Australia's Tour Of India - 2008

[Mad Snake]

What actually to Haddin is he alright, got a fright when i saw this picture

 

[smssia0112]

Hussey is also a medium pacer ... lol not much impact with him too

Mike is, Dave is a spinner though, hence my previous remarks.

aus5892 added 0 Minutes and 25 Seconds later...

What actually to Haddin is he alright, got a fright when i saw this picture

Hurt his finger, Punter said he'd definitely play the 1st test though.

 

[khalek]

Aussies seriously need a good spinner now.

Right now I think Casson would have been a better replacement than White because White is an all rounder and it will be big responsibility for him with both bat and ball but the problem is that Casson averages 40+ and White averages 38. Another positive for White is that he can bat. I feel sad for Krejza, I had expected better performance from him. He should have picked at least 1 or wickets. Though I think Adam Voges can be considered too in the future.

 

[sifter132]

Playing White/Watson as the 4th bowler ain't going to cut it. If we do that we are telling India we don't think we can win so we are trying to draw and that more times than not leads to a loss.
I'll put it in another way, would White or Watson be picked in our side as a bowler alone? Clearly not because we have better bowlers in Siddle, Bollinger and Noffke (not here) so no way we should go into a match with a 3 man bowling attack.

I can see where you are coming from totally. White would be picked ahead of Watson if you are looking purely for a bowler. Not because White is any good, but because White is closer in ability to the best spinner we have than Watson is in ability to the 4th paceman we have.

But that's why I think we go with both of them. Playing either of them as the 4th bowler isn't good enough, but play both of them and you can bowl them 10 overs each, Clarke + Katich = another 10 and there's 30 overs, leaving 60 for your 3 pace bowlers and giving us a lengthy batting lineup. It's not ideal of course, but otherwise you could play Krejza who might only bowl 10-15 overs before he's conceded 100 runs and he can't bat nearly as well as White.

But I agree with you in that the best chance to WIN would be to play 4 pacers + White and hope we can skittle them with pace. White should be a good enough #6 - he has batted very well the last 2 seasons in first class cricket.

I just think going conservative and playing more batters would be prudent for our first Test, try to get through Test one without losing - then work out a plan to win in the last 3 Tests. Not a very Australian attitude I know, but we don't have Warne and McGrath anymore and it will take a while to adjust to India's conditions, so we need to be realistic.

 

[smssia0112]

Because Watson is a more solid batsman than White AND he is more threatening with the ball IMO. White barely gets to bowl when he plays ODIs for Australia even though he is picked as an 'all-rounder' and it's mainly because he is pretty innocuous, Ponting doesn't trust him at all. OTOH while Watson doesn't move the ball much at all, he'll at least bowl good line and length and will try to rough up the batsmen with his bouncer - which usually surprises the batsman because he can crank up to 140KPH, faster than he looks.

Watson may be quick for a fast medium bowler, but that's about all he has in his arsenal, speed and of course his overused short balls. Batting wise not much really separates them IMO, and bowling definitely not too much in it. White will have more impact with the ball in India, guaranteed.

 

[aussie1st]

Aussies seriously need a good spinner now.

Right now I think Casson would have been a better replacement than White because White is an all rounder and it will be big responsibility for him with both bat and ball but the problem is that Casson averages 40+ and White averages 38. Another positive for White is that he can bat. I feel sad for Krejza, I had expected better performance from him. He should have picked at least 1 or wickets. Though I think Adam Voges can be considered too in the future.

Casson had a good season last year but the selectors probably were right in not picking him as I don't know how threatening he would have been over here. McGain was the perfect choice and he showed it when he grabbed a 3 fer in the tour match real big shame about his shoulder injury.

I just think going conservative and playing more batters would be prudent for our first Test, try to get through Test one without losing - then work out a plan to win in the last 3 Tests. Not a very Australian attitude I know, but we don't have Warne and McGrath anymore and it will take a while to adjust to India's conditions, so we need to be realistic.

Funny that as I do remember reading that we will need 5 bowlers now that Warne and McGarth are gone. So playing the 4 pacemen and 1 kinda of all rounder fits that bill.

 

[Slowcoach]

The safe option for Australia would be to play Watson at 6, White at 7, and Haddin at 8.

India is not the place to play 4 front line pace bowlers unless you have an attack as good as the West Indies did in the 80's.

Both teams should remember Steve Waugh's "horses for courses" mantra he kept repeating during Australia's world record streak of victories during 99 and 2000, and they should remember what happened when they abandoned the policy in India and went with 3 seamers instead of 2 spinners. Kasprowicz was carted for 0-139 in the 2nd innings of the famous Laxman/Dravid test, then when Australia finally picked offspinner Miller for the 3rd Test he outbowled Warne to take 6 wkts in the match, sure they lost that test, but without Miller they would have lost by more.

So my preferred Australian lineup is:

Hayden
Katich/Jaques
Ponting
Clarke
Hussey
Watson
White
Haddin(wk)
Lee
Johnson
Clark

Another reason to play Watson is that it would be a good experience for him to bat in the higher pressure situation of a test match and hopefully get a couple of decent scores to boost his confidence if they decide to use him in England next year. His bowling won't have much of an impact in Indian conditions but would be useful in England.

Also with Haddin being a much weaker batsman than Gilchrist, playing Watson at 7 as the 4th seamer in England, and Haddin at 8 would be a sort of insurance policy. Symonds and Clark could handle the spinners role between them in England because there is no way any of the current crop will develop into a match winner in English conditions by then.

 

[shubhrayu]

My Lineup:
Haydos
Katich
Punter
Pup
Huss
Watto
Binga
Mitch
Sarfraz
Bear
Siddle

 

[Jakester1288]

Regarding someones comment about India being better in batting and bowling than Australia, I will reel out the stats.

These are just projected line ups btw. The Indian one is manee's line up, and the Australia is what I think we will run with, not what I want.

BATTING:

Openers:
Matthew Hayden - 53.51 - 61 in India
Gambhir - 37.11 - 22 in India
Simon Katich - 39.47 - 39.42 in India
Virender Sehwag - 52.62 - 54.90 in India
1 - 1 there
*Comments*
If you put Katich on Gambhir and Hayden on Sehwag, Australia takes it out 2-0. I would prefer Jaques to Katich.

Middle order - 3-6:
Ricky Ponting - 58.37 - 12.28 in India
VVS Laxman - 43.79 - 44.66 in India
Michael Hussey - 68.38 - Yet to play in India
Sachin Tendulkar - 54.23 - 54.95 in India
Michael Clarke - 47.06 - 57.14 in India
Rahul Dravid - 53.92 - 50.36 in India
Shane Watson - 20.25 - Yet to play in India
Sourav Ganguly - 41.74 - 42.00 in India
2 - 2 there
3 - 3 so far
*Comments*
I went off overall averages for Hussey and Watson, due to them not yet playing a test match in India thus far in their career.

Wicketkeepers:
Brad Haddin - 30.20 - Yet to play in India
MS Dohni - 33.76 - 34.20 in India
0 - 1 there
3 - 4 so far
*Comments*
Close here, hoping Haddin can have a big series. I have a bet over at CricketWeb that he will make a half century, so I'm hoping he can score some big ones.

The tail:
Cameron White: Debut - FC average 41.47
Anil Kumble: 17.66 - 21.50 in India
Mitchell Johnson - 33.40 - Yet to play in India
Harbahajan Singh - 15.30 - 11.32 in India
Brett Lee: 21.45 - Yet to play in India
Zaheer Kahn: 11.77 - 9.26 in India
Stuart Clark - 11.80 - Yet to play in India
Ishant Sharma - 18.40 - Yet to lose his wicket in India
3-1 there.
6-5 now.
*Comments*
Interesting to see Sharma with a better test batting average than Clark, Clark is easily the best batsmen out of the 2. Still, have to go with the stats.

Batting summary:
Australia = 396.79
India = 363.55
In the end, player average wise, Australia won 6-5.

Without White, Australia would have lost that, he just got us over the line. But that silences the critics over our batting line up.

Now for the bowling.

BOWLING:
*Comments*
These are specialist bowlers only, however I had to include a spinner - Michael Clarke (seeing as White has only played FC, cant judge him by a test record) - to make up for India having the extra bowler, who happens to be a spinner.

Brett Lee: 289 @ 29.58 - Yet to play in India
Ishant Sharma: 23 @ 36.21 - 10 @ 21.30
Stuart Clark: 81 @ 21.46 - Yet to play in India
Zaheer Kahn: 178 @ 34.06 - 42 @ 40.09 In India
Mitchell Johnson: 34 @ 32.88 - Yet to play in India
Anil Kumble: 616 @ 29.33 - 347 @ 24.27 in India
Michael Clarke: 16 @ 21.31 - 6 @ 2.16 in India
Harbhajan Singh: 291 @ 30.87 - 191 @ 26.26 in India

*Comments*
2-2 there, it should be Lee over Sharma and Singh over Clarke, but the stats never lie.

Bowling summary:
Australia = 86.08
India = 111.92

Once again, Australia dominate the statistics. We are clearly the better side, even without a top spinner.

I just hope you know I wasted over 3 hours of my evening to do that for you.

 

[bladescape]

Go jump in a creek!
There I just spent 3 seconds typing that for you!

 

[angryangy]

Watson may be quick for a fast medium bowler, but that's about all he has in his arsenal, speed and of course his overused short balls. Batting wise not much really separates them IMO, and bowling definitely not too much in it. White will have more impact with the ball in India, guaranteed.

I don't think Watson's been all that quick since his last epic injury run. In truth, I think he's been better for it, because he did seem to be hitting the seam of; if not swinging; the new white ball. He's well shy of being brilliant, but I think he's starting to get something he can build upon.

 

[Mr.Cricket]

Indians making all the big predictions before the series (like Shewag saying they will thrash us 3-1). Aussies on the other hand look like they are focusing just on cricket at the moment. Its all good to make the big statesments , lets see if they can back it up....

Lot of 'so called' experts not giving us much of a chance either.....:

The safe option for Australia would be to play Watson at 6, White at 7, and Haddin at 8.

India is not the place to play 4 front line pace bowlers unless you have an attack as good as the West Indies did in the 80's.

Both teams should remember Steve Waugh's "horses for courses" mantra he kept repeating during Australia's world record streak of victories during 99 and 2000, and they should remember what happened when they abandoned the policy in India and went with 3 seamers instead of 2 spinners. Kasprowicz was carted for 0-139 in the 2nd innings of the famous Laxman/Dravid test, then when Australia finally picked offspinner Miller for the 3rd Test he outbowled Warne to take 6 wkts in the match, sure they lost that test, but without Miller they would have lost by more.

So my preferred Australian lineup is:

Hayden
Katich/Jaques
Ponting
Clarke
Hussey
Watson
White
Haddin(wk)
Lee
Johnson
Clark

Another reason to play Watson is that it would be a good experience for him to bat in the higher pressure situation of a test match and hopefully get a couple of decent scores to boost his confidence if they decide to use him in England next year. His bowling won't have much of an impact in Indian conditions but would be useful in England.

Also with Haddin being a much weaker batsman than Gilchrist, playing Watson at 7 as the 4th seamer in England, and Haddin at 8 would be a sort of insurance policy. Symonds and Clark could handle the spinners role between them in England because there is no way any of the current crop will develop into a match winner in English conditions by then.

Great post mate That batting line up look pretty strong. Even Lee, Mitch and Clark can make some runs with the bat. Toss will be really important again this series. If we can bat first and put some big scores on the board we can really strangle them with the ball.

 

[nikhil_99]

I know the pressure will be on me: Ganguly
all those players who have been wearing this shirt for a long time know that. We're here to do that and nothing else matters. At the end of the day all that counts are the number of runs that are on the board.
http://cricket.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/3563786.cms

Yes,even after performing last year,he has been under pressure,one of the reason is media,continously making issues of it like Retirement,age factor,fab-four...etc

 

[angryangy]

Ganguly needs to score because he's not a future player and not special. They can't develop him any further, his time is now. If that time is inconvenient for him, then they are surely better off developing a new champion. India definitely have more talented cricketers waiting to get a game. Talent alone shouldn't get a player into the side, but the point is that Ganguly can't fend these youngsters off if he's not making enough runs when it counts.

I know that sounds like it should be obvious, but it's not a flat across the board rule. Players like Tendulkar and Dravid are obviously going to be held in higher regard, while players like Sehwag and Laxman are not only younger, but possess a certain je ne sais quoi, especially with respect to Australia.

 

[ankurs_009]

"je ne sais quoi"

wats that??
& yeah i agree with u mate . in fact im believing yuvraj in for any 0f the last 2 tests if saurav fails .