India in Australia

[prarara]

I agree with Karnog. We might as well go in with 5 bowlers, no use playing defensive now, and we might be able to extract something if we go in attacking. Who knows, maybe with a nondefensive attitude we might get something more out of this.

 

[Cricket_60]

No chance of us going into the Sydney test with no specialist spinner. Would be an interesting sight of course seeing the 4 pacemen 3 of which are express but unless it's totally against spin bowling the Aussie lineup won't be looking like that.

The interesting thing about having 4 pacemen is that Clarke and Symonds could fill in the spinners role. Both are pretty capable bowlers and Clarke has taken his best figures against India on a turning pitch. The other thing the selectors might do is drop Johnson for Tait and keep Hoggy. Although I'm a massive fan of Johnson he didn't bowl half as well as he should have throughout the 1st test (no swing and too wide).

As for India. The ideal lineup for them IMO is having Sehwag and Jaffer opening with Dravid at 3 and Laxman at 6. Also include Pathan instead of RP Singh. They should keep Harbhajan and Kumble for the spinning track. That would give India a 2-2 bowling combination with Tendulkar and Sehwag as an extra option. Irfan Pathan also adds to the batting depth which currently seems a little short.

 

[karnog]

I think the swing didn't come for Johnson as a result of this pitch. In Sydney it may swing for him but considering his line in the last test could see him be dropped.

 

[Cricket_60]

The ball not swinging was more the fault of Johnson. Most deliveries he sent down had scrambled seams and only occasionally moved off the deck (let alone in the air). Lee on the other hand had a mostly upright seam and as a result with the new ball got some good swing and shape away from the right handers. Even Symonds got the ball to do more than Johnson.

 

[Kal-El]

I think the swing didn't come for Johnson as a result of this pitch. In Sydney it may swing for him but considering his line in the last test could see him be dropped.

As I said, we belted India by 8 trillion runs. Why do we need to make a change?

 

[karnog]

Out of interest did Johnson swing it in into the right handers? I didn't watch his bowling too much- wasn't really memorable to be honest except for the no-ball that dravid edged to the slips.

As I said, we belted India by 8 trillion runs. Why do we need to make a change?

I was referring to cricket_60'scomment that Johnson could get dropped. I gave the possible reason why.

 

[sohum]

I don't know why anyone wants to completely overhaul our bowling line-up when it was clearly our batting that failed. I think we should replace Bhajji with a pace bowler and that's it. Giving Pankaj Singh a debut or giving Ishant his third match is only going to result in everyone here who is asking for them bagging them after the completion of the second match.

Don't forget RP was also coming back from injury. And he has shown that he can bowl well overseas. So I say keep him in and give him another choice.

As for the batting, I stand firm. I really don't care who else is selected as long as we have our senior batsmen batting where they are most comfortable because they really carry our batting. That means getting a specialist opener in. Heck, I don't care if it's Karthik given that Sehwag's had such a poor year in Ranji.

 

[Cricket_60]

Out of interest did Johnson swing it in into the right handers? I didn't watch his bowling too much- wasn't really memorable to be honest except for the no-ball that dravid edged to the slips.

No, as I said before he got absolutely no shape back into the right handers or away from the lefties. His good figures came from him bowling with the new ball wide of the batsmen (combined with the defensive mindset of both openers). Johnson is a good bowler when he makes the batsmen play due to his ability to move the ball away from the right handers. If I was a selector I would keep him in the side because of his great potential to trouble the Indian batsmen, if he returns similar match figures, then leave him out for Tait.

 

[karnog]

I don't know why anyone wants to completely overhaul our bowling line-up when it was clearly our batting that failed. I think we should replace Bhajji with a pace bowler and that's it. Giving Pankaj Singh a debut or giving Ishant his third match is only going to result in everyone here who is asking for them bagging them after the completion of the second match.

Don't forget RP was also coming back from injury. And he has shown that he can bowl well overseas. So I say keep him in and give him another choice.

As for the batting, I stand firm. I really don't care who else is selected as long as we have our senior batsmen batting where they are most comfortable because they really carry our batting. That means getting a specialist opener in. Heck, I don't care if it's Karthik given that Sehwag's had such a poor year in Ranji.

My reason for strenghtening the bowling attack to have more of a chance of keeping Australia around 300-350. Also, to remove players (mainly batsman) who sit idle in Australian conditions. Thirdly to elevate Ganguly up the order (to say 3 or 4) as well as tendulkar. Dravid can remain opening as long as someone far more aggressive is batting with him (be it Sehwag or another aggressive player). I like Laxman at 5, Ganguly at 3 and tendulkar at 4. Openers can be Sehwag and Dravid. These five need to score the bulk and dhoni/pathan/kumble can add to the score. I don't like dropping Yuvraj but for the sake of balance it maybe the case. Australia don't have for example Simon Katich (one of the most prlific test domestic scorers this year) or Noffke in the team because of Symonds who adds dimension and balance to the bowling, batting and fielding creating a team that can be ready for any challenge. Although for an overseas tour this might not be the case. India don't have that balance yet. I personally think its this balance- 4 bowlers, 1 all-rounder, semi-wicket keeper batsman and five specialist batsman.

 

[Gilly Fan]

Johnson was getting good reverse swing away from the right handers.
When he went around the wicket, they had absolutely no clue. He just needs that reverse-inswinger and he'll be even better.

 

[karnog]

No, as I said before he got absolutely no shape back into the right handers or away from the lefties. His good figures came from him bowling with the new ball wide of the batsmen (combined with the defensive mindset of both openers). Johnson is a good bowler when he makes the batsmen play due to his ability to move the ball away from the right handers. If I was a selector I would keep him in the side because of his great potential to trouble the Indian batsmen, if he returns similar match figures, then leave him out for Tait.

I'll make myself more clear. In the SL series did Johnson swing it in into the right handers?

 

[Cricket_60]

From memory yes he did. He got both swing early with the new ball and then movement off the pitch later in the innings.

 

[harishankar]

India cannot afford 5 bowlers. I don't think they will risk it either.

3 pacers + 1 spinner + part time spin of Tendulkar and Sehwag is more than enough.

 

[mattfb]

Yeah I agree with you mate. 4 bowlers and 2 part timers is more than enough. If India can bring quality they wont need the 5th bowler.

 

[0601731]

the biggest change india have to make if they need to stand up in the series is in their attitude by being aggressive and the 1st move for that is by bringing in sehwag.