We've now won two tests away from home in less than 12 months. I can't remember for sure when was the last time that we managed this (not counting zim and bangladesh), but I can't think of any occasion more recently than when we beat England 2-1 in 1999 (obviously on that occasion the victories were slightly closer together.
In fact, I can think of only one away test match victory between 1999 and Hobart - when Bond knocked over a miserable Windies side in 2002. If this is accurate (cbf checking) then that is a remarkable failing of what was (until 2007 at least) still a pretty strong side.
I guess it says a lot about how much the team has changed in the past 10 years. Fleming had an usually solid batting lineup (with competent batsmen from 1-10) for much of his reign. However, after the injuries to Nash, Vettori and Cairns in 1999/2000 the side's bowling attack was a little pedestrian. Even when Bond came into the team, we only really looked likely to consistently grab 20 wickets with the advantage of home conditions. But the batting was so solid that we still performed credibly, with drawn series in Australia, SL and India from 2001-2003.
It's too early to say for sure, but it's beginning to appear that we now have the opposite problem. Our batting is so weak, that we're unlikely to score enough runs to be competitive with any consistency. As a result, even at home, we'll lose most test series that we play (especially when they're 3 matches long) - and by bad scorelines too. But with New Zealand now apparently only able to secure 2-test match tours, our bowlers will give us a chance to pinch the odd match, and thereby draw test series with what are (on paper at least) much stronger sides.
Originally Posted by HeathDavisSpeed
I can think of a list of Sydney Grade posters who would contribute a better average post than Bahnz.
Maow like no one can hear you maowing.