Which team is stronger at home, India or Australia?

Pratters · 13-02-2010, 11:04 PM

It certainly isn't RSA even though they are the best test side in the world (IMO at least now).

India has lost 2 series in 2 decades and this will be India's first series loss in this decade which comes v RSA pretty early into the decade.

Australia is pretty strong at home too.

My cousin and I just raised this topic when discussing cricket without going into the details. Richard had said India is the stronger side at home giving some reasons not that long ago, if I am not mistaken.

EDIT - Mods, add a poll please.

silentstriker · 13-02-2010, 11:09 PM

Australia are by far the strongest side if you look at the history. No subcontinental team has ever won a series in Australia. NZ have won once, SA have won once. Only England and WI have won multiple times.

If you look at the last decade, Australia stronger at home by virtue of being simply a stronger side overall. In the next decade, on basis of what's going on right now...I'd still give it to Australia

.

silentstriker · 13-02-2010, 11:09 PM

And I have no idea how to add a poll.

Mr Mxyzptlk · 13-02-2010, 11:10 PM

At the moment Australia, because they're producing pitches that their bowlers can use, and use better than the opposition. As I've said a couple of times in the SA-Ind thread, India needs to get back to those basics. Right now they're throwing away home field advantage.

G.I.Joe · 13-02-2010, 11:15 PM

wtf. I'm not your cousin, pratters. I'm starting to doubt the existance of this cousin you mention in every thread.

Pratters · 13-02-2010, 11:16 PM

Oh yes, I discussed this with GI Joe, not my cousin. SORRY. My cousin weighs 115-130 kilos and definitely exists A LOT.

G.I.Joe · 13-02-2010, 11:17 PM

damn right.

BoyBrumby · 14-02-2010, 04:43 AM

Overall I'd say Australia, but comparitive to their overall strength it's probably India. Famously Oz went over 30 years between test series wins in India before Gilchrist lead them to victory.

marc71178 · 14-02-2010, 05:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pratters

It certainly isn't RSA even though they are the best test side in the world (IMO at least now).

Interesting. Am I not correct in saying that since readmission, only Australia and England have won series in SA?

G.I.Joe · 14-02-2010, 05:55 AM

yeah, but multiple times.

Sir Alex · 14-02-2010, 05:59 AM

India still is a tough team to beat in India, although recently some of its curators have no idea of a concept called home adv. Even in the dire 90s when it failed to win a single test overseas it still beat touring comfortably.

Manee · 14-02-2010, 06:44 AM

I'd say it is probably even, atm.

irfan · 14-02-2010, 07:30 AM

I'd have to say that it's easier to win Test matches against India in India but not necessarily Test Match Series (2001 India Australia a case in point) than against Australia on their home turf

silentstriker · 14-02-2010, 08:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoyBrumby

Overall I'd say Australia, but comparitive to their overall strength it's probably India. Famously Oz went over 30 years between test series wins in India before Gilchrist lead them to victory.

That's the right way to put it.

Overall it's Australia but that's because they're just tougher overall to beat. If you look at home advantage comparatively to their overall ability, it'd be India.

Australia won only once, and that was when a bunch of Indian batsman were out of form, rain saved them on one day, and the curator at Nagpur had it in for the BCCI (and Ganguly refused to play the Test in protest...). Err, not that I'm taking anything away from the win, but a lot of things generally have to happen for you to win in India. Or you can have Dale Steyn. One or the other...

Uppercut · 14-02-2010, 09:36 AM

I reckon it depends on the players in each touring side and their individual skillsets far too much to say. For Sri Lanka I suspect Australia would be much tougher to tour. For South Africa I'd have said India would be much tougher to tour. Results don't really support that specific thesis, but you get the point

.

13-02-2010, 11:04 PM	#1 (permalink)
Pratters Banned Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Kolkata, India Posts: 20,794	Which team is stronger at home, India or Australia? It certainly isn't RSA even though they are the best test side in the world (IMO at least now). India has lost 2 series in 2 decades and this will be India's first series loss in this decade which comes v RSA pretty early into the decade. Australia is pretty strong at home too. My cousin and I just raised this topic when discussing cricket without going into the details. Richard had said India is the stronger side at home giving some reasons not that long ago, if I am not mistaken. EDIT - Mods, add a poll please. Last edited by Pratters; 13-02-2010 at 11:07 PM.

13-02-2010, 11:10 PM	#4 (permalink)
Mr Mxyzptlk Request Your Custom Title Now! Join Date: May 2002 Location: Trinidad and Tobago (Trinidad) Posts: 36,795	At the moment Australia, because they're producing pitches that their bowlers can use, and use better than the opposition. As I've said a couple of times in the SA-Ind thread, India needs to get back to those basics. Right now they're throwing away home field advantage. __________________ Sreesanth said, "Next ball he was beaten and I said, 'is this the King Charles Lara? Who is this impostor, moving around nervously? I should have kept my mouth shut for the next ball - mind you, it was a length ball - Lara just pulled it over the church beyond the boundary! He is a true legend." The Blog The Portfolio The...er...Twitter

14-02-2010, 04:43 AM	#8 (permalink)
BoyBrumby Englishman Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Doing the stance Posts: 42,622	Overall I'd say Australia, but comparitive to their overall strength it's probably India. Famously Oz went over 30 years between test series wins in India before Gilchrist lead them to victory. __________________ *- As featured in The Independent.* "This is not the time for namby-pamby promising youngsters who might just do something; not the time for building for the future. Pragmatism rules and they don't come more pragmatic than Rogers." - Victor Marks makes the case for stiff-legged and stiff-armed 35 year old left-handers in Ashes squads

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Official Club Cricket Season XIV-XV	Mr Mxyzptlk	CW Offseason Club Cricket	1002	18-12-2009 02:37 PM
Next Indian Coach	shoot_me	Cricket Chat	41	23-05-2007 02:37 AM

13-02-2010, 11:09 PM	#3 (permalink)
silentstriker The Wheel is Forever Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: USA Posts: 36,507	And I have no idea how to add a poll.

13-02-2010, 11:16 PM	#6 (permalink)
Pratters Banned Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Kolkata, India Posts: 20,794	Oh yes, I discussed this with GI Joe, not my cousin. SORRY. My cousin weighs 115-130 kilos and definitely exists A LOT.

13-02-2010, 11:17 PM	#7 (permalink)
G.I.Joe International Coach Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: India Posts: 10,223	damn right.

14-02-2010, 05:55 AM	#10 (permalink)
G.I.Joe International Coach Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: India Posts: 10,223	yeah, but multiple times.

14-02-2010, 05:59 AM	#11 (permalink)
Sir Alex Banned Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Nowhere Posts: 4,793	India still is a tough team to beat in India, although recently some of its curators have no idea of a concept called home adv. Even in the dire 90s when it failed to win a single test overseas it still beat touring comfortably.

14-02-2010, 06:44 AM	#12 (permalink)
Manee Cricketer Of The Year Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Heaven Posts: 8,201	I'd say it is probably even, atm.

14-02-2010, 07:30 AM	#13 (permalink)
irfan International 12th Man Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: WA Posts: 1,703	I'd have to say that it's easier to win Test matches against India in India but not necessarily Test Match Series (2001 India Australia a case in point) than against Australia on their home turf

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)