***Official Australia in India***

[honestbharani]

I liked the article. The tone was that of a grudging acknowledgment for a respected enemy. More real than if it had just been a eulogy of his batting skills.

reading it again.. I g2 agree.. I guess I juz jumped to a conclusion based on a feeling I had before even reading the article..


Apologies to everyone.

 

[ret]

those stats on tosses means little when you consider the intangibles associated with winning a toss like allowing you to put the best put forward

from the context of THIS series, I guess winning the toss is an important thing because the pitches have been beauties on the Ist two days as compared to later on. a big score has put the pressure on the opponent as we saw from the some of the collapses by both India and Australia in their Ist inning at B'lore and Mohali respectively

for Australia, making India bat last makes them take advantage of India's tendency to collapse in the 4th inning and for India, bowling in the 4th innings would mean that its two-spinners-2pacers attack is utilized in the best possible way with the spinners getting the advantage to ball on the final day

moreover the importance of winning a toss is reflected in a captain's eagerness to win a toss. ask any captain, would he like to lose a toss and the answer would probably be 'no' even though an analyst would suggest that winning tosses mean little. why a captain would not mind winning the toss is even though you have to play well to win a game, a toss [if the right decision is taken] allows a team to put its best foot forward, start the game in a positive frame of mind knowing that something has gone their way and ofc places the team in a position where it thinks it can better utilize its resources

analyst will never be captains or leaders .... captains and leaders think differently. they know how to take advantage of every single thing that motivates the side. Only time a captain should be using those stats on tosses is when he loses the toss and thus can say that tosses mean little and thus use those as a tool to motivate its side again despite losing the toss

don't know what the stats or analysts say, as a captain I would not mind winning the toss in every game that I play

 

[SJS]

Not really. It's pretty obvious that Australia's batting far outweighs it's bowling and as such it's definitely advantageous batting first. Look at Bangalore. I don't think we'd be winning here if we'd have won the toss, I think we'd have the same issues bowling India out, but I think we'd be in a much better position to draw the game then we are now.

But hey, that's fair, we won one and India won one. Can't complain.

In the last twenty years (since the start of the Ashes series in England in 1989) Australia have been the dominating side in world cricket. That has resulted in their winning more matches than they lose irrespective of the toss. This is what I mean when I say, if you are a good side, the disadvantage of a toss loss will not make you lose matches by itself and vice-versa. Have a look.

Since June 1989 - Australia in Tests.

[B]TESTS	TOSS LOST	TOSS WON[/B]
Total	108	100%	105	100%
[COLOR="DarkGreen"]Won	66	61.1%	63	60.0%[/COLOR]
[COLOR="DarkRed"]Lost	15	13.9%	21	20.0%[/COLOR]

As you can see the winning or losing the toss did nothing to their win percentage. On the other hand they lost one and a half time as many matches when they won the toss ! Not that it means anything - its just a statistic.

 

[Manee]

Agreed as well. Prasad has been a terrific bowling coach for India. What amazes me as well is that he still looks as young and as physically fit as he did when he played for India. He still looks like he could bowl for India and bowl well.

I remember watching a training session in the nets here when India toured Australia. Prasad was routinely bowling to the likes of Tendulkar and Ganguly and was bowling well too. He was another bowler in the queue alongside the likes of RP Singh and Ishant Sharma. Great bowling coach who teaches by example.

Indeed, I could imagine Prasad can still probe the spot at about 115kph and extract a fair bit of movement. Moreover, it is good that you have a bowling coach who can still bowl and trial new theories out (e.g. a new grip for swing) himself.

 

[Mister Wright]

Just watched the highlights on Foxsports. Sehwag's dispatching of Siddle's slower ball was monstrous. What a shot!

 

[pasag]

In the last twenty years (since the start of the Ashes series in England in 1989) Australia have been the dominating side in world cricket. That has resulted in their winning more matches than they lose irrespective of the toss. This is what I mean when I say, if you are a good side, the disadvantage of a toss loss will not make you lose matches by itself and vice-versa. Have a look.

Since June 1989 - Australia in Tests.

[B]TESTS	TOSS LOST	TOSS WON[/B]
Total	108	100%	105	100%
[COLOR="DarkGreen"]Won	66	61.1%	63	60.0%[/COLOR]
[COLOR="DarkRed"]Lost	15	13.9%	21	20.0%[/COLOR]

As you can see the winning or losing the toss did nothing to their win percentage. On the other hand they lost one and a half time as many matches when they won the toss ! Not that it means anything - its just a statistic.

Yep, the point is Australia aren't the side they once were and as such with the composition of this side, Australia's primary plan is to win the toss, bat heaps and try grind the opposition out. Obviously with Warne, McGrath and co that didn't apply so stats going back that far and in the general stats won't matter, this is an issue Aus face now and in the short term future.

 

[Ikki]

Not really. It's pretty obvious that Australia's batting far outweighs it's bowling and as such it's definitely advantageous batting first. Look at Bangalore. I don't think we'd be winning here if we'd have won the toss, I think we'd have the same issues bowling India out, but I think we'd be in a much better position to draw the game then we are now.

But hey, that's fair, we won one and India won one. Can't complain.

Agree. It'd be silly to say that the match hinges on who wins the toss - otherwise, why play after that - but to say it has no bearing is to be myopic.

 

[honestbharani]

Do Indians really appreciate how good Sharma is? All I've heard from some of my Indian mates is that "he's good, but he's not been tested much", etc, and then go laud some batsmen like Badrinath as the second coming of Christ.

Is it true or just my perception that Indian batsmen are more loved than their bowlers?

It is called "Reverse Jinxing"...

 

[SJS]

those stats on tosses means little when you consider the intangibles associated with winning a toss like allowing you to put the best put forward

from the context of THIS series, I guess winning the toss is an important thing because the pitches have been beauties on the Ist two days as compared to later on. a big score has put the pressure on the opponent as we saw from the some of the collapses by both India and Australia in their Ist inning at B'lore and Mohali respectively

for Australia, making India bat last makes them take advantage of India's tendency to collapse in the 4th inning and for India, bowling in the 4th innings would mean that its two-spinners-2pacers attack is utilized in the best possible way with the spinners getting the advantage to ball on the final day

moreover the importance of winning a toss is reflected in a captain's eagerness to win a toss. ask any captain, would he like to lose a toss and the answer would probably be 'no' even though an analyst would suggest that winning tosses mean little. why a captain would not mind winning the toss is even though you have to play well to win a game, a toss [if the right decision is taken] allows a team to put its best foot forward, start the game in a positive frame of mind knowing that something has gone their way and ofc places the team in a position where it thinks it can better utilize its resources

analyst will never be captains or leaders .... captains and leaders think differently. they know how to take advantage of every single thing that motivates the side. Only time a captain should be using those stats on tosses is when he loses the toss and thus can say that tosses mean little and thus use those as a tool to motivate its side again despite losing the toss

don't know what the stats or analysts say, as a captain I would not mind winning the toss in every game that I play

Australia while playing India have lost more matches when they have won the toss (24.5%) than when they have lost the toss (18.9%)

Again, as I said before it doesn't prove anything. Its just a statistics. It could very well have been the other way around.

Yes the toss does make a difference sometimes but that difference is not DECISIVE as any number of such stats will show. I can keep churning out as many as you want

Yes some of them will go one way and others will go another way. That because of the random nature of these and just proves that the impact is so small as to be irrelevant in such a large majority of cases as to make this discussion futile.

 

[duffer]

I think it's not trying to get ahead of ourselves. Too many false dawns from too many players.

 

[honestbharani]

Ponting can't do a **** as long as his bowlers don't bowl with any discipline, him having boundary riders is probably testimony to the fact that he expects his bowlers to bowl a hit-me ball every over, Lee bowling as poorly as he has and Clark not being there further makes things hard for him, but still he should to look to attack with the new ball or when the ball is doing something but he hasn't done that and that is something i'm not too happy about.

Not really... Ponting has been harping on about cutting of India's boundaries and him starting off with sweeper cover to Lee shows that he is basically trying to cut off the boundaries from ball one, and not looking to attack at all.


As I said during the first test, he showed great imagination and flair as far as the placement of his attacking fielders was concerned but the way he kept posting men on the boundary right after the first boundary was hit in that particular direction is not exactly a ringing endorsement of his captaincy skills.

 

[ret]

Australia while playing India have lost more matches when they have won the toss (24.5%) than when they have lost the toss (18.9%)

Again, as I said before it doesn't prove anything. Its just a statistics. It could very well have been the other way around.

Yes the toss does make a difference sometimes but that difference is not DECISIVE as any number of such stats will show. I can keep churning out as many as you want

Yes some of them will go one way and others will go another way. That because of the random nature of these and just proves that the impact is so small as to be irrelevant in such a large majority of cases as to make this discussion futile.

we are not just talking abt the results here but how a toss allows you to put the best put forward .... moreover those stats don't tell if the decision the captain made was a good one .... and Australia has been a better test team on most occasions

one example i can think is the 2003 WC final:
Ganguly wins the toss: happiness
Ganguly puts Asutralia in: many ppl thought then that he gave the cup away

ofc, Australia batted every well in that game but those stats don't tell the complete story, nor does it take the intangibles that i spoke about into account

the importance of winning a toss is best shown by the fact that very few captains [if any] would like to lose a toss [no matter what stats you give them]

 

[Top_Cat]

we are not just talking abt the results here but how a toss allows you to put the best put forward .... moreover those stats don't tell if the decision the captain made was a good one .... and Australia has been a better test team on most occasions

That's the point I think SJS is trying to make, I guess; the best teams make it so that winning the toss becomes an irrelevancy.

That said, most teams aren't that good and, without relying on winning, have a vested interest in hoping they do at least.

one example i can think is the 2003 WC final:
Ganguly wins the toss: happiness

Haha, got an image of Ganguly in a Buddha-like pose in my mind just then.

 

[honestbharani]

Good day for India... Hope they can press on, although given how flat the pitch is, I do think Australia can salvage a draw. But there is a good chance that India could go on to win too... Nice set up going into the last two days of a test match..



It is indeed all too easy as an arm chair critic and I certainly don't pretend to be anything else, but with hindsight, it does beg the question, were the tactics that the Aussies employed in 2004 so successful as a tactic itself or was it only because of the quality of the bowlers (and bowling) and the (lack of) quality of the batting (the batsmen were obviously of high quality)... I remember going into the series, I did NOT feel confident of our batting at all.. Sachin was out, Sourav was in the worst form, Rahul was coming out of his purple patch, Laxman was not in rhythm at all and the only guy who was going well was SEhwag. We didn't have an opening partner for him and we hadn't played a test for quite a while... And of course, Australia came in with the best bowling plans and also the best bowlers executing them....


To me, like all tactics new, it just caught the Indians off guard. They did not expect Australia to play this way. The fact that the same tactic has been tried last year against INdia in Australia and again here and haven't worked as well shows that, perhaps the Indians have just gotten used to this tactic.


I remember during India's tour to England last year, Tremlett and Co. started attacking Sachin by bowling short of length or even bouncers to his body and they had a leg gully and a short leg catching. He was looking poor against that initially, even got out once or twice, I guess, but once he got used to it, he was back to normal and was getting runs in the old way.. My cousins (Sachin fanatics, tbh) were absolutely worried that it was the beginning of the end for Sachin in that series, I just told them that great players don't get worked out so easily.. I mean, if it was THAT easy to get Sachin out, you would think it would have been figured out by the many greats who have a. bowled to him or b. skippered sides against him....


I think like most tactics, this one by Ponting too has perhaps reached its use by date and it is time to think of another way.. Maybe a combination of the old aggression and the new defensive settings????


Abt the game today, I just told my folks that Hussey was having an extremely lucky innings (not that he didn't bat well, but just so many edges, plays and misses, more than usual for Hussey from what I have seen) when he got out... He played a God like innings in Bangalore after the first mistake but here, there were just so many mistakes... WAtson and Lee showed great fight and batted beautifully but Lee just got out at the wrong time.. The umpiring continues to be poor, esp. from Rudi (although I thought Rauf got a great decision in not giving Gambhir out first ball LBW)..



Don't see Hayden and Clarke failing again but I do think the others might just fall over easily, unfortunately for Australia...

 

[pasag]

I think like most tactics, this one by Ponting too has perhaps reached its use by date and it is time to think of another way.. Maybe a combination of the old aggression and the new defensive settings????

First off it's time to bite the bullet and look at what India are doing right and learn from that, mainly stop bowling so short. Secondly wonder how much Greg Chappell is helping, it boggles the mind that our brains trust is low on ideas with an ex-Indian coach in the ranks.

 

[pup11]

Not really... Ponting has been harping on about cutting of India's boundaries and him starting off with sweeper cover to Lee shows that he is basically trying to cut off the boundaries from ball one, and not looking to attack at all.


As I said during the first test, he showed great imagination and flair as far as the placement of his attacking fielders was concerned but the way he kept posting men on the boundary right after the first boundary was hit in that particular direction is not exactly a ringing endorsement of his captaincy skills.

If you are talking in prespective of India' 2nd innings then Ponting didn't have much choice other than employ boundary riders to make sure that India don't score too many in boundaries, as he would have wanted to make sure India don't score their runs too qucikly, but still India scored at a rate of 4 rpo so obviously his tactic didn't work, but it was also due to some very poor bowling, the Aussie quicks atm have got their lenghths all wrong, since there isn't any movement for them, they are just banging the ball short of length, but due to slowness of the wicket Indian batsmen have easily picked them off for runs, so runs are gonna come if the bowlers bowl the way they are bowling atm, no matter what Ponting does, anyways as for the 1st test his tactics in Bangalore at times weren't too good imo either.

 

[Top_Cat]

First off it's time to bite the bullet and look at what India are doing right and learn from that, mainly stop bowling so short. Secondly wonder how much Greg Chappell is helping, it boggles the mind that our brains trust is low on ideas with an ex-Indian coach in the ranks.

Surely, in this Test, the problem hasn't been one of planning but execution?

 

[honestbharani]

Surely, in this Test, the problem hasn't been one of planning but execution?

That is true though... And you can't blame them too much too.. REverse swing, taking care of the ball are all very much subcontinental things.. You don't have to do it all by yourself in Australia with the pitches and the outfield being different. Also, the SG ball being used in this series.. Perhaps the Aussies are not used to taking care of it and maintaining the shine on one side???? Surely it is too much to expect them to get used to all this so soon.. I mean, Harbhajan never got anything out of the kookaburra, did he? Would LOVE some stats on how he has gone while using the kookaburra balls and the others...

 

[honestbharani]

We can chase down anything - Watson

 

[pup11]

Surely, in this Test, the problem hasn't been one of planning but execution?

Not much has gone right for them so far on this tour, there two best bowlers (Clark and Lee) have struggled, there two best batsmen in these conditions (Clarke and Hayden) are yet to really spend any decent time out there in the middle, they don't have any spinner of note who could really exploit 4th and 5th day conditions, so all these are big issues for the Aussies, execution wise the bowling was not any better in Bangalore than what it has been in Mohali, only difference is that the Bangalore pitch helped the bowlers a lot more than this pitch, its batting that has let the Aussies down big time in this game, on a placid track they have failed very badly, on a pitch where with just a little application could have payed rich dividends, Australian batsmen have failed to cash in, Lee and Watson' partnership just about further proved how poorly the Australian top-order batted.