Indian Oversea test watch, how will they do?

[Stefan9]

Hey 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 ;P

 

[smash84]

yes, i think India will draw the series in SA, win in Eng, and lose 3-1 in Aus. This India side looks as good as any in the last 70 years, if not better.

 

[Black_Warrior]

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?

Yes. It's less about the team, more about the conditions.
England that gets routinely thrashed in Australia manages to win consistently in South Africa.

Over the last 10 years, subcontinental teams have won 4 tests in South Africa ( India 2, Pakistan 1, Sri Lanka 1) and 1 test in Australia (India in 2007)

Forget about series, when was the last time an away team won a test in Australia (other than South Africa) ?

Australia is not a great side by any means but in their conditions, they are more dominant than any other side.

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.

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.

 

[Black_Warrior]

england getting sold short by a few here. if anderson continues in his current vein then india have next to no chance there.

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.

 

[Salamuddin]

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.

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.

 

[Salamuddin]

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.

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.

 

[Black_Warrior]

Regarding Tendulkar-Kohli, not making a comparison between them players as it's not possible to compare a veteran of 200 Test with a guy who's played 60 odd tests but right now, given the form that Kohli is in, and within the specific context of the current season, I would say Kohli = Tendulkar in terms of what you can get out of them

I mean Tendulkar at his peak would blast a 169 in South Africa against Donald and co.

Kohli is good enough to do that right now.

 

[Black_Warrior]

And I can see how people are looking at names like Shami, Yadav and Bhuvi and saying what's so great about that. I agree that they are not great bowlers yet and not even close to the best attacks we have seen in recent times of Steyn, Morkel, Philander, Anderson, Broad, Bresnan, Johnson, Harris, Siddle etc.

However, there is difference between comparing bowlers over careers and assessing their usefulness within the specific context of a 3 match series.

Here's a scenario.

Does the name Sreesanth or Agarkar scream greatness? No.

They won tests for India in South Africa and Australia respectively.

This much is at least beyond doubt that the likes of Shami, Bhuvi and Yadav are at least better than Sreesanth/Agarkar.

 

[Motorwada]

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.

 

[Spark]

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.

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.

 

[Motorwada]

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.

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.

 

[Spark]

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.

So will everyone else. Doesn't make him better than the bowlers who have to bowl on the roads too.

 

[Shri]

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.

Woakes is a more threatening bowler at home. And so are a lot of 125 trundlers who play county cricket.

 

[Salamuddin]

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.

Really ? I don't think its an obvious NO at all.
India were fairly competitive in 2013-14. They gifted Australia a win at Adelaide when a draw was there for the taking. Australia only won at Brisbane by four wickets. AT one point on that test, India had OZ 5-250 chasing 400 odd.

They're a better side now than they were in 2013-14. Australia's bowling attack is excellent but their batting lineup is flaky and held together by Smith.
Wouldn't surprise me at all if India actually won a test here next summer.

 

[Slifer]

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.

I swear if that comparison with Tendulkar had been made with any none Indian player this board would immediately come to a screeching halt.

 

[Chrish]

Tbh Warner is as big of a threat as Smith for Indian bowlers at home..

 

[Salamuddin]

I swear if that comparison with Tendulkar had been made with any none Indian player this board would immediately come to a screeching halt.

ok 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. :-)

 

[CricAddict]

ok 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. :-)

Meaning he is not overrated

 

[Shri]

Cribb's at Baulkham Hills? I work there, lol.

 

[Black_Warrior]

ok 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 Piper