Australia tour of India 2023 - 4 Tests , 3 ODIs

[Sherlock Holmes]

 

[SaiSrini]

Well I am someone who would rather watch this series than the boring slog fest never ending 2 month league.

The excitement for IPL for someone like me since 2013 has never been there.



Test Cricket is love.

My view is radically different - I’ve lost all passion for international “nation vs nation” sport. IPL is where my passion lies right now (and other franchise leagues based on quality of entertainment, standards, etc.).

The hyper toxicity of “fake nationalism” for just a game of sport, has destroyed my passion for “nation vs nation” sport. As we speak, Bumrah is being abused for being ruled out of this series including ODIs while being ready for IPL. Kohli was abused for attending to his family rather than miss it for a pointless series that happens every year or other year.

I won’t feel a drop of emotion when India fail to win the ODI World Cup this year or fail to win the “save tests gimmick” called the WTC finals.

P.s: Before someone asks “why post here if no passion for internationals”, I’m here for time pass. I can do that without passion

 

[Satan666]

My view is radically different - I’ve lost all passion for international “nation vs nation” sport. IPL is where my passion lies right now (and other franchise leagues based on quality of entertainment, standards, etc.).

The hyper toxicity of “fake nationalism” for just a game of sport, has destroyed my passion for “nation vs nation” sport. As we speak, Bumrah is being abused for being ruled out of this series including ODIs while being ready for IPL. Kohli was abused for attending to his family rather than miss it for a pointless series that happens every year or other year.

I won’t feel a drop of emotion when India fail to win the ODI World Cup this year or fail to win the “save tests gimmick” called the WTC finals.

P.s: Before someone asks “why post here if no passion for internationals”, I’m here for time pass. I can do that without passion

Could be in the wrong here but you seem pretty passionate about the T20 WC that was recently held. Perhaps its T20 cricket you have a passion for only.

Nothings wrong with how you feel tbh. I sincerely think this is the sentiment of most Indians, most Asians in general, and nothing is wrong with that at all.

 

[Bigby Wolf]

My view is radically different - I’ve lost all passion for international “nation vs nation” sport. IPL is where my passion lies right now (and other franchise leagues based on quality of entertainment, standards, etc.).

The hyper toxicity of “fake nationalism” for just a game of sport, has destroyed my passion for “nation vs nation” sport. As we speak, Bumrah is being abused for being ruled out of this series including ODIs while being ready for IPL. Kohli was abused for attending to his family rather than miss it for a pointless series that happens every year or other year.

I won’t feel a drop of emotion when India fail to win the ODI World Cup this year or fail to win the “save tests gimmick” called the WTC finals.

P.s: Before someone asks “why post here if no passion for internationals”, I’m here for time pass. I can do that without passion

Yeah nation vs nation thing does play a part but end of the day cricket is run by a filthy rich organisation called BCCI.

But I never associated cricket with hyper nationalism or something.

My views in this forum or across social media is based on players performance of cricket only , I remember telling people not to indulge Kohli or even a recently KL Rahul's personal life (where a few poster here dragging his marriage or something).

For me its about the love for Test cricket, I love watching Test matches and India did play some amazing game in the 2017-2021 cycle (Fast bowlers picking up 20 Wickets was something never happened before in Indian cricket).

IPL for me is just another boring snooze fest never ending league in two months time.

If you love Test cricket you will enjoy pacers and bowlers doing well picking 20 wickets and with the recent ENGLAND doing bazball thing my excitement for Test cricket will keep me going.

 

[Satan666]

Yeah nation vs nation thing does play a part but end of the day cricket is run by a filthy rich organisation called BCCI.

But I never associated cricket with hyper nationalism or something.

My views in this forum or across social media is based on players performance of cricket only , I remember telling people not to indulge Kohli or even a recently KL Rahul's personal life (where a few poster here dragging his marriage or something).

For me its about the love for Test cricket, I love watching Test matches and India did play some amazing game in the 2017-2021 cycle (Fast bowlers picking up 20 Wickets was something never happened before in Indian cricket).

IPL for me is just another boring snooze fest never ending league in two months time.

If you love Test cricket you will enjoy pacers and bowlers doing well picking 20 wickets and with the recent ENGLAND doing bazball thing my excitement for Test cricket will keep me going.

Exactly what is meant by BAZBALL?

 

[asprin]

What a great comeback by India. We were legit done and dusted in the 1st innings - 7 down for some 130 odd. A brilliant rear guard action (once again) by the lower-tail gave us a fighting chance. But by end of day 2, I was convinced Australia will end up winning the Test with the way they were going about things. Totally didn't expect them to implode the way they did in the 1st session of day 3. Ash and Jaddu looked like getting a wicket every second ball. But Australia's tactics were puzzling. Positive intent was the correct approach but perhaps the execution part was questionable.

Positives:

• Lower order contribution with the bat. This, IMO, has been the biggest gain of late. With Ash, Jaddu and Axar we bat till no.9 which is a great luxury to have.
• India's approach in the 2nd innings showing intent. Rohit was instrumental in the chase. Unfortunate that he got run out the way he did. Perhaps the idea that this was Puajara's 100th Test made him make the sacrifice play. But apart from KLR, everyone else seemed determine to not bog down. Small chases can be tricky, so kudos to them for not making it a nervy one.
• While spinners are expected to thrive in these conditions, it's heartening to see our seamers (Siraj/Shami/Umesh) also chip in and give us the needed breakthroughs almost on demand. It's a health pack and is likely to only get stronger once Bumrah comes back.

Negatives:

• KLR. There's something about his body language that gives the impression that his mind is constantly crowded with a thousand things. He is the golden boy of this management led by Dravid. So any hopes of seeing him dropped is a distant dream. The guy wasn't like this in his earlier phase, so unsure what's ailing him.
• Top and middle order issues - Our lower order's batting exploits are somewhat acting as a smokescreen for the failures of other half. There's no doubt that it's an area of concern and the sooner we address it, the better.
• Slip fielding - Too many catches being dropped. This is where Rahane will be missed. I do hope it's not the end of the road for him because I still consider he has at least 2-3 years of Test cricket left in him.
• Jadeja's no balls - Perhaps an equally frustrating thing to witness. This is compounded by the number of instances where he has taken a wicket on such balls. It's inexcusable to see a spinner of his calibre failing to address it.

All in all, credit to Australia for fighting hard. They did turn things around somewhat in this Test and I hope they can improve upon that. As an Indian, it's satisfying to see 3-day wins, but as a cricket fan would love to see see-sawing 5-day cricket.

 

[pillowprocter]

Exactly what is meant by BAZBALL?

It's a name for the style of Test cricket played by England in recent times.

 

[Bevab]

I honestly expected more... a lot more from the current number one test team in the world. It's clear that they've not prepared properly for this tour by needlessly risking Green and Starc's fitness in home games. The lack of warmup games they've played.. the way they've resorted to 'sweep everything' as the primary tactic.. selecting Agar and Warner... dropping Head (even if I think it wasn't the worst decision at that time)... they all point to a side that believed this wouldn't be as tough as it is. Now that Cummins may not play in the next test and Hazlewood is ruled out I'm not sure how competitive they'll be.

The fact that India are winning despite losing their best test batter and playing an inverted batting lineup speaks to how good certain players in this team are. Jadeja and Ashwin feel like a cheat code at home and Axar's now getting himself added to that list too. Shami's also quietly become the greatest pacer in Asian conditions by average tied with Imran Khan. If only the passengers in this side are evicted... we might see even greater results.

This Indian side since 2012ish over the last decade has a very strong claim to being the greatest home side in test cricket history. Even the West Indies sides of 70s and 80s have had series draws at home and the Aussie sides of 90s and 2000s never had such a strong run of games at home where they'd just thrash every side that came to play. Perhaps the Invincibles led by the Don have a claim but even they have the caveat of not having played against enough quality opposition in their times.

 

[Fenil]

This reel isn't looking too far fetched in case of Rahul.

Rohit and Rahul

 

[Satan666]

It's a name for the style of Test cricket played by England in recent times.

Exactly what style of cricket is this?

 

[pillowprocter]

Well there are a number of things involved, such as:
- Not being afraid to be attacking, even at the cost of collapses and giving away boundaries.
- Bouncing back after every defeat like nothing happened.
- Rarely being satisfied with a draw and looking for results.
- Doing things their own way: this is epitomized by things such as questionable but successful field settings and the creation of the Nighthawk role to pinch quick runs and put pressure on the opposition.

 

[Satan666]

Well there are a number of things involved, such as:
- Not being afraid to be attacking, even at the cost of collapses and giving away boundaries.
- Bouncing back after every defeat like nothing happened.
- Rarely being satisfied with a draw and looking for results.
- Doing things their own way: this is epitomized by things such as questionable but successful field settings and the creation of the Nighthawk role to pinch quick runs and put pressure on the opposition.

Yeah the great Aussie side in the 2000s did what Engl are doing today and surpassed it. Before them the WI did it the 80s.

People find it cool cuz they see England play as a reflection of T20 fast food cricket in Tests.

 

[Bevab]

Yeah aggressive batting as a whole isn't something new but the big difference is that England are doing it on steroids with their run-rate in a very bowling friendly era. Australia and West Indies in the past were never this aggressive. There's also been several interesting tactical moves that they've done which are usually forgotten from game to game but have been nudging them ever so closer to victory in each one. For instance most sides would not try to force the run-rate with their lower order and declare before they lost all their wickets yet England did that because they wanted that extra 0.5% chance at bowling successfully under the lights vs a NZ side that can sometimes retreat into a shell.

Australia and West Indies in the past could be aggressive and play bullish cricket because they had the better players. England on the other hand have just two world class cricketers in Root and Anderson, perhaps three if Stokes produces his magic. Maybe Foakes with the glove is another world class component. Other than that they've been churning out dominant displays of cricket for the most part and won matches in captivating style without the best players in the world in other areas. That simply hasn't been a thing in test cricket and yet they're making it work. That is the unique part of it and amidst all the talk of Bazball and 'T20 in test' it's things like these that sadly get drowned out.

 

[wasteyouryouth]

Yeah aggressive batting as a whole isn't something new but the big difference is that England are doing it on steroids with their run-rate in a very bowling friendly era. Australia and West Indies in the past were never this aggressive. There's also been several interesting tactical moves that they've done which are usually forgotten from game to game but have been nudging them ever so closer to victory in each one. For instance most sides would not try to force the run-rate with their lower order and declare before they lost all their wickets yet England did that because they wanted that extra 0.5% chance at bowling successfully under the lights vs a NZ side that can sometimes retreat into a shell.

Australia and West Indies in the past could be aggressive and play bullish cricket because they had the better players. England on the other hand have just two world class cricketers in Root and Anderson, perhaps three if Stokes produces his magic. Maybe Foakes with the glove is another world class component. Other than that they've been churning out dominant displays of cricket for the most part and won matches in captivating style without the best players in the world in other areas. That simply hasn't been a thing in test cricket and yet they're making it work. That is the unique part of it and amidst all the talk of Bazball and 'T20 in test' it's things like these that sadly get drowned out.

Yep, no one has batted like this over maybe more than one innings at a time, let alone a series or sustained period of time. Three have of the five highest run rates, in a completed innings, in test cricket have been by England since Stokes took over.

Ponting's Australia RPO was 3.52
Waugh's 3.66
England since Stokes became permanent captain is 4.82. Australia, in that same time frame, is 3.82.

In 23 innings England have scored at 5+ run rate ten times. Waugh's Australia managed it nine times 97 innings and only two of those innings last 30+ overs. Ponting's Australia did it 4 times in 144 innings and only once for 30+ overs. England has done this seven times (30+ overs batting like this).

England are winning games by taking risks that they wouldn't have done in the past and risks that I think a lot of teams can't/won't. I think the second test vs Pakistan, when Abrar Ahmed made his debut. England were five down at lunch but had scored 180. 12 months prior, or at any time in the previous years, England might have been lucky to score 180 all out. More likely they'd have been bowled out in a session and lucky to reach 100.

In terms of World Class players. While a sustained period, in my opinion, is needed to be considered world class they have players putting up numbers that World Class players do. Brook and Duckett are scoring consistently and at absurd strike rates. Bairstow averaged 75 last summer, 'out of form' Joe Root is averaging 50. Pope and Foakes both average 40+ and Stokes is at 37. They are putting up numbers like Strauss' side did and that's probably the best top 7 I can remember England fielding. Ollie Robinson's overall record is almost identical to Kyle Jamieson - although their records are second only to Scottt Boland and Kyle Mayers over the last few years.

 

[Satan666]

Yeah aggressive batting as a whole isn't something new but the big difference is that England are doing it on steroids with their run-rate in a very bowling friendly era. Australia and West Indies in the past were never this aggressive. There's also been several interesting tactical moves that they've done which are usually forgotten from game to game but have been nudging them ever so closer to victory in each one. For instance most sides would not try to force the run-rate with their lower order and declare before they lost all their wickets yet England did that because they wanted that extra 0.5% chance at bowling successfully under the lights vs a NZ side that can sometimes retreat into a shell.

Australia and West Indies in the past could be aggressive and play bullish cricket because they had the better players. England on the other hand have just two world class cricketers in Root and Anderson, perhaps three if Stokes produces his magic. Maybe Foakes with the glove is another world class component. Other than that they've been churning out dominant displays of cricket for the most part and won matches in captivating style without the best players in the world in other areas. That simply hasn't been a thing in test cricket and yet they're making it work. That is the unique part of it and amidst all the talk of Bazball and 'T20 in test' it's things like these that sadly get drowned out.

Thanks for this explanation I understand fully now what is meant by the term ‘bazball’.