What's new

Australia v India | 3rd Test | December 26-30, 2014 | MCG

Status
Not open for further replies.
This is one of those rare Tests that BOTH teams deserve to lose, but which will end up as a draw!
 
Ravdeep Mehta: "Seeing the way Ashwin is batting these days, I think it won't be a bad idea if he is moved to middle order like Australia has done with Smith.And may be he can play as pure batsman only"

See people WAAAY over rate Ashwin's batting.

Right now Ashwin plays ball in 2 ways:

1. Perfectly solid (95%)
2. Edges (5%)

No 2 is too damn high.
 
Junaids said:
This is one of those rare Tests that BOTH teams deserve to lose, but which will end up as a draw!
Click to expand...

Not sure why would you say Australia deserved to lose?

Australia were 2-0 up in the series and if India wanted to win they had to force the issue, which wasn't hard considering they were bowling to 3 tailend batsmen.

If they can't pick up last 3, why would you blame Australia for playing it out?

They have ensured they won the series and that's what matters.

Rest is just semantics, 1-0, 2-0, 3-1 or 4-0 is all missing the major part.

A series win.

Australia have fully deserved it.
 
These fourth innings matchsaving knocks are what Tendulkar was always useless at, which is why his fourth innings average was so low.

And it is what elevates FAF du Plessis from a mediocre batsman into a near-great.

Because you need courage, concentration and application to adapt to changing circumstances on the final day of a Test. It is the ultimate test of character.
 
sensible-indian-fan said:
Ravdeep Mehta: "Seeing the way Ashwin is batting these days, I think it won't be a bad idea if he is moved to middle order like Australia has done with Smith.And may be he can play as pure batsman only"

See people WAAAY over rate Ashwin's batting.

Right now Ashwin plays ball in 2 ways:

1. Perfectly solid (95%)
2. Edges (5%)

No 2 is too damn high.
Click to expand...
He sure is good enough for no. 7 with 4 pacers
 
Dr_Bassim said:
Not sure why would you say Australia deserved to lose?

Australia were 2-0 up in the series and if India wanted to win they had to force the issue, which wasn't hard considering they were bowling to 3 tailend batsmen.

If they can't pick up last 3, why would you blame Australia for playing it out?

They have ensured they won the series and that's what matters.

Rest is just semantics, 1-0, 2-0, 3-1 or 4-0 is all missing the major part.

A series win.

Australia have fully deserved it.
Click to expand...

I am annoyed with Australia for their defensive "safety-first" approach and for the ridiculous shots that some of their batsmen got out to - Smith in both innings. I've never seen two players get caught by leg-slip before. Yadav's bowling was awful yesterday, mind-blowingly awful, yet he got Haddin and Smith fiddling to leg-slip.
 
Dhoni should get some good hits and batting practice. He is going to be crucial for India's world cup campaign.
 
Junaids said:
These fourth innings matchsaving knocks are what Tendulkar was always useless at, which is why his fourth innings average was so low.

And it is what elevates FAF du Plessis from a mediocre batsman into a near-great.

Because you need courage, concentration and application to adapt to changing circumstances on the final day of a Test. It is the ultimate test of character.
Click to expand...

Gavaskar had high 4th innings average but don't recall him having courage to go for a win.
 
this pair needs to bat atleast 5 overs 6 overs will secure a draw and 1 of the batman should stay till the end
 
Junaids said:
Ozgod, I disagree.

With 60 balls left:
Australia requires 4 wickets
India requires 231 runs.

Unless India's lower implodes this is going to be the draw that Smith's hyper-defensive captaincy deserves.

Australia batted for 23 ridiculous overs this morning and added 57 runs.

Now they are paying the price - they only have 60 balls left whereas if they'd declared 7 overs earlier they would have 100 balls left.

The 10 balls that Nathan "Fredo Corleone" Lyon batted and the 3 balls that Hazlewood batted look suicidal now.
Click to expand...

Hindsight's always 20-20 though mate. I agree that they should have gone for the runs earlier. They wanted to make sure there was absolutely no chance for India and they probably wanted to drive home the message that if India wanted a chance to win the game they would need to take the wickets not rely on a declaration. I understand why that particular decision was made, and I understand that given they look like getting so close that there will be debate about it.
 
ashwin looks a proper no 7 he should bat there so that india can play 4 quicks feat bhuvi
 
OZGOD said:
Hindsight's always 20-20 though mate. I agree that they should have gone for the runs earlier. They wanted to make sure there was absolutely no chance for India and they probably wanted to drive home the message that if India wanted a chance to win the game they would need to take the wickets not rely on a declaration. I understand why that particular decision was made, and I understand that given they look like getting so close that there will be debate about it.
Click to expand...

In all fairness, it was the right decision.

Kohli took them very close on a worse Adelaide pitch.

Then he started saying a lot about how he won't take any nonsense, which I think was okay in context of this tour.

But perhaps Smith just wanted to remind India, that if Australia do not make kind declarations, Kohli has no chance in hell of chasing scores in Australia.

Pretty great mental call in my opinion !
 
After playing that Johnson over so well should have left the last ball.

Its a habit. Can't take a risk.

Anyways, Hazelwood and Harris are tougher to face right now.
 
OZGOD said:
Hindsight's always 20-20 though mate. I agree that they should have gone for the runs earlier. They wanted to make sure there was absolutely no chance for India and they probably wanted to drive home the message that if India wanted a chance to win the game they would need to take the wickets not rely on a declaration. I understand why that particular decision was made, and I understand that given they look like getting so close that there will be debate about it.
Click to expand...

India was set 384 runs in 70 overs because Australia batted 23 overs for 57 runs today.

If Australia had just slogged for 5 overs for 30 runs - even if the last 3 wickets fell - they would have set India a target of 357 runs in 88 overs.

And at that point they would have guaranteed themselves a total of 8 overs with a second new ball.

The target would have been virtually the same size, but those extra 18 overs - of which 8 with a second new ball - look very desirable now.
 
Dr_Bassim said:
In all fairness, it was the right decision.

Kohli took them very close on a worse Adelaide pitch.

Then he started saying a lot about how he won't take any nonsense, which I think was okay in context of this tour.

But perhaps Smith just wanted to remind India, that if Australia do not make kind declarations, Kohli has no chance in hell of chasing scores in Australia.

Pretty great mental call in my opinion !
Click to expand...

You also have to think of the context. Smith is captaining his second Test and probably wouldn't have wanted to be remembered as the captain who gave away a 2-0 series lead to end up drawing the series to India.
 
Special training for surviving 50 overs without scoring must be given to the batsmen of today. They all know how to go into T20 mode without any training.
 
They've called it off. It's a draw, Aus 4 wickets short. Aus regain the BG trophy and cannot lose the series.
 
Does Australia doesn't do its homework?

They accepted a draw.

One fluke wicket in the next over and thye had a real chance cos our next 3 batters are really bad.

Anyways, good good.
 
Overall I think it's a fair result. Neither team was able to take the 20 wickets needed to win the game despite virtually all the overs being available.

I guess if India were looking at moral victories they could point to the fact that this tour won't end up in a whitewash this time. Which is fair as they have played much better this time than last time.
 
Well played Dhoni and Ashwin.

And well played Dhoni to knock some sense into Ashwin and motivate him to not play at all deliveries.
 
IndianWillow said:
Special training for surviving 50 overs without scoring must be given to the batsmen of today. They all know how to go into T20 mode without any training.
Click to expand...

Congratulations to India on securing the draw.

I'm not convinced that Pakistan could defend for the last 10 overs at 6 wickets down to save a Test in Australia or South Africa.

Which is why numbers 7, 8 and 9 must be able to bat!
 
Weird day all round. The only highlights being Harris' bowling and the Kohli/Rahane partnership.
 
I think post match discussions will centre on the following:

1. the timing of the OZ declaration (Indians will use this as a reason for the draw)
2. Dhoni's defensive fields and his bowlers' inability to clean up the OZ tail, forcing them to rely on #1 for a chance (non-Indians will use this as a counter to #1)
3. the state of the wicket (fans from the subcontinent will use this to justify flat wickets in the subcontinent)

and

4. OZ dropped catches on Day 3 (I will use this as the real reason for OZ's failure to win. Catches win matches)
 
A perfect day really, Australia will be celebrating their series win, the commies will be going on and on about the declaration and India will be celebrating their moral victory.
 
Junaids said:
These fourth innings matchsaving knocks are what Tendulkar was always useless at, which is why his fourth innings average was so low.

And it is what elevates FAF du Plessis from a mediocre batsman into a near-great.

Because you need courage, concentration and application to adapt to changing circumstances on the final day of a Test. It is the ultimate test of character.
Click to expand...

Bud, why do you always say that?

Sachin is not a great batsman in 4th innings but he wasn't bad or useless.

1. His 119 in Manchester 1990 - widely regarded as a brilliant innings to save his team which was at one stage 183-6 (we eneded at 343 -6).

2. 136 Against Pakistan (only slogged when the pain got too much - a reason which I am sure you would find acceptable)

3. 2008 win chasing 383 against England at home - scored a century

4. 2011 against WI at home - 76 - He and Laxman chased down the target - We were garbage which is why we struggled to win against WI at home and got duly thrashed in the subsequent Aus tour

5. 2010 - India needed 258 to win. India were at 62-4 and he scored a crucial 50 (got out at 171) while Laxman scored a 100 and we won the match.

Then if you consider 3rd innings, there are some good innings like him and Laxman scoring 50's on a raging mumbai turner where Aussies next got all out for 94.

He isn't great but he definitely isn't useless.
 
Gilly said:
A perfect day really, Australia will be celebrating their series win, the commies will be going on and on about the declaration and India will be celebrating their moral victory.
Click to expand...

True true.

Indeed great series win for Aus.

Great achievement by India to avoid 0-4.

Woohoo.
 
feilding is the biggest worry, our bowlers have been struggling since the start of the uae tour but it doesn't help when 20+ chances have been missed over those 5 tests.

Can't recall a worse aussie fielding unit in many many years.
 
Vijay got a poor decision but I think a draw was a fair result this time,Aus gave up in the last 20 minutes when every ball was meeting the centre of the bat,however I must admit I never thought our last 6 wickets could last these many overs,Maybe Watto's drop catch gave us the lifeline
 
OZGOD said:
The match was beyond your team's ability to influence and you had to rely on Smith's generosity to make a game of it then?
Click to expand...

You need to stop getting hurt over every second comment. Pitch wasn't easy, and it's only because of Australia's late declaration that you guys are not up 3-0.
 
Even in the moral victory count, this was a draw. Australia giving a cowardly declaration and India not looking like winning it. So the series stands 2-0 in favour of India in moral victory.
 
Viay LBW - One of the many poor decisions umpires made this series.:facepalm:
0N76c9D.gif
 
OZGOD said:
I think post match discussions will centre on the following:

1. the timing of the OZ declaration (Indians will use this as a reason for the draw)
2. Dhoni's defensive fields and his bowlers' inability to clean up the OZ tail, forcing them to rely on #1 for a chance (non-Indians will use this as a counter to #1)
3. the state of the wicket (fans from the subcontinent will use this to justify flat wickets in the subcontinent)

and

4. OZ dropped catches on Day 3 (I will use this as the real reason for OZ's failure to win. Catches win matches)
Click to expand...

Aussies fir ro rahe hai :sree

The only time Indian fans complained was about umpiring deciding the match result, which was a fair reaction.
 
Junaids said:
These fourth innings matchsaving knocks are what Tendulkar was always useless at, which is why his fourth innings average was so low.

And it is what elevates FAF du Plessis from a mediocre batsman into a near-great.

Because you need courage, concentration and application to adapt to changing circumstances on the final day of a Test. It is the ultimate test of character.
Click to expand...

I don't hold any particular charm for fourth innings knocks. Without contributions from players like Sachin in the first innings, these fourth innings specialists do not even have a chance to contribute to a win.

First innings/Second innings specialists set up the match for their team and take out pressure for their team and put pressure on the opposition team - these are like openers in an ODI match. Third/Fourth innings specialists finish off matches - like finishers in an ODI match.

Greatness in cricket has nothing to do with being a 4th innings expert.

Faf cannot hold a candle to Sachin, just because he has played a couple of 4th innings knocks.
 
joly said:
Vijay got a poor decision but I think a draw was a fair result this time,Aus gave up in the last 20 minutes when every ball was meeting the centre of the bat,however I must admit I never thought our last 6 wickets could last these many overs,Maybe Watto's drop catch gave us the lifeline
Click to expand...

Simple. He dropped the match. :)
 
Kohli saved it for India. The Australian team may not respect him but it certainly fears him resulting in an unusually delayed declaration.
 
Electron said:
You need to stop getting hurt over every second comment. Pitch wasn't easy, and it's only because of Australia's late declaration that you guys are not up 3-0.
Click to expand...

Nobody's getting hurt lol. I'm just challenging your assertion. I agree that if not for the late declaration we probably would have been up 3-0. But I think they needed another 20 overs to take the last four wickets and that might have changed how India came out to bat and it's possible they could have pulled it off. It's a hypothetical so we will never know.
 
moumotta said:
Kohli saved it for India. The Australian team may not respect him but it certainly fears him resulting in an unusually delayed declaration.
Click to expand...

I think this "lack of respect" is all in Kohli's head. They're not going to walk on eggshells around him and kiss his @sre if that's how he defines respect. If anything the fact that he is the No1 target shows a healthy respect IMO. If you don't get sledged or focussed then it means the team doesn't consider you important enough to bother with.
 
OZGOD said:
I think this "lack of respect" is all in Kohli's head. They're not going to walk on eggshells around him and kiss his @sre if that's how he defines respect. If anything the fact that he is the No1 target shows a healthy respect IMO. If you don't get sledged or focussed then it means the team doesn't consider you important enough to bother with.
Click to expand...

You are talking about fear not respect.
 
sensible-indian-fan said:
What happ?



That's the hallmark of great players.
Click to expand...


Ravi says the scoreline doesn't matter and that the Rahane-Kohli partnership was something Australia has never seen before hehe.Manjrekar replied the score definitely does matter.The chutzpah of some of these chamchas ...
 
RexRex said:
Ravi says the scoreline doesn't matter and that the Rahane-Kohli partnership was something Australia has never seen before hehe.Manjrekar replied the score definitely does matter.The chutzpah of some of these chamchas ...
Click to expand...

Never seen before? Has Shastri not watched victorious tours of Australia by South Africa and England in the last five years?

Good grief.

This was a dead wicket, but still, India was never going to score more than 330 on it on the final day, with an inability to attack like in the first innings for fear of losing wickets and exposing the tail.

If Smith was afraid of losing from that position then he is too timid to be Aussie skipper. You don't bat on and on and on just in case the opposition scores the highest ever winning total in 137 years of Test cricket at the ground.

I make my mind up about skippers very quickly.

Atherton was right to deny Hick his century 20 years ago at the SCG when his slowness jeopardised a victory.


And Smith proved his inferiority as a Test captain today by his stupid attempts to nurse Marsh to a slow century. And it cost his team victory.
 
moumotta said:
You are talking about fear not respect.
Click to expand...

I know the difference between fear and respect. I feel that Kohli wants to be feared not respected. All those comments like "I don't care if they hate me" etc you hear them out of the mouths of 12yos that have come to a new school for the first time and are having trouble fitting in.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Or possibly Indian fans would prefer to have a player feared not respected by the opposition so they view all his and their actions through that lens.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
if Aus had set a target of 330 , India would have had a decent shot at win . Yeah Aus chances of win would have gone up , but so would Indias . May be 60-40 in favour of Aus .
 
Junaids said:
Never seen before? Has Shastri not watched victorious tours of Australia by South Africa and England in the last five years?
Click to expand...

Yep those english/sa teams played total cricket with bat ball and in the field they didn't just rack up scores on dead tracks.
 
Poor marsh tried to tuk tuk for his first hundred at home but got run out for 99 & also cost aus a win.
 
jusarrived said:
if Aus had set a target of 330 , India would have had a decent shot at win . Yeah Aus chances of win would have gone up , but so would Indias . May be 60-40 in favour of Aus .
Click to expand...

The target was already 326 overnight, and no team - not even with Bradman - has ever scored more than 332 to win on this ground.

Australia then wasted 23 overs before lunch in adding just 57 runs to the target.

If they had just slogged for five overs - even if they got out - they would have increased 326 to at least 360, but given themselves not just an extra 18 overs, but crucially 8 overs with a second new ball against the tail.

Boof Lehmann is a good coach, but he's no student of the history of the game. Neither, clearly, is Steve Smith. They delayed the declaration far, far too late for fear of Kohli and Rahane being better than Bradman and Sobers and Pollock and Viv Richards and Tendulkar and Lara and all the other greats who never chased down 330+ on this ground.
 
Junaids said:
The target was already 326 overnight, and no team - not even with Bradman - has ever scored more than 332 to win on this ground.

Australia then wasted 23 overs before lunch in adding just 57 runs to the target.

If they had just slogged for five overs - even if they got out - they would have increased 326 to at least 360, but given themselves not just an extra 18 overs, but crucially 8 overs with a second new ball against the tail.

Boof Lehmann is a good coach, but he's no student of the history of the game. Neither, clearly, is Steve Smith. They delayed the declaration far, far too late for fear of Kohli and Rahane being better than Bradman and Sobers and Pollock and Viv Richards and Tendulkar and Lara and all the other greats who never chased down 330+ on this ground.
Click to expand...

I think they declared too late but not sure what past mcg history has to do with this pitch?

This is the deadest mcg pitch i have seen for a long time and the teams in this series are scoring at run rates rarely seen in test history so how can that just be ignored when it's more relevant than run chases on different pitches from different era's?
 
Junaids said:
The target was already 326 overnight, and no team - not even with Bradman - has ever scored more than 332 to win on this ground.

Australia then wasted 23 overs before lunch in adding just 57 runs to the target.

If they had just slogged for five overs - even if they got out - they would have increased 326 to at least 360, but given themselves not just an extra 18 overs, but crucially 8 overs with a second new ball against the tail.

Boof Lehmann is a good coach, but he's no student of the history of the game. Neither, clearly, is Steve Smith. They delayed the declaration far, far too late for fear of Kohli and Rahane being better than Bradman and Sobers and Pollock and Viv Richards and Tendulkar and Lara and all the other greats who never chased down 330+ on this ground.
Click to expand...

Junaids you need to put come context though. I'm not disagreeing with the fact that the runs should have been scored quicker so that the declaration could have come earlier. I mentioned previously I understand the reasons why they did it. I understand that quantifiably speaking the odds of an Indian victory were probably very low. You can do all the scientific stuff and run regression analyses and figure out precisely what they are. And as for history, since 2000 the MCG has used drop in pitches. I'm not a huge fan of drop in wickets as I feel they can vary a lot year on year. Last year's MCG wicket was quite hard to score on for the first three days, both Australia and England struggled to score over 250. Then it flattened out on Day 5 and OZ were able to score 230-odd for the loss of just two wickets. That's why I tend to look at each wicket individually at the state of each day at the MCG rather than look at history the way you would with other grounds.

Just my thoughts regarding Smiffy's captaincy. I'm a little bit different to you regarding captains. I believe captains grow into their roles. Two Tests isn't enough for me to either praise or condemn Smith's long term viability as captain. After the WI series I might have a better idea. Right now he's one win one draw. He probably got the timing of his declaration wrong but it's much easier to say that in hindsight. This time last night I felt we definitely needed more runs.

One thing I will say about Smiffy's captaincy is that he seems to be trying a bit too hard to be a hardarse, talking about India whingeing and saying they tend to fold under pressure and all the rest of it. I don't think it suits him to fill that attack role, the way that when someone like Ponting or Steve Waugh did it it would come more naturally. You don't really hear Clarke saying that stuff, nor did Tubby Taylor. Let the attack dog in the OZ side do that, let someone like Warner do it and cop the heat in the press for it. I guess he wanted to show the Indians he wasn't going to be a softcock but I just don't think it suits him. Play hard on the field but off the field let someone else do all that shyte.
 
Junaids said:
The target was already 326 overnight, and no team - not even with Bradman - has ever scored more than 332 to win on this ground.

Australia then wasted 23 overs before lunch in adding just 57 runs to the target.

If they had just slogged for five overs - even if they got out - they would have increased 326 to at least 360, but given themselves not just an extra 18 overs, but crucially 8 overs with a second new ball against the tail.

Boof Lehmann is a good coach, but he's no student of the history of the game. Neither, clearly, is Steve Smith. They delayed the declaration far, far too late for fear of Kohli and Rahane being better than Bradman and Sobers and Pollock and Viv Richards and Tendulkar and Lara and all the other greats who never chased down 330+ on this ground.
Click to expand...

I think the Aussies did a good thing by securing the series win. Not sure why any captain would want to have a floored opponent to rise again? If the Aussies lose this match, India may go as far as squaring the series.
 
Junaids said:
The target was already 326 overnight, and no team - not even with Bradman - has ever scored more than 332 to win on this ground.

Australia then wasted 23 overs before lunch in adding just 57 runs to the target.

If they had just slogged for five overs - even if they got out - they would have increased 326 to at least 360, but given themselves not just an extra 18 overs, but crucially 8 overs with a second new ball against the tail.

Boof Lehmann is a good coach, but he's no student of the history of the game. Neither, clearly, is Steve Smith. They delayed the declaration far, far too late for fear of Kohli and Rahane being better than Bradman and Sobers and Pollock and Viv Richards and Tendulkar and Lara and all the other greats who never chased down 330+ on this ground.
Click to expand...

you do realize that a lot of records especially chasing ones have been broken in the last 5-6 years ? Bradman - sobers - Viv could not do it , does not mean Rahane- Virat cannot do it .
 
jusarrived said:
you do realize that a lot of records especially chasing ones have been broken in the last 5-6 years ? Bradman - sobers - Viv could not do it , does not mean Rahane- Virat cannot do it .
Click to expand...

Sorry, no, I'm not aware of any such development.

Just over six years ago there were two entries into the top ten winning Test run chases of all time (South Africa in Australia and India over England at Chennai).

But within the last 6 years you have to go down to the 25th highest successful run chase of all time, which is Australia's 311-8 to win at Johannesburg.

So no, the last 6 years of Test cricket have produced nothing to suggest that Australia needed more than 330 runs to win.
 
Junaids said:
Sorry, no, I'm not aware of any such development.

Just over six years ago there were two entries into the top ten winning Test run chases of all time (South Africa in Australia and India over England at Chennai).

But within the last 6 years you have to go down to the 25th highest successful run chase of all time, which is Australia's 311-8 to win at Johannesburg.

So no, the last 6 years of Test cricket have produced nothing to suggest that Australia needed more than 330 runs to win.
Click to expand...

No total is really safe these days. SA came close to besting a chase of 458 and only a last minute choke prevented them from winning. I won't be surprised if one of the top teams successfully chases 500 over the next five years. Faster scoring has made this possible.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

jeetu
Stats: Rating players by their performance against each country
Replies
12
Views
497
jeetu
jeetu
sweep_shot
Joe Root's (128*) batting master-class takes England to 262/3 on Day 1 in 1st Test v India
3 4 5
Replies
353
Views
13K
Hasan123
Hasan123
jeetu
Stats : Batter's Effective Test average (2020 to 2022)
Replies
3
Views
2K
jeetu
jeetu
A
Australia vs India | 3rd Test | Melbourne | Dec 26-30, 2018 | Day 1 Thread
2 3
Replies
233
Views
10K
kingusama92
kingusama92
jeetu
Stats - Rating Test batsman by taking Peer Factor into account
Replies
6
Views
2K
jeetu
jeetu
Back
Top