made drop ins) and they're really hard which affects the ball.But yeah, we have good success, well did last time. I have a theory that they drop their guard against us. The games are played in the most ridiculously friendly manner with nary a sledge and heaps of fielders running up to shake hands with outgoing batsmen. Off field stories are all about the tourists having dinners with expats and it's back slapping and compliments all tour.
So there you go mate, stop being over competitive fluffybunnies and you'll sweep them 2 nil!
-
@NTA said in Australia v India:
@MN5 said in Australia v India:
Yeah I dunno, they've been quite shite in the past and they've had about the same amount of people to select from.
Really?
Look at the last decade:I count 20 series wins out of 30, and 1 drawn. That isn't too shabby, even if they've struggled in swing-friendly New Zealand
(in the same period, NZ haven't won in India).Over the same period, Australia have won 15 series from 33 (or 34) with 4 drawn. The days of Steve Waugh's legendary sides is long gone.
They've obviously got the coaching set up right.......they've always had the batsmen but they actually have some decent fast bowlers for once as well.
And I think that is actually a product of realising their weaknesses away from home. In England against the Duke, and on green seamers in New Zealand, they weren't doing that well. In Australia we provided them roads to bat on but their bowling wasn't consistent enough.
But it is definitely improving.
It's weird mate but perhaps there isn't so much swing in NZ of late as one would assume. In the Dravid years when we were shit, the cold and green tops made them give up - so much so that they paid us to cut the grass - true story!
Now we have Aussie type drop ins (or, more accurately, you have kiwi made drop ins) and they're really hard which affects the ball.But yeah, we have good success, well did last time. I have a theory that they drop their guard against us. The games are played in the most ridiculously friendly manner with nary a sledge and heaps of fielders running up to shake hands with outgoing batsmen. Off field stories are all about the tourists having dinners with expats and it's back slapping and compliments all tour.
So there you go mate, stop being over competitive fluffybunnies and you'll sweep them 2 nil!
-
God this might be gay but I just see a tiny bit of similarity in the slight decline of this aus team and our ABs after such dominance over a long time. Players pretty much the same but now good teams are doing to them what they dined out on for ages.
Declining empires? Probably reaching but something's not the same in both teams
@Siam said in Australia v India:
God this might be gay but I just see a tiny bit of similarity in the slight decline of this aus team and our ABs after such dominance over a long time. Players pretty much the same but now good teams are doing to them what they dined out on for ages.
Declining empires? Probably reaching but something's not the same in both teams
I'm inclined to think for almost opposite reasons - or maybe the same reasons, but comparisons in different spheres .
India has been an underperformer for almost forever - with a massive population, but fuck all resources. Now they've harnessed their financial and institutional resources - used the IPL to develop their players - and they've become super strong in depth. If they carry on like this it will be increasingly difficult to beat these bastards!
ABs have punched above their weight because other countries (i.e. England, maybe France) have failed to properly harness their resources. If and when they ever properly do, we might be in deep schtumm.
Overall, it's a pretty amazing outcome given that the last two tests you would have expected the world-class Australian attack to blast out the Indians in the fourth innings. Got to ask the question as to why that didn't happen - and I don't really think the answer is in the quality of the bowling.
-
@Siam said in Australia v India:
So there you go mate, stop being over competitive fluffybunnies and you'll sweep them 2 nil!
ahem 4-nil. We play real Test match series against India. Not this nuffy 2-game, toss-a-coin crap
@NTA said in Australia v India:
@Siam said in Australia v India:
So there you go mate, stop being over competitive fluffybunnies and you'll sweep them 2 nil!
ahem 4-nil. We play real Test match series against India. Not this nuffy 2-game, toss-a-coin crap
Sure, but we win!
-
@Siam said in Australia v India:
God this might be gay but I just see a tiny bit of similarity in the slight decline of this aus team and our ABs after such dominance over a long time. Players pretty much the same but now good teams are doing to them what they dined out on for ages.
Declining empires? Probably reaching but something's not the same in both teams
I'm inclined to think for almost opposite reasons - or maybe the same reasons, but comparisons in different spheres .
India has been an underperformer for almost forever - with a massive population, but fuck all resources. Now they've harnessed their financial and institutional resources - used the IPL to develop their players - and they've become super strong in depth. If they carry on like this it will be increasingly difficult to beat these bastards!
ABs have punched above their weight because other countries (i.e. England, maybe France) have failed to properly harness their resources. If and when they ever properly do, we might be in deep schtumm.
Overall, it's a pretty amazing outcome given that the last two tests you would have expected the world-class Australian attack to blast out the Indians in the fourth innings. Got to ask the question as to why that didn't happen - and I don't really think the answer is in the quality of the bowling.
-
@Chris-B i think that's the other side of the coin to our "decline", resources.
Sheffield shield was everything once. Now it's shoehorned in twice in a season. That's becoming obvious when looking for new test talent.
@Siam Yeah - poaching of resources has also had an effect on the ABs. The Charles Piatau and Steven Luatua effect.
And for Oz - it is quite strange that they're having to field people like Wade, Burns and Harris.
Maybe that's why they've had to prepare pitches that haven't deteriorated as much as they've needed?
-
@Siam Yeah - poaching of resources has also had an effect on the ABs. The Charles Piatau and Steven Luatua effect.
And for Oz - it is quite strange that they're having to field people like Wade, Burns and Harris.
Maybe that's why they've had to prepare pitches that haven't deteriorated as much as they've needed?
@Chris-B said in Australia v India:
@Siam Yeah - poaching of resources has also had an effect on the ABs. The Charles Piatau and Steven Luatua effect.
And for Oz - it is quite strange that they're having to field people like Wade, Burns and Harris.
Maybe that's why they've had to prepare pitches that haven't deteriorated as much as they've needed?
Very telling that they put so much on the wunderkind after going back to failed players as you mentioned. Khawaja popped up in dispatches too. And yet they blew off investments like Kurtis Patterson ( century maker i think) and Bancroft and Head. The cupboard is as bare as it's ever been. 20/20 side has oodles to pick from though.
-
@Chris-B said in Australia v India:
@Siam Yeah - poaching of resources has also had an effect on the ABs. The Charles Piatau and Steven Luatua effect.
And for Oz - it is quite strange that they're having to field people like Wade, Burns and Harris.
Maybe that's why they've had to prepare pitches that haven't deteriorated as much as they've needed?
Very telling that they put so much on the wunderkind after going back to failed players as you mentioned. Khawaja popped up in dispatches too. And yet they blew off investments like Kurtis Patterson ( century maker i think) and Bancroft and Head. The cupboard is as bare as it's ever been. 20/20 side has oodles to pick from though.
@Siam said in Australia v India:
@Chris-B said in Australia v India:
@Siam Yeah - poaching of resources has also had an effect on the ABs. The Charles Piatau and Steven Luatua effect.
And for Oz - it is quite strange that they're having to field people like Wade, Burns and Harris.
Maybe that's why they've had to prepare pitches that haven't deteriorated as much as they've needed?
Very telling that they put so much on the wunderkind after going back to failed players as you mentioned. Khawaja popped up in dispatches too. And yet they blew off investments like Kurtis Patterson ( century maker i think) and Bancroft and Head. The cupboard is as bare as it's ever been. 20/20 side has oodles to pick from though.
No it’s not. They still get more players in an ANZAC team than we do and some of the teams of the 80s were pretty bad when they had Border and that was about it.
-
@Siam said in Australia v India:
@Chris-B said in Australia v India:
@Siam Yeah - poaching of resources has also had an effect on the ABs. The Charles Piatau and Steven Luatua effect.
And for Oz - it is quite strange that they're having to field people like Wade, Burns and Harris.
Maybe that's why they've had to prepare pitches that haven't deteriorated as much as they've needed?
Very telling that they put so much on the wunderkind after going back to failed players as you mentioned. Khawaja popped up in dispatches too. And yet they blew off investments like Kurtis Patterson ( century maker i think) and Bancroft and Head. The cupboard is as bare as it's ever been. 20/20 side has oodles to pick from though.
No it’s not. They still get more players in an ANZAC team than we do and some of the teams of the 80s were pretty bad when they had Border and that was about it.
@MN5 said in Australia v India:
@Siam said in Australia v India:
@Chris-B said in Australia v India:
@Siam Yeah - poaching of resources has also had an effect on the ABs. The Charles Piatau and Steven Luatua effect.
And for Oz - it is quite strange that they're having to field people like Wade, Burns and Harris.
Maybe that's why they've had to prepare pitches that haven't deteriorated as much as they've needed?
Very telling that they put so much on the wunderkind after going back to failed players as you mentioned. Khawaja popped up in dispatches too. And yet they blew off investments like Kurtis Patterson ( century maker i think) and Bancroft and Head. The cupboard is as bare as it's ever been. 20/20 side has oodles to pick from though.
No it’s not. They still get more players in an ANZAC team than we do and some of the teams of the 80s were pretty bad when they had Border and that was about it.
Even then there was usually a David Boon, Geoff Marsh, or a Craig McDermott floating around alongside Border, and they nabbed the 87 World Cup.
-
@Siam said in Australia v India:
@Chris-B said in Australia v India:
@Siam Yeah - poaching of resources has also had an effect on the ABs. The Charles Piatau and Steven Luatua effect.
And for Oz - it is quite strange that they're having to field people like Wade, Burns and Harris.
Maybe that's why they've had to prepare pitches that haven't deteriorated as much as they've needed?
Very telling that they put so much on the wunderkind after going back to failed players as you mentioned. Khawaja popped up in dispatches too. And yet they blew off investments like Kurtis Patterson ( century maker i think) and Bancroft and Head. The cupboard is as bare as it's ever been. 20/20 side has oodles to pick from though.
No it’s not. They still get more players in an ANZAC team than we do and some of the teams of the 80s were pretty bad when they had Border and that was about it.
-
@MN5 said in Australia v India:
@Siam said in Australia v India:
@Chris-B said in Australia v India:
@Siam Yeah - poaching of resources has also had an effect on the ABs. The Charles Piatau and Steven Luatua effect.
And for Oz - it is quite strange that they're having to field people like Wade, Burns and Harris.
Maybe that's why they've had to prepare pitches that haven't deteriorated as much as they've needed?
Very telling that they put so much on the wunderkind after going back to failed players as you mentioned. Khawaja popped up in dispatches too. And yet they blew off investments like Kurtis Patterson ( century maker i think) and Bancroft and Head. The cupboard is as bare as it's ever been. 20/20 side has oodles to pick from though.
No it’s not. They still get more players in an ANZAC team than we do and some of the teams of the 80s were pretty bad when they had Border and that was about it.
Even then there was usually a David Boon, Geoff Marsh, or a Craig McDermott floating around alongside Border, and they nabbed the 87 World Cup.
-
@MN5 said in Australia v India:
@Siam said in Australia v India:
@Chris-B said in Australia v India:
@Siam Yeah - poaching of resources has also had an effect on the ABs. The Charles Piatau and Steven Luatua effect.
And for Oz - it is quite strange that they're having to field people like Wade, Burns and Harris.
Maybe that's why they've had to prepare pitches that haven't deteriorated as much as they've needed?
Very telling that they put so much on the wunderkind after going back to failed players as you mentioned. Khawaja popped up in dispatches too. And yet they blew off investments like Kurtis Patterson ( century maker i think) and Bancroft and Head. The cupboard is as bare as it's ever been. 20/20 side has oodles to pick from though.
No it’s not. They still get more players in an ANZAC team than we do and some of the teams of the 80s were pretty bad when they had Border and that was about it.
Even then there was usually a David Boon, Geoff Marsh, or a Craig McDermott floating around alongside Border, and they nabbed the 87 World Cup.
@Donsteppa said in Australia v India:
@MN5 said in Australia v India:
@Siam said in Australia v India:
@Chris-B said in Australia v India:
@Siam Yeah - poaching of resources has also had an effect on the ABs. The Charles Piatau and Steven Luatua effect.
And for Oz - it is quite strange that they're having to field people like Wade, Burns and Harris.
Maybe that's why they've had to prepare pitches that haven't deteriorated as much as they've needed?
Very telling that they put so much on the wunderkind after going back to failed players as you mentioned. Khawaja popped up in dispatches too. And yet they blew off investments like Kurtis Patterson ( century maker i think) and Bancroft and Head. The cupboard is as bare as it's ever been. 20/20 side has oodles to pick from though.
No it’s not. They still get more players in an ANZAC team than we do and some of the teams of the 80s were pretty bad when they had Border and that was about it.
Even then there was usually a David Boon, Geoff Marsh, or a Craig McDermott floating around alongside Border, and they nabbed the 87 World Cup.
All good players. Not great. Let’s be honest the team that Hadlee routed was pretty shite. They got better in the late 80s, much stronger still in the 90s and became arguably the best test team in history in the 2000s.....
This current team is still littered with absolute class players.
-
@Siam said in Australia v India:
@MN5 name and rank the players outside the 11 then.
I don’t get what you mean
@MN5 i was saying the playing stocks are low in Aus at the moment regarding test cricket. The ones outside of 3 batsmen and 4 bowlers. You said they're fine and then referenced 40 fucking years ago. I offered up the " cupboard" stock examples but obviously have got it wrong.
So who are these cricketers that are better than Harris, Wade khawaja, head and burns?
-
@Donsteppa test cricket?
@Siam said in Australia v India:
@Donsteppa test cricket?
My vague memory is that they turned it around with the one day side, then built up to the 89 Ashes series hiding with players like Deano and co alongside Border. Though I did see possibly their worst side being routed at Eden Park in 1986.
-
@Chris-B said in Australia v India:
@Siam Yeah - poaching of resources has also had an effect on the ABs. The Charles Piatau and Steven Luatua effect.
And for Oz - it is quite strange that they're having to field people like Wade, Burns and Harris.
Maybe that's why they've had to prepare pitches that haven't deteriorated as much as they've needed?
Very telling that they put so much on the wunderkind after going back to failed players as you mentioned. Khawaja popped up in dispatches too. And yet they blew off investments like Kurtis Patterson ( century maker i think) and Bancroft and Head. The cupboard is as bare as it's ever been. 20/20 side has oodles to pick from though.
@Siam said in Australia v India:
And yet they blew off investments like Kurtis Patterson ( century maker i think) and Bancroft and Head.
Head was given a few tries and didn't perform adequately under pressure. Therefore the writing is on the wall for players like Wade. Bancroft's Test form didn't recover in England so he's been blacklisted.
The introduction of genuinely young players like Pucovski and Green is good - would have liked to see more of the former instead of Marcus Harris. The big factor in our opening partnerships: Dave Warner has had 10 different partners at Test level in the opener role. That isn't great, and probably points to Sheffield Shield being below where it needs to be for player prep.
