Winning a series doesn,t mean australia are a better test team than india

[theman]

hello,
my dear friends have a look at this statsitic and tell who is the better between india and aus ifrom 1998 to 2004
1-aus tour india -india beat aus 2-1
2-india tour aus get there ass kicked and a white wash
3-aus tour india having a unbeaten for 16 tests and win the 1 one in mumbai and made india follow on and the best comebacks of whole cricket history aus get their ass kicked india win 2-1
4-india tour Aus with everyone predicting a white wash and on the first day of the first test everybody thought about a whitewash by aus but then captain ganguly and zaheer made the ausssies bow down.then dravid the" god" laxman as said by geof boycott took over and beat aus in the second test .but aus fought back to level the series .then sachin played a great innings and aus could have suffered 2-1 deafet on 5th day.but umpires and mr parthiv patel had other ideas and steve waugh for the last time saved australia .iseries drawn with india dominating aus .and taking home border gavaskar trophy .

5- aus tour india and in a time the worlds greatest batting line up was in shatters they would hardly score a run and win the series 2-0 and may be 3-0 .even risky ponting admits that they toured india at the right time when indian batsman were out of form.

so my conclusion is india have won the rubber 3 times including a drawn series and aus two times .so as of now aus are world champs in test but when indian batsman start playing well aus will have to give up the slot as this is a old team with players like warne or mcgrath who are their in the mid 30"s and allmost all players except ricky ponting ,clarke, are above 30 so their time is every short.i am not defending india but the stats show the truth .so please post your views freely

 

[vibs89]

Ya man ur r right

 

[jamesdriscoll]

Seems you forgot about the other half of the game aswell. And one day cricket was supposed to be what India were better at.

World Cup final? TVS Cup or whatever it was? VB Series? Pretty one sided if you ask me.

Fair enough, India won the last home test series. But the pitches Australia served up for their home series last year did make you wonder who the groundsmen wanted to win. More injury problems than they've had for a long time, and a drawn series. Australia then went on to win game after game and India lost the plot in their new found fame.

And then Australia go and beat India 2-0 in 3 tests, outplay them, and you say that India are the better team?

The Aussies have a better batting line-up, far better bowling line-up (particularly in the pace department) and they can handle pressure. Something that has always made India crack.

But yeah, you're right, India are the better team without a doubt.

 

[zimrahil]

Winning a series doesn,t mean australia are a better test team than india

True, but beating all other test nations home and away since 1998 means they are though

 

[The_gas]

Yes australia are by far a better team. I thin even england could beat india in a test match on current form

 

[fardin]

even pakistan or zimbabwe can beat india if they are in a current form' india is a not a good team losing almost every match they have played sens natwast tour'

 

[angryangy]

4-india tour Aus with everyone predicting a white wash and on the first day of the first test everybody thought about a whitewash by aus but then captain ganguly and zaheer made the ausssies bow down.then dravid the" god" laxman as said by geof boycott took over and beat aus in the second test .but aus fought back to level the series .then sachin played a great innings and aus could have suffered 2-1 deafet on 5th day.but umpires and mr parthiv patel had other ideas and steve waugh for the last time saved australia .iseries drawn with india dominating aus .and taking home border gavaskar trophy .

So it's ok for you to make excuses for India's batsmen, saying when they come back to form they will be the best, but in a series where Australia continually lost it's best bowlers to injury, there is no excuse?

 

[gold639]

True, but beating all other test nations home and away since 1998 means they are though

Yeah mate.I totally aree with you.I hope you read that theman.

 

[sachinisgod]

Seems you forgot about the other half of the game aswell. And one day cricket was supposed to be what India were better at.

World Cup final? TVS Cup or whatever it was? VB Series? Pretty one sided if you ask me.

Fair enough, India won the last home test series. But the pitches Australia served up for their home series last year did make you wonder who the groundsmen wanted to win. More injury problems than they've had for a long time, and a drawn series. Australia then went on to win game after game and India lost the plot in their new found fame.

And then Australia go and beat India 2-0 in 3 tests, outplay them, and you say that India are the better team?

The Aussies have a better batting line-up, far better bowling line-up (particularly in the pace department) and they can handle pressure. Something that has always made India crack.

But yeah, you're right, India are the better team without a doubt.

The same can be said abt the Indian Cricket Administrators who served up a schedule that favoured the Aussies the most. Think of this...had the 5th day in Chennai been played, looking at the start and the target India were enroute to squaring the series. In Nagpur the same doubt as urs can be cast which team did the curator support? In mumbai its yet to start. Had Chennai been won and Nagpur been a different wicket, dont u think the story been different?

So it's ok for you to make excuses for India's batsmen, saying when they come back to form they will be the best, but in a series where Australia continually lost it's best bowlers to injury, there is no excuse?

So this time its India's bowlers and batsmen who are down with injury. Its not abt excuses. India's lost the series and we sadly accept it. India's played far far below their capabilty but "had it been so" is a very tricky question. Aussies will cry for years that when India squared the series and as theman said missed out coz of Patel and Bucknor in getting it to 2-1, Aussies were without Warne and McGrath. Indians will whine that the GOD was not playing for half this series. The captain was changed half way thru and Bhajji didnt get to play the Nagpur match.

Aussies are simply the best now. But two years hence and apart from Clarke and one or two others, this ageing team is going out through the top very fast. Now that both the Ashes and BG Trophy are going to be biennial its going to be a fascinating contest between the teams I reckon are the top three.

 

[squiz]

Australia have some up and coming cricketers:
Michael Clarke, Michael and David Hussey, Marcus North, Shaun Tait, Cameron White, Shane Watson, Daniel Marsh, Chris Rogers, Allan Wise, Andrew McDonald, Paul Rofe

just to name a few. None of them can break through into the senior team though because it's so powerful, and the only way they can get a game is through injury, and usually they replace players with other players with other ex test players:
Matty Elliot, Martin Love, Andy Bichel, and Stuart MacGill (2nd best leg spinner in the world, and can't get a game in the Aussie side) just to name a few again

So you can see the depth of Australian cricket, and it will still be pretty big in years to come, although the bowling department will have dropped off considerably, without the guns of today (McGrath, Gillespie and Warne)

 

[theman]

Australia have some up and coming cricketers:
Michael Clarke, Michael and David Hussey, Marcus North, Shaun Tait, Cameron White, Shane Watson, Daniel Marsh, Chris Rogers, Allan Wise, Andrew McDonald, Paul Rofe

just to name a few. None of them can break through into the senior team though because it's so powerful, and the only way they can get a game is through injury, and usually they replace players with other players with other ex test players:
Matty Elliot, Martin Love, Andy Bichel, and Stuart MacGill (2nd best leg spinner in the world, and can't get a game in the Aussie side) just to name a few again

So you can see the depth of Australian cricket, and it will still be pretty big in years to come, although the bowling department will have dropped off considerably, without the guns of today (McGrath, Gillespie and Warne)

I don,t agree with you except micheal clarke ,shaun tait and shane watson are just waste of time.the keeper brad haddin can,t bat .and andy bicheal is old and stuart macgill is as disgrace .he takes wickets for 100 or 150 runs remember the last series against india .iin every over he throws up a full toss.
second best leg spinner in the world my ****ing foot .aus are sure going struggle in the next 4 years i can bet .

 

[theman]

Seems you forgot about the other half of the game aswell. And one day cricket was supposed to be what India were better at.

World Cup final? TVS Cup or whatever it was? VB Series? Pretty one sided if you ask me.

Fair enough, India won the last home test series. But the pitches Australia served up for their home series last year did make you wonder who the groundsmen wanted to win. More injury problems than they've had for a long time, and a drawn series. Australia then went on to win game after game and India lost the plot in their new found fame.

And then Australia go and beat India 2-0 in 3 tests, outplay them, and you say that India are the better team?

The Aussies have a better batting line-up, far better bowling line-up (particularly in the pace department) and they can handle pressure. Something that has always made India crack.

But yeah, you're right, India are the better team without a doubt.

what are you taking about i cleary mentioned tests put your damn specs on.and in aus if you remember brisbane was a wicket favouring aus and yes on currnet form aus have a better line up in batting and bowling but i think india has best batting line up in the world in the long term and aus are no where near them.and bowling aus are fast declining .So take that james

 

[brad352]

I don,t agree with you except micheal clarke ,shaun tait and shane watson are just waste of time.the keeper brad haddin can,t bat .and andy bicheal is old and stuart macgill is as disgrace .he takes wickets for 100 or 150 runs remember the last series against india .iin every over he throws up a full toss.
second best leg spinner in the world my ****ing foot .aus are sure going struggle in the next 4 years i can bet .

SCG MacGill

Bowling
Overs: 1407.5
Maidens: 292
Runs: 4441
Wickets: 152
Avg: 29.21
BBI: 7-50
5WI: 9
10WM: 2
SR: 55.5
Econ: 3.15

Yeah, you're right- absolutely disgraceful :


You lost to a better team- get over it and stop being a sore loser

 

[hi ppl]

You lost to a better team- get over it and stop being a sore loser

Well said.

 

[angryangy]

26 year old Dominic Thornley just hit 261 n.o. and took David Hookes' long held record for the number of sixes hit in an Australian first class match.
25 year old Adam Voges hit a record 100 n.o. off 62 balls on Sunday. His violent strokeplay is somewhat reminiscent of Adam Gilchrist. He is still struggling to make selection however, as the form of the Western Australian top order is so good.
21 year old Cameron White is the captain of Victoria and narrowly missed test selection today. Shows talent in all aspects of his game, averaging 26 with the bat, 34 with the ball and a in the field, can only improve in coming years.
23 year old Michael Clarke needs no introduction. May well be capable of holding his Test berth until retirement, barring injury.
25 year old left armer Allan Wise has taken 36 wickets at an average of 25.30 in his first year of first class cricket.
21 year old Shaun Tait is simply explosive. 62 wickets in 17 first class matches with a strike rate of 41.9, he is almost certain to make his mark on the world stage.
The Hussey brothers; 29 year old Mike averages 51.88 at various positions in the WA order while 27 year old David averages 57.37 in Victoria's middle order, somewhat surprisingly, because he couldn't get a game for WA.
27 year old keeper and stand-in captain for NSW, Brad Haddin can certainly bat. His average of 33.31 may not be all that impressive, but if anything, it is more because his power hitting game can crumble.
30 year old Martin Love is a prime example of Australia's depth. Just 5 tests under his belt in over 10 years of first class cricket, an average of 51.54, a high score of 300 n.o. and nearly 13000 runs to his name, he probably won't return to the national side before several of the current members retire.

These are mainly just stats though and Squiz already refered to most of them. Anyone can look up stats and produce them for any argument. I do think it's a very big call though, to dismiss Australia's (or anyone's for that matter) depth if you've never seen it play.

In addition to this, Katich, Gillespie, Lee and Symonds are under the age of 30, while Ponting and Hodge will turn 30 later this year. While a number of great players will probably retire over the next few years, these players will likely still be around in four years' time.

Australia struggling is unlikely. It will weaken, almost certainly, but this team has survived the retirements of the Waugh twins and prospered. One mustn't forget, Tendulkar, Ganguly, Dravid and Kumble are not young men either. I think, if one thing can be said about the next four years of international cricket, it's that nothing is certain. That Australia will loose it's dominance may be likely, but that it will loose it to anyone in particular is another question entirely.