India in Australia

[Adarsh]

My country's better than yours....

Good day's cricket. India will be pleased. If you restrict Australia to below 400, let alone around 350, on a first day's pitch in a test match in Australia it's a great effort. That said, the Aussies won't be too disappointed either. India's batsmen need to cash in here.

 

[smssia0112]

1. Was referring to Jacques vs Jaffer and Jaffer made 116 in SA and 212 in WI. If Jacques can do that in the sub-continent (equivalent to Jaffer's feat) then i'd be ready to say that Jacques is almost as good or greater than Jaffer. Till then Jaffer> Jacques.

2. That India don't have the bowling attack. You said there wasn't one utter truth in my paragraph.

3. As for this comment. That ain't garbage or as you call it "bluffing". As you don't believe me lets talk about the 3rd ODI against NZ. Brett Lee removed the openners in quick succession in his first spell without leaking too much runs. However when Styris was going Lee and Hogg were the men who suffered. Lee at the end was 9 overs 3 for 49. Considering he was after just 5overs providing 2 an over is some wacking. I'm not saying Lee has been crap. I'm saying he hasn't been as consistent as people have made him out to be. Their saying he has taken what Mcgrath has done. I do not believe that. He has bowled well. He's a threat. But bloody hell. I believe he won't perform as well as he has before and judging by his recent history will go for a few if someone picks up their pace.

1. That is your opinion, but look how good Jaques is for a player who has just started. A lot of people would disagree with you on that statement.

2. I said barely, I agree that they don't have a fantastic bowling attack.

3. Well I'm saying that he has been improving lately, and his recent tests illustrate that. A bad ODI does not. And I highly doubt that anyone is comparing him with McGrath.

 

[Leggie]

A decent day for India, but I think this last pair could really humiliate India if we don't get them out early...

Well bowled Kumble and that delivery from Zaheer to Ponting looked unplayable from my TV set..

 

[aussie_ben91]

And,
Dravid > Hayden in tests anyday.

No way. Hayden's strike-rate is almost 20 runs higher then Dravid, Dravid only averages 2 more runs then Hayden and Hayden has made a few more centuries then Dravid has and has played over 20 less matches then Dravid.

 

[Sman-21]

OMG i dont mind people supporting there team an talking them up but indian fans are the worst an people say us aussies are arrogant.
If your gonna talk them up at least be able to back it up with stats not just a game here and a game there.

Yes india have a good batting lineup but australia easily has the best batting lineup in international cricket.

http://www.lgiccrankings.com/ just look at all the indians in the top 10 lists :

An the fact they still say tendulkar is currently the best batsmen in the world is a joke.Lara was always better.

Ponting is easily the best current batsmen closely followed by hussey an if hussey can have a good series here may have to start calling him the best current batsmen.

And dont forget unlike most teams who get to bat twice in most tests alot of the aussie players only get 1 innings to bat each test so considering that its amazing to see aussie players so high up in total test runs.

 

[aussie_ben91]

Ponting > Hayden > Hussey > Jaques > Clarke > Gilchrist > Symonds

Jaques > Jaffer
Hayden > Dravid
Ponting > Laxman
Tendulkar > Hussey
Clarke > Ganguly
Symonds > Yuvraj
Gilchrist > Dhoni

 

[w3lshrugby]

Nice to see the Australians being challenged a bit for once, rather than the usual 360/2 nonsense that I tend to see at the end of day 1. I think India will have a lead after the first innings, albeit a small one of 50-100 in my opinion.

 

[Leggie]

How can you possibly say that Michael Clarke is better than Ganguly at batting? Clarke's test average is only 3 more then Ganguly's and he's only played 30 tests compared to Ganguly's 100, and I think is quite logical that its harder to keep up your average with the more matches you play. And with the form Ganguly's in right now he's definetley in the top 3 batsmen in the world right now...

 

[icyman]

This really is the second coming of Anil Kumble. A little while ago, he was a bit unimpressive and unpenetrative but he has now got that back with the captaincy (which did not seem to go his way in the early overs). Let's hope that India can polish off Stuart Clark/Mitchell Johnson in the morning and get a first innings lead.

Captaincy has worked wonders for Kumble !

My country's better than yours....

This is bigger than the Ashes !
Definately....

No way. Hayden's strike-rate is almost 20 runs higher then Dravid, Dravid only averages 2 more runs then Hayden and Hayden has made a few more centuries then Dravid has and has played over 20 less matches then Dravid.

How can you compare an opener with a middle order batsman ?
Also,Hayden is pretty aggresive whereas Dravid is kinda mild.

Ponting > Hayden > Hussey > Jaques > Clarke > Gilchrist > Symonds

Jaques > Jaffer
Hayden > Dravid
Ponting > Laxman
Tendulkar > Hussey
Clarke > Ganguly
Symonds > Yuvraj
Gilchrist > Dhoni

The inequalities will be inverted if you give them a spinning track.

Also,Ponting does not have a good record as Test captain against India.

 

[sohum]

1. That is your opinion, but look how good Jaques is for a player who has just started. A lot of people would disagree with you on that statement.

Remember how Strauss was made out to be a legend after his start to Test cricket? Agreed that those were Indian fans, but you really cannot judge players based on just a couple of international series.

No way. Hayden's strike-rate is almost 20 runs higher then Dravid, Dravid only averages 2 more runs then Hayden and Hayden has made a few more centuries then Dravid has and has played over 20 less matches then Dravid.

When exactly was strike rate an important factor in determining who a better test player was?

That said, Hayden has been in brilliant form and I would actually pick him ahead of Dravid in my team--however I would not be silly enough to open with Dravid so I would never have to make that decision.

Ponting > Hayden > Hussey > Jaques > Clarke > Gilchrist > Symonds

Jaques > Jaffer
Hayden > Dravid
Ponting > Laxman
Tendulkar > Hussey
Clarke > Ganguly
Symonds > Yuvraj
Gilchrist > Dhoni

As test batsmen I disagree with the two bolded above. Symonds and Gilchrist both played pathetic shots to get out when they could have hung around and pushed for a big innings. Symonds in particular looked like he had come in at around the 40-over mark in an ODI game which just shows his lack of understanding about the way to play test matches.

How can you possibly say that Michael Clarke is better than Ganguly at batting? Clarke's test average is only 3 more then Ganguly's and he's only played 30 tests compared to Ganguly's 100, and I think is quite logical that its harder to keep up your average with the more matches you play. And with the form Ganguly's in right now he's definetley in the top 3 batsmen in the world right now...

Ganguly has also been quite consistent over his career. His average has never gone below 40, if I remember correctly.

As for the match, I think this match is far more evenly poised than it seems. While we have picked up 9 wickets, the fact that we are rejoicing that Australia are at 337/9 shows what a strong team they are as that would be considered a pretty decent score for any other team against Australia.

We really need to make sure we don't give it all up in our first innings. The first issue to settle would be to avoid the follow-on and then we can think about taking a lead.

 

[icyman]

How can you possibly say that Michael Clarke is better than Ganguly at batting? Clarke's test average is only 3 more then Ganguly's and he's only played 30 tests compared to Ganguly's 100, and I think is quite logical that its harder to keep up your average with the more matches you play. And with the form Ganguly's in right now he's definetley in the top 3 batsmen in the world right now...

Averages ?
Well...i'd really like to see Clarke's average after 100 Tests...if he lasts long enough,that is...

 

[Harrypotter_fan]

No way. Hayden's strike-rate is almost 20 runs higher then Dravid, Dravid only averages 2 more runs then Hayden and Hayden has made a few more centuries then Dravid has and has played over 20 less matches then Dravid.

If you want someone to bat for your life, whom would choose?
Dravid for me.

 

[aussie_ben91]

When exactly was strike rate an important factor in determining who a better test player was?

That said, Hayden has been in brilliant form and I would actually pick him ahead of Dravid in my team--however I would not be silly enough to open with Dravid so I would never have to make that decision.

On ESPN's Legends of Cricket one of the writters on cricinfo said about Sunil Gavaskar 'As an opener you generally have to add 5 runs onto their career average to get a more realistic view'.

However I do agree with you Sohum, how you can move your best ever number 3 to opener just so an inform Yuvraj Singh can get into the team when you've got an opener in your squad who averages 49 in Test Cricket and in the last series in Australia on this exact same ground made 195 is beyhond me.

A strike-rate doesn't mean much but can be significant if their a massive differential.

As test batsmen I disagree with the two bolded above. Symonds and Gilchrist both played pathetic shots to get out when they could have hung around and pushed for a big innings. Symonds in particular looked like he had come in at around the 40-over mark in an ODI game which just shows his lack of understanding about the way to play test matches.

I haven't seen much from Yuvraj in Tests but he has a pretty poor average and is one of the few batsman in India who doesn't average 50+ in FC cricket. It's pretty even, but by no stretch of the imigination is Yuvraj the better batsman. While I've seen Dhoni get out to some stupid shots, I think his much more preferred in the ODI game. Gilly's a better Test Player.

If you want someone to bat for your life, whom would choose?
Dravid for me.

Why would you want to bat for your life though? To win matches with contribution from the batsman they need hundreds and that's what Hayden does allot more often that what Dravid does.
Hayden for me.
Do you want India to draw or win this game?

How can you possibly say that Michael Clarke is better than Ganguly at batting? Clarke's test average is only 3 more then Ganguly's and he's only played 30 tests compared to Ganguly's 100, and I think is quite logical that its harder to keep up your average with the more matches you play. And with the form Ganguly's in right now he's definetley in the top 3 batsmen in the world right now...

Ganguly in the top 3 batsman in the world right now?! Are you crazy? They're yonks of batsman in the world right now who are better them him by a mile!
And in the last year Clarke's Test Average has risen from 35 to almost 47!

Averages ?
Well...i'd really like to see Clarke's average after 100 Tests...if he lasts long enough,that is...

I reckon he'll finish his career with better records in both forms of the game then what Ganguly does.

 

[manee]

I don't see the point of these player comparisons. After the series is over, we will know who the better team on Australian soil is.

On a side note, I love how even a slow, low Australian wicket still aids the bowlers somewhat and harbours a relatively low score.

 

[aussie1st]

Very nice fightback by India once again Kumble hard work pays off. It was Hayden the one that hasn't done this summer that produces the big knock, thought Jaques would continue his pattern still another 50 in a boxing day test is good going.