Ive seen 6 Aus tours to India, only one win. If you seen the terrible tours in th epast you would know how badly we can go in India. 1998 was just abysmal, 2008 not much better.
Well i see where you are coming from old chap ha. I have seen the last 4 myself since 1998, but i dont think we should be that worried.
In 1998 like 2008. The bowling attack suffered serious injury set-backs & was on the back-foot early on leaving Warne exposed. Plus the fact that in 1998 AUS batsmen where still very vulnerbale againts spin on turners in the sub-continent. Also in 08, AUS where in the early rebuilding stages of the post McGrath/Warme era - so AUS was never really expected to win that series from the outset.
In 01, that was just individual brilllaince from Laxman & Harbhajan that won IND that series. While also AUS although they were in the middle of their legendary run, losing that series proved they still had a MASSIVE achillies heel againts quality spin that was exposed in the 90s.
In 04 as you alll areas where covered in batting & bowling & AUS won that series with ease.
I'd say this 2010 class has most of tools covered in batting & bowling to emulate the 2004 class, instead of faltering like the class of 98 & 01.
angryangy said:
Reverse swing will be helpful, but it can't be the only weapon. You don't want to be taking your first wicket in the 40th over.
They've talked about the short ball; it's not all hot air, if we remember Peter Siddle's first ball in Test cricket, it donged Gambhir square on the helmet. That in mind, they won't be the first to try it and will have to work harder to have the element of surprise on their side. Hopefully they can execute this better than Sri Lanka, who attempted to pepper the short areas and simply couldn't find a decent one. Pace and bounce will be on their side, but a similar lack of discretion with short pitched bowling will probably still yield the same results.
Indeed, in Australia's successful 04/05 tour of India, the seamers were not about pace at all. They did have the height, but the aim was not to bowl a bouncer. They focused on bowling straighter at the stumps and used cutters to create the variation that would make the batsmen work hard. In conditions where genuine nicks were few, those pacemen got more batsmen bowled and more caught in front of square.
Of course, there's also the South African special; they might just luck their way into a pitch that holds a little early movement for the pacemen. Planning for that one might take a little
Reverse swing along with the stuff the quicks used in 04/05 is how AUS should bowl in this series. Which based on historical evidence of how all fast-bowling attacks have won/drawn in India since they became a force @ home (Windies 83/84, AUS 04/05, SA 2000/01, SA 07/08 & 09/10, 96/97, ENG 05/06, PAK 98/99), thats a recipe for success.
Plus its not as if the AUS quicks would be incapable of taking wickets with the new-ball in IND. Even if the scenario as you suggested where IND are 130/0 after 40 overs. If reverse swing starts going @ the 40th over - AUS could easily reduce IND to 250/6 for eg & get themselves right back into the match.
So again i dont think AUS fans should be worried about anything.
