Indian tour of South Africa, December-January 2010/11

[Sobi]

Just for reference, South Africa's last innings in India they were bowled out for 120 on a turning track.

Lol this shows how good the SA batsmen are. Atleast Indian batsmen made 136 against so called "good bowlers". we scored 136 against Dale Styne and Morne Morkel but SA were facing the crappy bowlers like Ishant and Harbhajan. They still bundled out for 120? what happened there? this shows how we are much better. We can survive atleast a little against good bowling attacks and get destroyed sometimes but SA? They can't even survive against the crappy bowlers that India has. also, why isn't rank number 1 for India right? thats the ranking for ICC so? We haven't witnessed Don Bradman so why do we consider him the best? Sachin has far more records than him so he should be considered much better than him and there is no doubt about his records since most of us have witnessed it in front of our eyes. But Bradman's records are only in "ICC records" which are probably wrong because like most people here said that IC rankings aren't right so the older records might be wrong too right?

 

[Gurjot95]

I say, let the series be over first before making any judgement.

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

Just for one batting collapse, I don't think India doesn't deserve to be no.1 test team. .

this is the other most boring cliche about india.

There is a no.1 position because there is a ranking system. India have gained the most points, therefore they are quite rightful no.1s.

maybe man united should hand back the league title next time they don't win the league by 12 points, or maybe no one should have won the wimbledon title where fed and nadal played 5 sets. They should have called it a draw because neither could "dominate" the other.

 

[sohum]

. Good job horribly mischaracterising my position. SMH

I dont nor have i ever discredited every IND victories oveseas.

Okay, then go ahead and give India credit for one of these Test match/series victories:

India in New Zealand - 2008/09 (India won 1-0)
India in Australia - 2007/08 (India lost 2-1 in a closely contested series)
India in England - 2007 (India won 1-0)
India in South Africa - 2006/07 (India lost 2-1)
India in West Indies - 2006 (India won 1-0)
India in Australia - 2003/04 (India drew 1-1)

From past posting, you have implied every series India has won is because of either weakened opposition line-ups or flat pitches or the sun rising on the wrong side of the earth.

 

[SaiSrini]

Just for reference, South Africa's last innings in India they were bowled out for 120 on a turning track.

That ain't count. Remember, we rub it on other's faces.

 

[War]

Okay, then go ahead and give India credit for one of these Test match/series victories:

India in New Zealand - 2008/09 (India won 1-0)
India in Australia - 2007/08 (India lost 2-1 in a closely contested series)
India in England - 2007 (India won 1-0)
India in South Africa - 2006/07 (India lost 2-1)
India in West Indies - 2006 (India won 1-0)
India in Australia - 2003/04 (India drew 1-1)

From past posting, you have implied every series India has won is because of either weakened opposition line-ups or flat pitches or the sun rising on the wrong side of the earth.

Last i checked in the last decade the major overseas tours for India & all sub-continent sides has been winning in ENG, AUS, SA. So it shows a bit of desperation on yourside if you are seriously going to include poor windies & NZ sides. Winning in NZ & WI has certainly never been seen as major overseas tour in recent.

Every Australian fan will tell you regardless of how well IND played in AUS 03/04 to draw that series, that McGrath/Warne not being presnet & Gillespie playign half fit was the main reason why that happen. It was no coincidence that when those bowlers where back from the return series in IND 04, that they absolutely owned INDs batsmen.

Overall IND have never won a series againts full strenght AUS, ENG, SA in those countries backyards. Until they do so then I & world cricket will give them credit & may recognise them as # 1.

----------

this is the other most boring cliche about india.

There is a no.1 position because there is a ranking system. India have gained the most points, therefore they are quite rightful no.1s.

maybe man united should hand back the league title next time they don't win the league by 12 points, or maybe no one should have won the wimbledon title where fed and nadal played 5 sets. They should have called it a draw because neither could "dominate" the other.

Yes. But the way in which points are allocated is very faulty. If we never had a ranking system nobody would be calling IND # 1 now.

The rankign system calculates for performances over a short period (2-3 years) & doesn't consider important details like injuries to key players during a series which can influence a series.

I give you an example. Bangladesh got 3 points for beating Windies in 2009. The ranking system doesn't consider the fact that was basically the Windies C or D team playing due to strike with the main players.

Plus how the hell did SRI get to # 3 in the ranking & they haven't toured overseas & won in years??

Unless such things are considered when calculating points, we shouldn't have a ranking system. For many years before 2002 cricket was fine without a ranking system.

 

[relentless_rock]

Is there nothing else left to discuss here? One fruitcake keeps dragging the discussion back to the same topic again n again.. and others oblige by responding.
Moving on...
Though it may not be as "interesting", but I would like to know your guys views on captaincy comparison.. between Smith and Dhoni.

Do you guys perceive Dhoni captaining the same SA side would have got as favourable results as Smith did (i.e. ofcourse if he had won the toss ). Need not rely solely on the last match outcome, but over a period of time.

My views: I know Indian side doesn't have the most penetrating bowling attack around (that's me being polite), but yet.. leadership has made it to look far more ordinary than it is. I do not quite have the same trust in Dhoni's leadership anymore going into future whilst the big three pacing there retirements.

 

[Sobi]

Some people just can't move on. Collapses in batting happen and its not a big deal. You just have to live with what the truth is and that is that India is the number 1 test side in the WORLD. which means they are a better team in test cricket than ALL THE OTHER TEAMS. They didn't just hack the rankings system and put their name at the top. they deserved that position so they got to the top. if they suck that much then why don't the other teams just get past them easily? Also, one more point to think about is that you all say that it counts alot of we win series in SA, AUS, or ENG and if we win there then we are truly the number one side. but think about it, why don't the other teams first prove that they are better than the Indian side by beating the Indians in India? dead Indian pitches are just an excuse. Beat the Indians in India then call yourself better. We can't easily win away games and so can you guys. We come in your land and you win and you come in our land and we whoop your ass. Now looking at the rankings, India is number 1 beause they deserve it. So stop crying about the rankings and move on....

 

[StinkyBoHoon]

Yes. But the way in which points are allocated is very faulty. If we never had a ranking system nobody would be calling IND # 1 now.

The rankign system calculates for performances over a short period (2-3 years) & doesn't consider important details like injuries to key players during a series which can influence a series.

I give you an example. Bangladesh got 3 points for beating Windies in 2009. The ranking system doesn't consider the fact that was basically the Windies C or D team playing due to strike with the main players.

Plus how the hell did SRI get to # 3 in the ranking & they haven't toured overseas & won in years??

Unless such things are considered when calculating points, we shouldn't have a ranking system. For many years before 2002 cricket was fine without a ranking system.

these things would make for a TERRIBLE ranking system.

there is no sports ranking system in the world that takes injuries into account. It's not about assessing and weighing things up, it's about keeping it simple. India beat Australia, therefore india are better.

That's the whole point of sport, it's where the whole interest and excitement comes from watching it. of course we can analyse and get enjoyment from saying, "ah but australia were without..." but that's for the nitty gritty. As a rule, sport is about who wins. I mean, maybe instead of actually playing any cricket you're suggesting that countries should invite experts on technique who can then assess they best team on paper should anyone actually play. Maybe India should get a few extra points because there's probably some kid that never got discovered who would have been really good?


fair enough you don't like the ranking system, and the point about Sri Lanka is also fair enough (though perhaps it should be up to teams like australia, england and south africa to invite them, as it is not sri lanka's fault they don't tour much, they don't bring in the money that series against england or india will) but no ranking system should ever account for speculation.

 

[Adarsh]

Is there nothing else left to discuss here? One fruitcake keeps dragging the discussion back to the same topic again n again.. and others oblige by responding.
Moving on...

Do you guys perceive Dhoni captaining the same SA side would have got as favourable results as Smith did (i.e. ofcourse if he had won the toss ). Need not rely solely on the last match outcome, but over a period of time.

My views: I know Indian side doesn't have the most penetrating bowling attack around (that's me being polite), but yet.. leadership has made it to look far more ordinary than it is. I do not quite have the same trust in Dhoni's leadership anymore going into future whilst the big three pacing there retirements.

Lol yes, we need to stop feeding trolls and move on.

Dhoni's captaincy has been poor. Look he can't make the bowlers get wickets but he can definitely not allow 200+ runs in one session. That session was dire, and contributed hugely to India's loss. Raina really is a pie chucker, he's got no flight, just bowls flat off spin that doesn't turn much. Sehwag, on the other hand, is genuinely a very good offspinner ! He's got great control, and gets a lot of purchase. His five wicket haul against the Aussies (watch on youtube) was sheer class.

When sides start whacking you , you need to bowl on one side of the wicket. Bowl 2/3 feet outide off stump, with a 7/2 or 6/3 field , with a bit of an in-out field. EVEN with the Indian line up, that session was absolutely rubbish. And you don't bring part timers like Sachin and Raina on when you're looking to contain runs. They're only good for 3/4 overs to attempt to get a wicket when things are not going your wicket and when there's a reasonable chance of winning the match. When you're looking to attack the bowling, nothing's easier than a Raina and Sachin bowling long hops twice an over.

 

[angryangy]

The trouble with a session like that is that it ceases to be about skills and is more about strength of character and communication. They were in trouble early because the bowlers were conceding a bad ball every over. Dhoni, ever a fan of bad bowling, is quick to put a deep point in place. Piece by piece, the captain and his charges dismantle each other. The difficulty of executing the simplest of skills increases as the "plans" get more vague and the mistakes mount up. Eventually, you have disorder in all matters, except fear and the opponent's domination. It is a rout.

Of course, that's part of the beauty of it, if you're on the other side.

 

[shripathee]

The South African batsmen played brilliantly. But it was quite strange to see Dhoni looking helpless. He usually has some plan or the other.
Dhoni's captaincy can sometimes go haywire. In many limited overs matches and in the IPL sometimes his captaincy lacks forethought. I know this because I am a Chennai supporter.

 

[sami ullah khan]

^A Captain is as good as his resources. What else could have Dhoni done with crap bowlers like Ishant, Unadkat and Sreesanth. I think he was resigned to the fact that his pace bowlers suck and can't get any wickets.

 

[Cricketman]

Neither am I, I agree with you, it was mainly a reply to Rohit's over emotional post about how India always gets picked on (not that we've heard that before...)

How the hell was what I said over emotional? In fact I thought it lacked any emotion whatsoever. TBF it was a pretty passive comment...

----------

Anyways, on to the next test. I have a good feeling about this one. We have had time to get used to the conditions by now. Considering we scored 400+ runs in the second dig, I think we'll put a better fight this time around.

It is hard to bet against a middle order of Dravid, Tendulkar, and Laxman - a batting order many teams couldn't dream of having, which have consistently performed not only in the last year but for the better part of the last two decades all over the globe.

I have faith in my bowlers too. Zaheer's return does not just bolster the attack but it lifts the whole unit. I would place his importance to almost as much as Sachin's in terms of the effect he has on the dressing room. He is the leader of the attack and serves as the bowling captain - motivates the younger guys and sets fields accordingly. Our best matchwinner in recent times. Sree and Ishant will fare better under his wing.

 

[surendar]

This is too much pressure on poor Zaheer who is just getting himself fit after a good gap. It might result in otherway ( hope, I didn't jinx anything ). In all the cricket shows they repeat the same thing - " The last best pace bowler which India produced apart from Zaheer is Srinath! ", which is a big shame.