India have lost 7 matches in overseas conditions, which is the most by any Indian team so far

[MenInG]

The Australian bowlers were all fired up and came out all guns blazing and they clinched the second Test in just over an hour. There was some resistance by Hanuma Vihari and Rishabh Pant, but once Mitchell Starc dismissed Vihari, it was only a matter of time before the rest of the batting order was sent back to the hut.

India were bundled out for 140 and conceded the match by 143 runs. Australia are now on level terms in the series and everything is perfectly set up for the Boxing Test match. With this loss, India have lost seven matches in overseas conditions, which is the most by any Indian team in foreign shores.




“As a team I think we played well in patches and that’s something that we can hold on to and take forward in the next game. Australia played better cricket than us, especially with the bat and getting 330 on that sort of a pitch was a bit too much. They deserved to win,” Kohli said after the match.

India missed a trick by not playing a spinner on a surface where Nathan Lyon picked up 8 wickets and was adjudged man of the match. However, Kohli said that as a management group they did not think about playing a spinner when they looked at the pitch on the first morning.


“We thought four quicks would be enough. Nathan Lyon bowled really well on this wicket. With the skill levels and consistency that he has to get something out of this wicket was really good. We never thought about the spin option to be honest,” the captain added.


https://www.hindustantimes.com/cric...-perth-test/story-gKsCAuq4VrqpMdtWF6rqKL.html

 

[Bilal7]

7-2 is better than 8-0. They have definitely improved. The bowling attack is arguably their best ever and it shows.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

7-2 is better than 8-0. They have definitely improved. The bowling attack is arguably their best ever and it shows.

7-3

 

[Proactive_]

7-2 is better than 8-0. They have definitely improved. The bowling attack is arguably their best ever.

Which is exactly the reason why Kohli and Shastri have to be two of the absolute worst people to have ever been in charge of a cricket team. Hell I'd even argue that they have destroyed a potentially very stable and competent batting line up as well by their incessant mind boggling selections on every tour thereby making sure that every batsman is playing every game with the added pressure of saving their places in the team. This is the team environment of a "No.1" ranked team ladies and gentlemen.

These two clowns have ruined what could have been India's golden generation. I had Kohli on par with Tendulkar with regards to being India's worst captain ever but he is surely taking the lead now. What an absolute knobhead.

 

[JibranAnsari]

Well if you play a lot if matches overseas then you gotta lose a lot as well


Simple proportion.

 

[shariqnoor]

They have won 3 Overseas Tests this year too - most by an Indian team ever. Depends which way you want to look at it.

 

[Cuts_and_cuts_hard]

They've played more overseas tests than any other Indian team. Bound to happen.

 

[MenInG]

table added to first post

 

[Swashbuckler]

3-7 with serious winning chances in at least a couple more. Better than Dhoni days but they have underachieved enormously, special thanks to Kohli and the Mumbai lobby.

Also out of the 10 overseas matches this year in SA/ENG/Aus we have won 2 tosses (Johannesburg, Adelaide) and lost 8 !!!! In this toss dependent era that is pretty bad luck.

 

[Sarwar89]

3-7 with serious winning chances in at least a couple more. Better than Dhoni days but they have underachieved enormously, special thanks to Kohli and the Mumbai lobby.

Also out of the 10 overseas matches this year in SA/ENG/Aus we have won 2 tosses (Johannesburg, Adelaide) and lost 8 !!!! In this toss dependent era that is pretty bad luck.

And Australia playing with out Steve Smith and Dave Warner is also bad luck ?

 

[MenInG]

And this team is still number one ranked? Guess other teams are doing really bad in this way.

 

[Buffet]

Have they lost any test after winning the toss?

Have they won any test after losing the toss?

 

[rhony]

Have they lost any test after winning the toss?

Have they won any test after losing the toss?

Kohli never lost a test after winning the toss. Most have been wins with 3 draws I think

 

[rhony]

Have they lost any test after winning the toss?

Have they won any test after losing the toss?

They won the only game in England after losing the toss and batted first.

 

[cricketindiafan]

And it’s also the first time we have won a test in SA, ENG and Aus in the same year. So a 3-7 record overall and a 6-7 record including the home tests. Should have won at least a couple of tests where we had a chance but threw it away. Massive underachievement and disappointing. Not winning the Aus series will only make it worse.

We have now equalled WI (lost 7 tests and won 1 out of 9 tests in 2000) and Australia (lost 7 tests, won none out of 9 tests in 2013) as the teams with most away losses in a calendar year.

 

[Buffet]

Kohli never lost a test after winning the toss. Most have been wins with 3 draws I think

They won the only game in England after losing the toss and batted first.

Thanks. I think Indian team is strong to capitalize after winning the away toss, but not strong enough to overcome a toss loss in away conditions.

 

[Varun]

You can laugh, but we're rightfully the #1 side in test cricket going around today: we can win at least one test everywhere and dominate at home. That's good enough in these times.

 

[KingKhanWC]

They've played more overseas tests than any other Indian team. Bound to happen.

This gives you more chances to win.

India is too used to playing on low, slow turning decks. Also selecting T20 players wont help you win tests overseas.

Still have a chance in Aus to do well but their captain and coach are tactially retarted.

 

[rhony]

Thanks. I think Indian team is strong to capitalize after winning the away toss, but not strong enough to overcome a toss loss in away conditions.

As is the case with most teams. Toss plays an important part but the main issue is with batting too. Only 3 batters perform regularly and in that Rahane is hit or miss. India failed to chase relatively low scores in at least 2 tests this year. The first test in SA should have been won.

One thing you can clearly see is that this Indian team is very competitive in majority of the tests. Gone are the days of capitulation within 3 days. Most games are going to the 5th day with the winner still undecided. Good batting with push them towards victory as the bowlers are clearly doing their jobs.

 

[The Viper]

Think it’s a definite improvement winning at least one game on each tour. And it was closely contested mostly. There were moments that India could have been ahead in the England tour.

 

[Usman Chadda]

You can laugh, but we're rightfully the #1 side in test cricket going around today: we can win at least one test everywhere and dominate at home. That's good enough in these times.

That is such a sad statement of the state of world cricket at the moment. Forget Australia of 2000s or Windies of 70s, world cricket would do well to have a South Africa of 2010s right now.

 

[Bhaijaan]

3 overseas test wins right next to it seems more impressive and could have easily been 6 test wins. 2018 has been the best year for India in a long while. They have been competitive in literally every test they played. Could have been the other way around with 7 wins and 3 defeats had India won the crucial moments. There were hardly any drubbings.

 

[Saj]

Credit where it's due, India has won a Test in Australia in this series.

The last time Pakistan won a Test match in Australia was November 1995.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Credit where it's due, India has won a Test in Australia in this series.

The last time Pakistan won a Test match in Australia was November 1995.

Scraped over the line against the weakest Aus team in living memory and on a pitch suited for sub-continent teams.

I think it's better to judge in recent times, Pak 2-2 and 1-1 in England, India lost 4-1.

No 1 ranking is pretty much meaningless if you cant win away.

 

[Usman Chadda]

Credit where it's due, India has won a Test in Australia in this series.

The last time Pakistan won a Test match in Australia was November 1995.

There is a difference between the number one ranked side and the number seven ranked side. Pakistan would struggle to win against this weak Aussie side in Australia, but India is a better team and is expected to beat them convincingly.

 

[K4Kohli]

Toss is playing a crucial role in Test cricket currently. In overseas condition, Kohli had won all the tests where he had won the tosses.

 

[WhenSultansBowled]

They (Kohli aside) are lacking the killer instinct. Should have won more.

They play a lot of cricket overseas; which provides them more opportunities to learn and improve. I wish Pakistan played this much as well.

In any case, credit to them for at least competing. SENA teams in India are hopeless.

India are the real #1 (England #2).

 

[Hasan123]

Scraped over the line against the weakest Aus team in living memory and on a pitch suited for sub-continent teams.

I think it's better to judge in recent times, Pak 2-2 and 1-1 in England, India lost 4-1.

No 1 ranking is pretty much meaningless if you cant win away.

Why do you only include results in England? Why not talk about results at home or in other countries ? Also we wouldn't beat this Australian team in Australia.

 

[Saj]

Scraped over the line against the weakest Aus team in living memory and on a pitch suited for sub-continent teams.

I think it's better to judge in recent times, Pak 2-2 and 1-1 in England, India lost 4-1.

No 1 ranking is pretty much meaningless if you cant win away.

Pakistan would still get thrashed by this so-called weak Australian team in Australia.

 

[Junaids]

Credit where it's due, India has won a Test in Australia in this series.

The last time Pakistan won a Test match in Australia was November 1995.

Not just that.

The anti-Indian hubris is awful at times.

I enjoy pointing out India’s deficits to their most loyal fans, but never forget this:

The ranking system is nonsense. Misbah’s “Number 1” team lost 6 away Tests in 6 months.

Asian teams need to unlearn everything before each tour outside Asia. They need to change

1. Where their batsmen take guard.
2. Which balls to leave.
3. Which line and length to bowl.
4. How many quick bowlers they select.

I’ve seen some awful Kohli and Shastri selections and strategies this year.

But nothing as appalling as Yasir Shah opening the bowling in Australia in a Test match, bowling a leg-stump line to a legside field.

 

[gazza619]

Pakistan would still get thrashed by this so-called weak Australian team in Australia.

Cant argue with that. But this is Pakistan’s weakest team in our history and (arguably) India’s strongest team in their history.

Do you think the Pakistan team of the 90s would have beaten this Australian team in Australia?

 

[Saj]

Cant argue with that. But this is Pakistan’s weakest team in our history and (arguably) India’s strongest team in their history.

Do you think the Pakistan team of the 90s would have beaten this Australian team in Australia?

They would have pushed them hard, won some Tests, but even then I'm not certain they would have won a Test series.

We seem to have this mental block when playing Test cricket in Australia.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Why do you only include results in England? Why not talk about results at home or in other countries ? Also we wouldn't beat this Australian team in Australia.

Because both teams have played against England in England in very recent times. This means they came up against pretty much the same side.

 

[Hasan123]

Because both teams have played against England in England in very recent times. This means they came up against pretty much the same side.

Both teams played Australia recently and we will see if we can beat India 2-1 defeat.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Both teams played Australia recently and we will see if we can beat India 2-1 defeat.

lol. There are a few important players missing incase you have not seen the current squad.

 

[Hasan123]

lol. There are a few important players missing incase you have not seen the current squad.

What will you say if Pakistan beat South Africa without Philander,Ngidi,Morkel,and AB? You will be the first 1 doing banghra and won't be complaining about missing players.


Also if we lose that series it will add humiliation onto that series for posters like you who are mocking India for beating a weekend Australia team.

 

[KingKhanWC]

What will you say if Pakistan beat South Africa without Philander,Ngidi,Morkel,and AB? You will be the first 1 doing banghra and won't be complaining about missing players.


Also if we lose that series it will add humiliation onto that series for posters like you who are mocking India for beating a weekend Australia team.

I dont have a crystal ball to look into the future.

But I am glad you have reaslised missing the best opener in world cricket and the best batsmen changes the team.

 

[Hasan123]

I dont have a crystal ball to look into the future.

But I am glad you have reaslised missing the best opener in world cricket and the best batsmen changes the team.

How could you praise Pakistan for winning the series against South Africa with injured players but mock India for winning Australia missing key players?

 

[KingKhanWC]

How could you praise Pakistan for winning the series against South Africa with injured players but mock India for winning Australia missing key players?

Where?

 

[Monsee]

How could you praise Pakistan for winning the series against South Africa with injured players but mock India for winning Australia missing key players?

You do realise that has not even happened yet, your post makes no sense at all?

Also, earlier you mentioned AB's name as one could be missing, I didn't realise AB still plays for SA, does he; why are you mentioniong his name in there if he already retired?

Every time I see a post from you, it is about defending Indian team at all cost, sometimes even stretching reality...there should be some balance and realism to your posts!

 

[Monsee]

Where?

On his TV screen, not shown any where else lol

 

[Pete Rose]

Well, they play more so they will lose more.

 

[Sher Khan]

And this team is still number one ranked? Guess other teams are doing really bad in this way.

India is well deserving of the number one rank. Not only have they won those three test matches. They had serious chances of winning most of the tests they lost.

 

[Junaids]

They would have pushed them hard, won some Tests, but even then I'm not certain they would have won a Test series.

We seem to have this mental block when playing Test cricket in Australia.

Only since the weak team of 2004-5.

Consider these Pakistan tours of Australia:

1976-77 Drew 1-1
1981-82 Lost 2-1
1984-85 Lost 2-0 with 3 draws
1989-90 Lost 1-0, almost drew 1-1
1995-96 Lost 2-1
1999-2000 Lost 3-0 after almost levelling at 1-1.

From 1975-2000 the general perception was that Pakistan was the second most competitive team in Australia after the West Indies. Plus of course they won the World Cup in Australia in 1992.

And for cricket followers aged over 35, that’s why Pakistan remains a big prestige series to host.

Yes, it’s not based on recent reality. I couldn’t agree more.

 

[Sunny_majoka]

How could you praise Pakistan for winning the series against South Africa with injured players but mock India for winning Australia missing key players?

Because India is ranked number 1. And Pakistan is ranked no 7.
India is far better team than this Australian team.even with home advantage to Australia

And Pakistan is much weaker team than SA
Plus SA has the home advantage.

I think this will help.

 

[happydavy]

Thanks. I think Indian team is strong to capitalize after winning the away toss, but not strong enough to overcome a toss loss in away conditions.

It's true for almost every country. Even lankans managed to draw against NZ in NZ after winning the toss. That's why neither the victories are too special nor are the losses catastrophic.

 

[cricketindiafan]

Only since the weak team of 2004-5.

Consider these Pakistan tours of Australia:

1976-77 Drew 1-1
1981-82 Lost 2-1
1984-85 Lost 2-0 with 3 draws
1989-90 Lost 1-0, almost drew 1-1
1995-96 Lost 2-1
1999-2000 Lost 3-0 after almost levelling at 1-1.

From 1975-2000 the general perception was that Pakistan was the second most competitive team in Australia after the West Indies. Plus of course they won the World Cup in Australia in 1992.

And for cricket followers aged over 35, that’s why Pakistan remains a big prestige series to host.

Yes, it’s not based on recent reality. I couldn’t agree more.

In that same period,
Pakistan played 22 tests in Australia, won 4 and lost 12. Lost 5 series and drew 2 series.
India in the same period played 19 tests in Australia, won 3 and lost 11. Lost 3 series and drew 2 series
Eng played 36 tests, won 10 and lost 17. Won 2 series and lost 6.
NZ played 16 tests, won 2 and lost 8. Won 1 series, drew 1 and lost 4 series

You sure about your claim?

 

[Junaids]

They would have pushed them hard, won some Tests, but even then I'm not certain they would have won a Test series.

We seem to have this mental block when playing Test cricket in Australia.

In that same period,
Pakistan played 22 tests in Australia, won 4 and lost 12. Lost 5 series and drew 2 series.
India in the same period played 19 tests in Australia, won 3 and lost 11. Lost 3 series and drew 2 series
Eng played 36 tests, won 10 and lost 17. Won 2 series and lost 6.
NZ played 16 tests, won 2 and lost 8. Won 1 series, drew 1 and lost 4 series

You sure about your claim?

Yes, absolutely.

The only series that Pakistan lost by a margin of more than 1 Test in Australia from 1975 to 1999 was the one in which they had no fast bowlers, with Imran injured and Wasim and Waqar about to emerge. And they drew 3 of the 5 Tests in that series.

 

[cricketindiafan]

Yes, absolutely.

The only series that Pakistan lost by a margin of more than 1 Test in Australia from 1975 to 1999 was the one in which they had no fast bowlers, with Imran injured and Wasim and Waqar about to emerge. And they drew 3 of the 5 Tests in that series.

So a team that did not win a series in Australia was more competitive than teams which won 2 and 1 series respectively. Interesting perspective of how you define 'competitive'.

 

[happydavy]

So a team that did not win a series in Australia was more competitive than teams which won 2 and 1 series respectively. Interesting perspective of how you define 'competitive'.

I am sure he has done his door to door survey figuring out who Australians think are competitive. Somehow he's always very worried about what Australians think of Pakistani team, I sense case of low self esteem!

 

[topspin]

Not just that.

The anti-Indian hubris is awful at times.

I enjoy pointing out India’s deficits to their most loyal fans, but never forget this:

The ranking system is nonsense. Misbah’s “Number 1” team lost 6 away Tests in 6 months.

Asian teams need to unlearn everything before each tour outside Asia. They need to change

1. Where their batsmen take guard.
2. Which balls to leave.
3. Which line and length to bowl.
4. How many quick bowlers they select.

I’ve seen some awful Kohli and Shastri selections and strategies this year.

But nothing as appalling as Yasir Shah opening the bowling in Australia in a Test match, bowling a leg-stump line to a legside field.

Sums up the legacy of Misbah. His captaincy was rightfully called out by the Channel 9 commentary team, yet some of our fans here have the nerve to criticise Kohli.

 

[topspin]

Scraped over the line against the weakest Aus team in living memory and on a pitch suited for sub-continent teams.

I think it's better to judge in recent times, Pak 2-2 and 1-1 in England, India lost 4-1.

No 1 ranking is pretty much meaningless if you cant win away.

Bro scraping over the line is what Pakistan did recently in UAE against an even weaker Australia side than this one playing against India, when you consider in addition to Smith and Warner, they were also without Hazlewood and Cummins.

We would most likely get whitewashed against this weaker Aus outfit.

 

[Bilal7]

7-3

I did not count the dead rubber but sure.

You can laugh, but we're rightfully the #1 side in test cricket going around today: we can win at least one test everywhere and dominate at home. That's good enough in these times.

Except that both England and New Zealand have proven that they can actually win series away from home and pretty much dominate at home. I would put those two on level terms, if not ahead of India.

 

[Hasan123]

You do realise that has not even happened yet, your post makes no sense at all?

Also, earlier you mentioned AB's name as one could be missing, I didn't realise AB still plays for SA, does he; why are you mentioniong his name in there if he already retired?

Every time I see a post from you, it is about defending Indian team at all cost, sometimes even stretching reality...there should be some balance and realism to your posts!

AB just recently retired. Our same fans use Misbah and Younis retiring as reasons as to why we are struggling in tests. Don't see you pointing that out .

All I see is you playing the victim all day about we hard done by.

 

[Hasan123]

Where?

Can you answer this simple question or not?

You have said India are winning because Australia are without Smith and Warner , so you don't want to give them any credit.

If Pakistan win the series will you use the excuse that SA had players out or not ?

Answer the question.

 

[Saj]

Only since the weak team of 2004-5.

Consider these Pakistan tours of Australia:

1976-77 Drew 1-1
1981-82 Lost 2-1
1984-85 Lost 2-0 with 3 draws
1989-90 Lost 1-0, almost drew 1-1
1995-96 Lost 2-1
1999-2000 Lost 3-0 after almost levelling at 1-1.

From 1975-2000 the general perception was that Pakistan was the second most competitive team in Australia after the West Indies. Plus of course they won the World Cup in Australia in 1992.

And for cricket followers aged over 35, that’s why Pakistan remains a big prestige series to host.

Yes, it’s not based on recent reality. I couldn’t agree more.

In the period you have mentioned, Pakistan had a number of world-class cricketers in all facets of the game, battle-hardened cricketers, experienced guys and young fearless cricketers.

These days Pakistan's cricketers are meek, weak mentally and the vast majority are nowhere near world-class.

 

[Ab Fan]

If Pakistan wins a series in SA, they deserve huge rounds of applause.

But I am sorry that is not happening. Good teams fail to win in SA, current Pak team is as terrible as it gets. Losing to NZ in UAE was a huge disaster. If they win in any unlikely scenario, they deserve massive praise.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Can you answer this simple question or not?

You have said India are winning because Australia are without Smith and Warner , so you don't want to give them any credit.

If Pakistan win the series will you use the excuse that SA had players out or not ?

Answer the question.

South Africa series is about to start in a few days.

Which players SA missing and how is the team weakend?

 

[Hasan123]

On his TV screen, not shown any where else lol

I asked him a question which he chose not to answer. If you actually read you can see .

 

[Hasan123]

South Africa series is about to start in a few days.

Which players SA missing and how is the team weakend?

Philander and Ngidi are out. 2 class bowlers in their home conditions. Also SA batting is weaker compared to previous teams.

If we win the series I will be the first one her3 doing banghra regardless of SA team.

But can you answer my question or not ? You seem to be doing everything to avoid it.

 

[Sadozai]

Only since the weak team of 2004-5.

Consider these Pakistan tours of Australia:

1976-77 Drew 1-1
1981-82 Lost 2-1
1984-85 Lost 2-0 with 3 draws
1989-90 Lost 1-0, almost drew 1-1
1995-96 Lost 2-1
1999-2000 Lost 3-0 after almost levelling at 1-1.

From 1975-2000 the general perception was that Pakistan was the second most competitive team in Australia after the West Indies. Plus of course they won the World Cup in Australia in 1992.

And for cricket followers aged over 35, that’s why Pakistan remains a big prestige series to host.

Yes, it’s not based on recent reality. I couldn’t agree more.

really?

 

[Napa]

Kohli never lost a test after winning the toss. Most have been wins with 3 draws I think

Winning the toss has become critical in winning a game, which is unfortunate.

It is time that instead of a toss (which is pure luck), both teams should be allowed to bid runs to determine who gets to choose who bats first.

For example, suppose India bids 30 runs, and Australia bids 35 runs, then Australia gets to decide who bats first, but the Indian first innings will start at 35/0.

 

[Napa]

Only since the weak team of 2004-5.

Consider these Pakistan tours of Australia:

1976-77 Drew 1-1
1981-82 Lost 2-1
1984-85 Lost 2-0 with 3 draws
1989-90 Lost 1-0, almost drew 1-1
1995-96 Lost 2-1
1999-2000 Lost 3-0 after almost levelling at 1-1.

<b>From 1975-2000 the general perception was that Pakistan was the second most competitive team in Australia after the West Indies.</b> Plus of course they won the World Cup in Australia in 1992.

And for cricket followers aged over 35, that’s why Pakistan remains a big prestige series to host.

Yes, it’s not based on recent reality. I couldn’t agree more.

More from Junaids alternate reality. Besides West Indies, which absolutely demolished Australia in Australia, we also have England winning two series in Australia during 1975-2000.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/series/60476.html

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/series/60539.html

But of course, in an Englishman's alternate reality losing 5 series on the trot makes a team more competitive than one which won 2 series.
[MENTION=134300]Tusker[/MENTION] [MENTION=45053]cricketindiafan[/MENTION] [MENTION=146612]BlackShadow[/MENTION] [MENTION=143530]Swashbuckler[/MENTION]
[MENTION=732]Gilly[/MENTION] [MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION]

 

[KingKhanWC]

Philander and Ngidi are out. 2 class bowlers in their home conditions. Also SA batting is weaker compared to previous teams.

If we win the series I will be the first one her3 doing banghra regardless of SA team.

But can you answer my question or not ? You seem to be doing everything to avoid it.

Ngidi is pretty new and Philander will be back for the second test. They still have Steyn and Rabada. Their batting is fine, not sure who you mean. You cant compare Aus losing the best opener and the best batsmen in the world with Philander out for one test .

If Pakistan win it will be a great performance because the SA team is still very strong at home. Hope that answers your question.

 

[Buffet]

From 1975-2000 the general perception was that Pakistan was the second most competitive team in Australia after the West Indies.

1975 to 2000????

Well, here are the first 10 years of the period you are citing,




Here are the last 5 years of the period you are citing,



Even in middle 10 years, Pakistan doesn't show up in the top 3 W/L in Aus soil.

By any chance you are referring to moral victories or just your personal perception?

 

[Ab Fan]

Philander and Ngidi are out. 2 class bowlers in their home conditions. Also SA batting is weaker compared to previous teams.

If we win the series I will be the first one her3 doing banghra regardless of SA team.

But can you answer my question or not ? You seem to be doing everything to avoid it.

While I am not aware of Philander being out of SA squad, but if that is one, then it is a huge miss. In SA conditions, he is pretty much the most devastating bowler for SA.

However, if SA play with both Philander and Rabada, then I don't see any chance of Pakistan winning or even being competitive the whole series.

 

[Tusker]

More from Junaids alternate reality. Besides West Indies, which absolutely demolished Australia in Australia, we also have England winning two series in Australia during 1975-2000.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/series/60476.html

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/series/60539.html

But of course, in an Englishman's alternate reality losing 5 series on the trot makes a team more competitive than one which won 2 series.
[MENTION=134300]Tusker[/MENTION] [MENTION=45053]cricketindiafan[/MENTION] [MENTION=146612]BlackShadow[/MENTION] [MENTION=143530]Swashbuckler[/MENTION]
[MENTION=732]Gilly[/MENTION] [MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION]

You miss the key requirement of [MENTION=138496]juni[/MENTION]ads world: Facts not allowed to get in the way. And now you shall be subject to silent treatment.

PS: Loved this bit from his post - 1999-2000 Lost 3-0 after almost levelling at 1-1. ... how is that even possible I have no idea but I guess we will find out

But you have to realize the source of his frustrations: its been nearly a quarter Century since his beloved "prestigious" team has won a Test match in Aus whereas India did that 10 days ago.

Last 20 yrs:
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...span;team=6;team=7;template=results;type=team

 

[Napa]

... his beloved "prestigious" team"

Something about mutter mutter "only series that Pakistan lost by a margin of more than 1 Test" mutter mutter... while his home country absolutely demolished Australia 5-1 which we are told makes his home country a worse team than one which doesn't lose series by more than one Test.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/series/60476.html

Even "The only series that Pakistan lost by a margin of more than 1 Test in Australia from 1975 to 1999" is easily confirmed to be false, with Australia whitewashing Pakistan 3-0 in the Nov 1999 series.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/series/60679.html

 

[umerz]

3-7 is not bad TBH. Some of the matches were really close and could have gone to any side. Surprisingly I must say India needs to improve their batting in overseas conditions their bowling looks better these days

 

[cricketindiafan]

I did not count the dead rubber but sure.



Except that both England and New Zealand have proven that they can actually win series away from home and pretty much dominate at home. I would put those two on level terms, if not ahead of India.

Eng won in SL who have lost to almost everyone at home.
NZ won in UAE where even SL beat you guys and WI won a test.

Our away wins in SL and WI do not count, but others winning against weak teams at home counts for a lot. Interesting perspective.

 

[Varun]

Except that both England and New Zealand have proven that they can actually win series away from home and pretty much dominate at home. I would put those two on level terms, if not ahead of India.

New Zealand are awesome, but England have lost tests at home from Australia to West Indies and everyone in between in the last 3-4 years alone. Do not rate.

They even lost a series to Lanka in 2014.

 

[Napa]

I did not count the dead rubber but sure.

There are no "dead rubbers" in the battle for the mace between the #1 and the #2 ranked teams. If you have any doubts about the importance of the mace, check your profile pic.

 

[AMSS]

There are no "dead rubbers" in the battle for the mace between the #1 and the #2 ranked teams. If you have any doubts about the importance of the mace, check your profile pic.

You can excuse fans of a #7 ranked team to overlook these details, they aren't used to it

 

[Tusker]

There are no "dead rubbers" in the battle for the mace between the #1 and the #2 ranked teams. If you have any doubts about the importance of the mace, check your profile pic.

Epic response. Something tells me that the edit button on the profile settings will be invoked soon

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Winning the toss has become critical in winning a game, which is unfortunate.

It is time that instead of a toss (which is pure luck), both teams should be allowed to bid runs to determine who gets to choose who bats first.

For example, suppose India bids 30 runs, and Australia bids 35 runs, then Australia gets to decide who bats first, but the Indian first innings will start at 35/0.

Great idea really.

But this would scare me with Kohli as our tactician.

 

[Hasan123]

While I am not aware of Philander being out of SA squad, but if that is one, then it is a huge miss. In SA conditions, he is pretty much the most devastating bowler for SA.

However, if SA play with both Philander and Rabada, then I don't see any chance of Pakistan winning or even being competitive the whole series.

Philander is out of the first game.

 

[Napa]

Great idea really.

But this would scare me with Kohli as our tactician.

Even if Kohli made the right choice whether to bat first completely randomly, we would still have it right 50% of the time. Better than losing the toss 90% of the time