India tour of New Zealand - March 2009

[shravi]

Sigh... "draw first, win later" is the mentality that's killing Test cricket. I much prefer teams who approach matches from a "win first, draw later" perspective.

Only in this match and this situation. We absolutely had to ensure there was no chance of us tying the series.

Also, that isn't the mentality that's killing test cricket. It's the pitches, where the mentality is "equal the oppositions score" and because of the flat pitches pitches we see, the scores are so high that a draw is always on the cards, not because of the mentality you referred to.

 

[mrtwisties]

Then who's dominant? Your Australian side? LOL LOL LOL. They, even after having great Matthew Hayden in the team got thrashed by India when they last came here, in those "so called flat pitches" and they are getting thrashed everyday in SA. Funny how you still say this, even after we winning each and every ODI series starting from early 2008 till now, and each and every test series except for the Sri Lanka one. May I know what's the definition of the word "dominant"? Beating Australia in Australia, beating Sri Lanka in Sri Lanka two times, whitewashing NZ in NZ, still we are "not even close to dominant". LOL. And oh, another stat, last year, not a single team could win a test series in India in those "so called flat pitches." And another stat, except for beating England in England, WI in WI, and SA in SA- MSD's team has thrashed all the other cricketing superpowers in their homegrounds. Still we are not even close to dominant, even after remaining unbeaten in 13 test matches= LOL.

Dude, you're ranked third in the ICC Test rankings. I mean, some bias towards your home country is to be expected but does it have to be so strong? And so heavily punctuated by the "LOL" acronym?

Sure, there's an argument that the rankings are flawed and maybe you should be ranked second or (perhaps, at least before this NZ series) first - but a dominant team doesn't need to have that argument about ICC rankings. A dominant team is 20 points clear of everyone else for a year or more at a time. A dominant team doesn't get complacent and draw matches against a woefully underpowered NZ team. A dominant team actually beats Australia in Australia, rather than losing the test series 2-1 (including losses by 337 and 122 runs!) and then shamelessly bleating that they won afterwards.

I'm actually glad there isn't a dominant team at the moment. I stopped watching international cricket around 2001 because Australia were too dominant. I started watching again because South Africa and India were both giving the Aussies a run for their money. It's great.

Summary: I don't see how you can claim that India is dominant, nor do I see why you'd want it to be the case.

 

[aussie_ben91]

Dude, you're ranked third in the ICC Test rankings. I mean, some bias towards your home country is to be expected but does it have to be so strong? And so heavily punctuated by the "LOL" acronym?

Sure, there's an argument that the rankings are flawed and maybe you should be ranked second or (perhaps, at least before this NZ series) first - but a dominant team doesn't need to have that argument about ICC rankings. A dominant team is 20 points clear of everyone else for a year or more at a time. A dominant team doesn't get complacent and draw matches against a woefully underpowered NZ team. A dominant team actually beats Australia in Australia, rather than losing the test series 2-1 (including losses by 337 and 122 runs!) and then shamelessly bleating that they won afterwards.

I'm actually glad there isn't a dominant team at the moment. I stopped watching international cricket around 2001 because Australia were too dominant. I started watching again because South Africa and India were both giving the Aussies a run for their money. It's great.

Summary: I don't see how you can claim that India is dominant, nor do I see why you'd want it to be the case.

Good post. You absolutely owned that little kid.

Anyways how good is Gambhir? Total run-machine that doesn't get all of his runs from bullying weak attacks on the subcontient. EG: Yuvraj averages 48 in the subcontient but 17 in outside the subcontient - LOL!

 

[surendar]

Raina needs to tighten up his defense. He'll get pwnt in Tests tbh.

I feel Rohit Sharma might get a test nodd before Raina or Badri? But we still have Vijay in the team who has performed well in his only chance given. So it would be tight to get into playing XI for Raina, Sharma, Badri is what i feel..

Only the real dominant teams should have a few batsman averaging over 50. India isn't a real dominant team, nor are they close to it. Being the best team in the world means clearly being the best team in the world.


Yeah, it's ridiculous because of how flat the pitches are these days.

What is your problem now if India has 3 50-avg batsmen or 2 50-avg batsmen or 4 50-avg batsmen of how many ever ? This team under Dhoni is best in their business. Obviously it will take time to reach the top step in the ladder. You don't have to keep digging continuously in the stats and say, " see you have 3 50-avg people, but u are not even the best! ": We are in prime form at the moment, and that is the reality!

Taylor escaped that catch by Gambhir (it was clearly off the ground) but he has been put into battle by Harbhajan Singh who is bowling superbly. And at the other end, Zak is looking to hunt down batsmen. AWESOME COMBO! NZ really under the pump

Congrats Dravid for the record. And fittingly, it was a very good low catch

If Taylor had gone that time, we could have been in better position by now. Franklin/Taylor partnership has given the hopes to Kiwis already if rain is going to play a spoil-sport! :upray

 

[aussie_ben91]

What is your problem now if India has 3 50-avg batsmen or 2 50-avg batsmen or 4 50-avg batsmen of how many ever ? This team under Dhoni is best in their business. Obviously it will take time to reach the top step in the ladder. You don't have to keep digging continuously in the stats and say, " see you have 3 50-avg people, but u are not even the best! ": We are in prime form at the moment, and that is the reality!

Tendulkar, Dravid & Gambhir deserve 50+ averages. Sehwag doesn't.

 

[mrtwisties]

Good post. You absolutely owned that little kid.

Ouch. Good point, well made.

Gambhir's brilliant, especially now that he's being less of an ******* on the field. In fact, the whole Indian side has become a lot more charismatic under Dhoni, a real pleasure to watch.

If they can sort out this complacency issue and maintain the hunger, then India vs SA and Aus vs SA are going to be fantastic advertisements for test cricket every time they take place over the next 6-8 years (India vs Aus too, if they can get past the off-field tanties).

 

[TruSachFan]

Dominant? What dominant? This is not a dominant team? For god's sake, we're not even trying to win against NZ here. We're happy with 1-0. Some delusional Indian fans if you ask me!!

 

[mrtwisties]

Dominant? What dominant? This is not a dominant team? For god's sake, we're not even trying to win against NZ here. We're happy with 1-0. Some delusional Indian fans if you ask me!!

Well, it's lucky they're not trying to win - because NZ just got offered the light, and tomorrow's forecast is rain with gale-force northerlies. I don't know about you, but 80-100kmh winds scream "unplayable conditions" to me.

 

[irottev]

I wouldn't be surprised if this was a draw. We may only get 1 session in tomorrow because rain is forecast and gale force winds. At least I hope we only have to bat 1 session. Dhoni batted too long reguardless I feel. We'd never chase anything over 500.

Also, I think Harbhajan forgot to take his Ritalin this morning the way he was monkeying around in the outfield.

 

[surendar]

Tendulkar, Dravid & Gambhir deserve 50+ averages. Sehwag doesn't.

If Sehwag is the only problem, then fine Ben I know you hate Sehwag.. but you know what, he is just a natural hitting player. He won't bother about the match situation(whether situation demands him or not), he won't bother whether it's crucial situation or not.. rather he just focuses only on hitting.

You heard the commentator( I think it was Simon Doull) who was making a difference between Dravid and Sehwag,

For Dravid, safety first(ensuring that he is not playing any risks) and hitting next.
For Sehwag hitting first and safety next( he won't even bother whether he is getting out or not.. He has hit 6's quite a few times to bring his century, 200 and 300 & he got out on 195 while tryin to hit a huge one vs Aussies.. If he would have been a responsible player, he would have got that 200 in Aus)

Finally what i meant is, for such a natural hitting player, seeing averages and statistics doesn't make any meaning. May be see the strike rate If he stays at the crease, he ensures entertainment. Thats all we expect from him.. 'Blind Explosive player' is correct term rather than calling him as 'Strategical minded player'

 

[SaiSrini]

Dude, you're ranked third in the ICC Test rankings. I mean, some bias towards your home country is to be expected but does it have to be so strong? And so heavily punctuated by the "LOL" acronym?

Sure, there's an argument that the rankings are flawed and maybe you should be ranked second or (perhaps, at least before this NZ series) first - but a dominant team doesn't need to have that argument about ICC rankings. A dominant team is 20 points clear of everyone else for a year or more at a time. A dominant team doesn't get complacent and draw matches against a woefully underpowered NZ team. A dominant team actually beats Australia in Australia, rather than losing the test series 2-1 (including losses by 337 and 122 runs!) and then shamelessly bleating that they won afterwards.

I'm actually glad there isn't a dominant team at the moment. I stopped watching international cricket around 2001 because Australia were too dominant. I started watching again because South Africa and India were both giving the Aussies a run for their money. It's great.

Summary: I don't see how you can claim that India is dominant, nor do I see why you'd want it to be the case.

India are not dominant. They can never be. But they are the best in the world ATM. Not our mistake that we got friendlier wickets in NZ. Even Australia dished out the same thing to us (Perth was not the same Perth when we went there). So we have won at home and we have won away, and we can rightfully stake claim to being the "best in the world" AT THE CURRENT MOMENT.

 

[King Cricket]

Sure, there's an argument that the rankings are flawed and maybe you should be ranked second or (perhaps, at least before this NZ series) first - but a dominant team doesn't need to have that argument about ICC rankings. A dominant team is 20 points clear of everyone else for a year or more at a time. A dominant team doesn't get complacent and draw matches against a woefully underpowered NZ team. A dominant team actually beats Australia in Australia, rather than losing the test series 2-1 (including losses by 337 and 122 runs!) and then shamelessly bleating that they won afterwards.

I'm actually glad there isn't a dominant team at the moment. I stopped watching international cricket around 2001 because Australia were too dominant. I started watching again because South Africa and India were both giving the Aussies a run for their money. It's great.

We would have won the test series 2-1 had it not for Steve Bucknor. Not even Gods from Heaven XI can win a test match if almost 12 crucial decisions go against them in very very vital times of the match, even if the opposition is Bangladesh, try to understand this.

A dominant team doesn't get complacent and draw matches against a woefully underpowered NZ team

We drew just one test against New Zealand. This means nothing. Even Australia lost a test series vs the West Indies (a side worse than NZ)immediately after the 03 WC, when they were at their peak. Did it mean anything?

 

[SaiSrini]

I feel Rohit Sharma might get a test nodd before Raina or Badri? But we still have Vijay in the team who has performed well in his only chance given. So it would be tight to get into playing XI for Raina, Sharma, Badri is what i feel..



What is your problem now if India has 3 50-avg batsmen or 2 50-avg batsmen or 4 50-avg batsmen of how many ever ? This team under Dhoni is best in their business. Obviously it will take time to reach the top step in the ladder. You don't have to keep digging continuously in the stats and say, " see you have 3 50-avg people, but u are not even the best! ": We are in prime form at the moment, and that is the reality!



If Taylor had gone that time, we could have been in better position by now. Franklin/Taylor partnership has given the hopes to Kiwis already if rain is going to play a spoil-sport! :upray

Vijay should only open. Enough of this "makeshift" idea. Atleast now we can very well afford to pick specialist openers and make them open. If Vijay has to play, Sehwag has to go down the order and if they are ready to do it, so be it (Gambhir should never go down the order coz he is not for those positions).

saisrini80 added 5 Minutes and 26 Seconds later...

Dominant? What dominant? This is not a dominant team? For god's sake, we're not even trying to win against NZ here. We're happy with 1-0. Some delusional Indian fans if you ask me!!

The pitch is very flat with almost zero sideways movement. Its an unusual pitch that gets flatter as the game progresses (where do they make these pitches, man?). And you cant make predictions based on weather. If tomorrow is going to be windy with rain, Dhoni cant make declarations based on it. What he did was perfectly right. He made a calculation based on the fact that we have 6 more sessions of play (starting on the 4th day) and NZ will have 6 sessions to score 530 odd (which was what India had when they ended Day 3). Seeing that the pitch was so flat, there is every chance NZ might pull off that surprise (being more used to the conditons, home advantage, etc). Dhoni batted an hour today making sure we got 600+ and made sure we have 5+ sessions to bowl them out. So no mistake from his side at all.

P.s: This reply was to irottev's post. Sorry!

 

[aussie_ben91]

India only beat Australia because Phillip Hughes wasn't playing, Peter Siddle or Jason Krezja didn't play the entire series and because Cameron White played the entire series.

South Africa actually beat us on our home soil, something that India has never acchieved but we bounced back and beat South Africa in South Africa, another thing that India has never acchieved.

Australia's still the best team in the world. South Africa & India both still have flaws in their claims to being number 1 in the world.

 

[SaiSrini]

A dominant team is 20 points clear of everyone else for a year or more at a time. A dominant team doesn't get complacent and draw matches against a woefully underpowered NZ team. A dominant team actually beats Australia in Australia, rather than losing the test series 2-1 (including losses by 337 and 122 runs!) and then shamelessly bleating that they won afterwards.

Even the Australians acknowledged how close the Indians ran them in that series and the way they talked about the matches and after the series ended, they sounded a little guilty of winning that series. Everyone knew that India were hard done by the Sydney test. Had we atleast drawn it, it would have been 1-1 and at that time, a 1-1 by a visiting team against Australia in Australia is considered equal to victory.