-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
***Official*** Australia in India 2017
- Thread starter Spark
- Start date
centurymaker
Cricketer Of The Year
Still, he needed a 50+ score when his team was behind or when the match was in balance, but it did not happen once and thus Australia almost lost 3 Tests out of 4. He was unsuccessful when situation was critical or when chips were down. It's always relatively easy to dominate when you are ahead or when you bat first with no scoreboard pressure and with first use of a flatter pitch. Smith is Tendulkar 2.0
He totally reminds me Tendulkar version 2.0 (the accumulator) although Smith is a much better accumulator. Yet the Tendulkar 2.0 would seldom do in a truly critical situation, his 100s were good but rarely great or truly match defining or impactful. And idk about Smith but at least this series, he's done what Tendulkar did often, which is score 100s when its relatively easy and then not even score 40 even once in all the other relatively tougher or tighter match situations/ conditions.
When backs were against the wall or match was really tight, Tendulkar too would crumble or get dismissed along with his team mates in one way or another... This is why Tendulkar despite his stats is NOT seen as the 2nd greatest Test batsman, its not about the stats. Up until 2011 after around 175 Tests, his test average was 57 at age of 38. Thats incredible, but he played relatively fewer match defining innings in the later half of his career, which affected his standing among the greats of the game, and it hurt India's success rate especially overseas.
Its more about when you perform. Umesh Yadav averaged 36+ for the season, yet we all know how invaluable he was, especially with his timely impactful breakthroughs. His true worth & avg would be much lower.
Therefore, **** the stats, they don't win you anything. I can recall India's tour of Australia 2007/08 where Tendulkar was amazing, he looked in top form, he scored 100s & 50s in each of the 1st innings of the 4 Tests.
It was roughly like 60, 160, 70, 150
yet he did nothing in any of the 2nd innings, not that 2nd innings runs are always valuable but given India and their overall performance, India tended to be in a tight situation come the 2nd innings and Tendulkar, despite his ability and form, would get out or crumble when behind.... or in those truly tough situations which could change or define the series... and thus India lost that series, just like Australia has lost this one, and in a team sport thats all that actually matters!!
Tendulkar failed to propel India to victory, Smith failed to propel Australia to victory despite both being in sublime form overall. When it truly mattered, they both failed. Thats all that ultimately counts.
2007/08 Australia win 2-1
2017 India win 2-1
Spark
Global Moderator
100% logic: it was the guy who made 100's fault that we didn't get a big first innings score, not the other batsmen giving their wickets away around him.
Handscomb turns a few of his starts into 60s or 70s and we likely win the series, perhaps even 3-1. Same for Marsh, same for Warner. When a guy puts up 500 runs in the series, you should look elsewhere for blame.
Handscomb turns a few of his starts into 60s or 70s and we likely win the series, perhaps even 3-1. Same for Marsh, same for Warner. When a guy puts up 500 runs in the series, you should look elsewhere for blame.
Last edited:
Daemon
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Shri
Mr. Glass
Gamer Poop cricket edition.
Shri
Mr. Glass
Not sure if I have said this but this has been the most competitive series I have seen in a long time. The Dharmasala pitch should be the template for how pitches should be prepared in India but I am not sure if it was only possible to prepare something like that because of the cool conditions near the mountains. Well played Aus and thanks for helping put an end to Nair's career.
Bijed
International Regular
Quite possibly both the Marsh brothers' careers, they owe you
stephen
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
For all the talk about the pitches early in the series, the last pitch was an absolute cracker. One of the best test match pitches you'll see. Something in it for everyone. If I had one complaint though it's that it could have been a touch easier to score on so that the game went a bit longer, but then again it could just be that Australian batsmen not named Smith just need to learn how to hold a cricket bat.
Shri
Mr. Glass
Yeah, we'll take the younger Marsh out of their hands if they want.Quite possibly both the Marsh brothers' careers, they owe you
Tempted to ban you for giving that moron the time of day.
Son Of Coco
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Yeah, it seemed to be a pretty good deck. It's a pity we didn't challenge the Indians more in the decider. I would have liked to see it come down to a tight finish, but full credit to India for dominating when it counted.
It's unfortunate Kohli apparently told his players they couldn't share a few drinks with the Australians after the series. But then, he may have been worried some of them would register a blood-alcohol level higher than his series batting average.