Lol , autcorrect on the mobile obviously agrees ;PHey come on, let's not turn this into another conversation about why the problem with Indian bowlers is their diet
Lol , autcorrect on the mobile obviously agrees ;PHey come on, let's not turn this into another conversation about why the problem with Indian bowlers is their diet
Yes. It's less about the team, more about the conditions.So, even in a worst case scenario India will somehow manage to win a test in South Africa while still being thrashed 4-0 in Australia?
They almost won the 1st test in 2013. It's not just about the names but the consistency shown over the last 2 years. Shami and Yadav are fitter and more skilled than they were in 2013-14 which is something that happens - people get better with a few years of test cricket than they were at the start.No kidding. Pretty much the same as the attack they had the last time they toured South Africa only with Kumar and Bhumrah in place of Zaheer Khan. Oh, and Hardik Pandyia. Really fearsome now.
And that is precisely why people are saying England is their best chance. English attack is reliant on just 2 bowlers - Broad and Anderson. That's just not enough to win you a 5 match series. You will need to sustain pressure for long periods of time. Are you going to have these 2 bowl all day non stop? The moment someone else comes on to bowl, England don't look like taking wickets.england getting sold short by a few here. if anderson continues in his current vein then india have next to no chance there.
India undoubtedly have a better balanced side than they did during the 2000's. In Pandya they have a genuine allrounder at 6, which gives them a balance they never had.Are you really serious? I have seen numerous better sides in 30 years than the one currently playing. I saw a side with Tendulkar, Ganguly, Dravid, Khan, Kumble and Singh. That was later supplemented with Dhoni. Those teams were far better all round than the current side. India being competitive in SA and ENgland will likely be because of how weak those sides have come but I won't make any excuses, India will not win in SA but might sneak a test match in England.
As for a fully fit Australia, even on the flatter modern pitches, India will be out scored, time and time again. I cant imagine it being any different from a couple years back.
don't disagree that they don't have a class bowler like Rabada or Steyn. BUT the 2000's India side had a decidedly worse bowling side than this one and they managed to eke out series draws in Australia and South Africa and a series win in NZ. And quite frankly had India's batting lineup not screwed up they probably should have got a series win in South Africa in 06/07.Personally I think people are overrating this india pace attack. I see no true class bowler in there. Might have more depth then previous teams but that's about it.
this is why small sample bowling stats are meaningless. particularly kumar, who very conveniently didn't play most of the tests in which he would have been ineffective. shami is good though.Bhuvi averages 27 btw so not sure how he's overrated. Also Shami averages 30.xx overall and 25 odd over the last 2 years. Players like anderson, broad, johnson averaged in the 30s for a long while.
Yes but right now Bhuvi is going to be playing in conditions which will be helpful for him. Not Australia but SA and England surely.this is why small sample bowling stats are meaningless. particularly kumar, who very conveniently didn't play most of the tests in which he would have been ineffective. shami is good though.
So will everyone else. Doesn't make him better than the bowlers who have to bowl on the roads too.Yes but right now Bhuvi is going to be playing in conditions which will be helpful for him. Not Australia but SA and England surely.
Woakes is a more threatening bowler at home. And so are a lot of 125 trundlers who play county cricket.And that is precisely why people are saying England is their best chance. English attack is reliant on just 2 bowlers - Broad and Anderson. That's just not enough to win you a 5 match series. You will need to sustain pressure for long periods of time. Are you going to have these 2 bowl all day non stop? The moment someone else comes on to bowl, England don't look like taking wickets.
Same attack failed to beat Pakistan at home over a 4 match series and that had Woakes bowling much better than he is now. You also have to factor in the fitness. Quite likely that Anderson might miss a game or two.
Really ? I don't think its an obvious NO at all.An important question is can India be as competitive in Australia as Australia were in India last time around? I think the answer to that question is a fairly obvious NO.
I swear if that comparison with Tendulkar had been made with any none Indian player this board would immediately come to a screeching halt.India undoubtedly have a better balanced side than they did during the 2000's. In Pandya they have a genuine allrounder at 6, which gives them a balance they never had.
Also, their seam attack is better than it was in the 2000's - Shami, Bhuvi and Ishant is surely the best seam bowling trio than India have ever had. Hell even the reserve seamers Umesh and Bumrah are better than some of the first choice seamers that India had in the 2000's.
Also, I think Kohli is amore aggressive and ambitious captain than either Gangly or Dhoni and you need that when playing away from the subcontinent.
The only thing the 2000's side had over this one was arguably a better top 7 but I'm not sure it was better by that much.
KL Rahul > Gambhir
Vijay = Sehwag (better avg for Sehwag but i think in overseas conditions the gap narrows considerably)
Pujara < Dravid
Rahane < Laxman
Kohli > Tendulkar (yeah I know people are gonna to disagree with me on this but I think Tendulkar was very overrated).
Pandya = Yuvraj/Raina
Saha < Dhoni
Honestly the 2000's side wasn't THAT much better guys.
ok I'll say it then. Lara and Ponting were far better players than Tendulkar.I swear if that comparison with Tendulkar had been made with any none Indian player this board would immediately come to a screeching halt.
Meaning he is not overratedok I'll say it then. Lara and Ponting were far better players than Tendulkar.
Tendulkar is as overrated as Burgey of Wentworthville and Cribbage of Baulkham Hills are as posters. :-)
Burgey lives in Wentworthville? Thought the billionaires park was Vaucluse or Point Piperok I'll say it then. Lara and Ponting were far better players than Tendulkar.
Tendulkar is as overrated as Burgey of Wentworthville and Cribbage of Baulkham Hills are as posters. :-)