Would you still begrudge India's series win in Australia?

[Ashmal]

A bowling attack of Starc, Cummins, Hazlewood and Lyon is as good as it gets. Certainly much better than the England attack where a joker like Moeen is the main spinner.

Lol...that same joker spinner has owned the whole Indian batting line-up more than once.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

I dont think India will win a single match including the current match. The win in 2018 was a fluke.

I know you are in pain.

Keep telling this to yourself.

Mcg win can't be taken away.

Loving it.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Your 2012 England win has no business being here for this comparison.

Short term Injuries and short term bans are different from players being past it or bad selection or whatever. Otherwise you can find an excuse for and discredit any loss like a [MENTION=150610]tyron_woodley[/MENTION] has excused India’s loss to NZ last year since for things like Shubham Gill not being selected or India not taking it seriously.

Just cos someone else stretches a logic to ridiculous proportion (Gill) doesn't mean I have to defend it mate.

2012 point still stands.

 

[Mamoon]

Lol...that same joker spinner has owned the whole Indian batting line-up more than once.

Strange things happen in cricket. It doesn’t mean anything. Pakistan played Lyon comfortably in the UAE in 2014 and then made a nobody Kiwi spinner look like Warne few months later.

Moeen’s decent record against India doesn’t change the fact that he is a very poor spinner and certainly not threatening enough to be the first choice spinner of a Test side.

 

[Mamoon]

India have been great in this series and overall in Aus in the last 20 years.

But, it's a fact that India won against a very weak Aussie team in 2018.
No way they would have won the series in 2018 with Smith & Warner being available.

It's not India's fault but they were lucky to be touring Aus at the right time.

If India can win this current series then they can claim that last series win wasn't just about luck.

Whether India would have against full-strength Australia in 2018 or not is not the point. The point is that any other side would still have lost the 2018 series in Australia.

The fact that India completely outclassed them in their own conditions with their (Australia’s) brilliant bowling attack showed the quality of that Indian team.

 

[Ashmal]

Whether India would have against full-strength Australia in 2018 or not is not the point. The point is that any other side would still have lost the 2018 series in Australia.

The fact that India completely outclassed them in their own conditions with their (Australia’s) brilliant bowling attack showed the quality of that Indian team.

No one is doubting the quality of India...they have been very good in Aus in last 2 decades.

And how does other teams failure to matter.....we already know that SA and Ind have been the 2 best teams in Aus.

The only question here is, would India have won in 2018 if Smith and Warner were available?
The answer to that is 'No'.

 

[Mamoon]

No one is doubting the quality of India...they have been very good in Aus in last 2 decades.

And how does other teams failure to matter.....we already know that SA and Ind have been the 2 best teams in Aus.

The only question here is, would India have won in 2018 if Smith and Warner were available?
The answer to that is 'No'.

No, the only question is, would any other team managed to thump Australia without Smith and Warner but with Cummins, Hazlewood, Starc and Lyon the way India did?

The answer is no.

No point in discrediting India when they still achieved what others wouldn’t have.

 

[soso_killer]

India is not winning series here. At best they can draw and that's a huge task. If they can pile up runs in this test, they have a chance to win this test.

I personally think those doubts etc are non-sense. Very few teams have actually won against a full-strength good team when playing away unless the opposition is in transition. Even the great Aus team needed many things going their way to winning a series in India. If conditions are similar then yes, it's possible to beat a good team on their home ground. If conditions are different, it's a very hard task.

We should appreciate good cricket and if a touring side wins then they win.

This. To win in foreign conditions you need a few things going your way to beat good teams in their home conditions. Can only beat what is in front of you in the end.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

No, the only question is, would any other team managed to thump Australia without Smith and Warner but with Cummins, Hazlewood, Starc and Lyon the way India did?

The answer is no.

No point in discrediting India when they still achieved what others wouldn’t have.

This. At tte time no other team could have done what India did . That's all that needs to be said. Even now, I doubt any team can win a single test in Australia at full strength let alone do it with a depleted side like India did at the MCG

 

[Rohan]

This. At tte time no other team could have done what India did . That's all that needs to be said. Even now, I doubt any team can win a single test in Australia at full strength let alone do it with a depleted side like India did at the MCG

Forget about winning, can any Asian team draw a test match with all the shoooperstars in the team against AUS?

 

[subshakerz]

Would India have won if Smith and Warner were available in 2018? No.

Was it still a good achievement? Yes.

I would give team India more credit if they werent so massively overhyped by their fans and pundits. A team like South Africa under Graeme Smith achieved far more with far less fanfare.

 

[subshakerz]

Whether India would have against full-strength Australia in 2018 or not is not the point. The point is that any other side would still have lost the 2018 series in Australia.

The fact that India completely outclassed them in their own conditions with their (Australia’s) brilliant bowling attack showed the quality of that Indian team.

South Africa is 2018 would have likely beaten them. They already beat them with Smith and Warner at home. I am sure even England would have given themselves a chance.

 

[andy0204]

South Africa is 2018 would have likely beaten them. They already beat them with Smith and Warner at home. I am sure even England would have given themselves a chance.

You are right South Africa have defeated full strength Australian team without having Steyn,Morkel and Abd.

 

[Slog]

Just cos someone else stretches a logic to ridiculous proportion (Gill) doesn't mean I have to defend it mate.

2012 point still stands.

I don’t think your 2012 stands though. But we can agree to disagree

There is a difference between a team being wrecked by injuries (India this series after 1st Test) or suspensions (Australia 2018) vs a team filled with over the hill players (India v England 2013). Only in one of the case were the best active players as per team management playing.

 

[Slog]

Whether India would have against full-strength Australia in 2018 or not is not the point. The point is that any other side would still have lost the 2018 series in Australia.

The fact that India completely outclassed them in their own conditions with their (Australia’s) brilliant bowling attack showed the quality of that Indian team.

South Africa (missing AB + Steyn) defeated them with Smith + Warner and same bowling line up.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

I don’t think your 2012 stands though. But we can agree to disagree

There is a difference between a team being wrecked by injuries (India this series after 1st Test) or suspensions (Australia 2018) vs a team filled with over the hill players (India v England 2013). Only in one of the case were the best active players as per team management playing.

What's the difference tho?

Its just technicalities.

And it's not like one is claiming them to be over hill just cos they failed. They were to be dropped for a long time but they stuck on.

And we aren't talking about 1 or 2 players. We are talking 4 batsman and 2 bowlers (one looked iffy and other was totally off color).

Thats 6 players out of 11 players.

 

[Slog]

What's the difference tho?

Its just technicalities.

And it's not like one is claiming them to be over hill just cos they failed. They were to be dropped for a long time but they stuck on.

And we aren't talking about 1 or 2 players. We are talking 4 batsman and 2 bowlers (one looked iffy and other was totally off color).

Thats 6 players out of 11 players.

This way you can excuse literally any series loss by saying you were including over the hill players or players not cut out for international cricket.

These same players had been doing well in home series prior to that so it’s not like they had been in terminal decline for a long time.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

This way you can excuse literally any series loss by saying you were including over the hill players or players not cut out for international cricket.

These same players had been doing well in home series prior to that so it’s not like they had been in terminal decline for a long time.

1. They were in terminal decline. You just didn't see it being a non Indian.

Only Yuvi was there in merit after slamming a couple of double centuries in domestic. Still a wrong pick and failed as expected but if we have to get super detailed, that's that.

Sehwag, Gambo and tendu were pretty much done.

Situation was so bad I was rooting for Junaid Khan when Sehwag and Gambo were batting in Aane Do series. It was THAT bad.

2. In my 7 years of PP, have you seen me excuse any other series with this logic? Even if I tried.. I can't cos the facts won't stack up anyway.

2012 was an anomaly.

 

[Slog]

1. They were in terminal decline. You just didn't see it being a non Indian.

Only Yuvi was there in merit after slamming a couple of double centuries in domestic. Still a wrong pick and failed as expected but if we have to get super detailed, that's that.

Sehwag, Gambo and tendu were pretty much done.

Situation was so bad I was rooting for Junaid Khan when Sehwag and Gambo were batting in Aane Do series. It was THAT bad.

2. In my 7 years of PP, have you seen me excuse any other series with this logic? Even if I tried.. I can't cos the facts won't stack up anyway.

2012 was an anomaly.

Well in your 7 years in PP that’s the only series india has lost at home

I’ll end saying one thing. Even if what you say is true and I accept it there are still no sympathies from my side because that is just poor planning and selection. The hands of the team aren’t tied as they are in a case of unexpected suspension or injury. So even then I won’t put this in same bucket

 

[Chrish]

First and second test proves that 2018 victory wasn't a fluke. India could have very well beaten Australia with Smith and Warner still playing.. Some Pak fans need to get over this and move on.

 

[Ashmal]

First and second test proves that 2018 victory wasn't a fluke. India could have very well beaten Australia with Smith and Warner still playing.. Some Pak fans need to get over this and move on.

It doesn't prove anything.
Big difference between winning a match and a series. Even Aus won 1 game in India but do you think they can win a series in India??

Btw...no one is calling India's win in 2018 a fluke, it was a good achievement and many other teams wouldn't have done it.

But it's also a fact that it was a very weak Aussie team and India were lucky to be touring Aus at the right time which helped them win a series in Aus for first time.

 

[Chrish]

It doesn't prove anything.
Big difference between winning a match and a series. Even Aus won 1 game in India but do you think they can win a series in India??

Btw...no one is calling India's win in 2018 a fluke, it was a good achievement and many other teams wouldn't have done it.

But it's also a fact that it was a very weak Aussie team and India were lucky to be touring Aus at the right time which helped them win a series in Aus for first time.

It proves everything.. India has a pace attack capable of threatening Australian batsmen.. And Indian batsmen are more than capable of dealing with Aussie bowlers.

And yes, Aus could have won the series in India as well; they came closer than anyone else in recent memory.

 

[Mamoon]

South Africa (missing AB + Steyn) defeated them with Smith + Warner and same bowling line up.

No, Cummins did not play in that series.

South Africa won the first two Tests. Australia’s third seamer in the first Test was Siddle and in the second Test it was Mennie.

 

[Mamoon]

You are right South Africa have defeated full strength Australian team without having Steyn,Morkel and Abd.

South Africa didn’t play Cummins in the 2016 series.

 

[Mamoon]

South Africa is 2018 would have likely beaten them. They already beat them with Smith and Warner at home. I am sure even England would have given themselves a chance.

No they wouldn’t have. They didn’t have the batting strength to resist an attack of Starc, Cummins, Hazlewood and Lyon together. They won in 2016 but Cummins did not play in that series.

2018 version of England would have lost. They didn’t have the bowling attack in spite of the absence of Smith and Warner. However, the current England team can because of the emergence of Archer and Wood.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Would India have won if Smith and Warner were available in 2018? No.

Was it still a good achievement? Yes.

I would give team India more credit if they werent so massively overhyped by their fans and pundits. A team like South Africa under Graeme Smith achieved far more with far less fanfare.

We don't know. One can only guess. If a team would have won if player X played in place of player Y.

Is this is what the whole discussion is based on? Very weak reasoning and laughable.

 

[Last Monetarist]

South Africa had the psychological advantage over Australia after sandpapergate, they would definitely have beaten them in 2018/19 had there been another series.

 

[andy0204]

South Africa didn’t play Cummins in the 2016 series.

Cummins wasn't into the picture he was struggling to get in the side due to injuries and he started playing test cricket from 2017 onwards.

 

[subshakerz]

No they wouldn’t have. They didn’t have the batting strength to resist an attack of Starc, Cummins, Hazlewood and Lyon together. They won in 2016 but Cummins did not play in that series.

2018 version of England would have lost. They didn’t have the bowling attack in spite of the absence of Smith and Warner. However, the current England team can because of the emergence of Archer and Wood.

They already played Lyon, Cummins, Starc and Hazelwood along with Warner and Smith in 2018 in SA and beat them, without Steyn. On top of that, SA have a psychological edge against Australia in their own turf.

 

[Mamoon]

They already played Lyon, Cummins, Starc and Hazelwood along with Warner and Smith in 2018 in SA and beat them, without Steyn. On top of that, SA have a psychological edge against Australia in their own turf.

Beating Australia in South Africa is not the same as beating them in Australia. South African pitches have more purchase for fast bowlers than Australian pitches.

This psychological stuff is always overblown and exaggerated. If current South Africa tour Australia today they will get wrecked in spite of their record in Australia in recent times.

 

[Ashmal]

Beating Australia in South Africa is not the same as beating them in Australia. South African pitches have more purchase for fast bowlers than Australian pitches.

But, SA have won every series in Australia since 2008 while they have struggled to beat Aus in SA.

They finally managed to beat Aus in SA in 2018.

Pretty sure they would've backed themselves to win in Aus again had they toured in 2018 with Smith and Warner missing.

 

[Last Monetarist]

Beating Australia in South Africa is not the same as beating them in Australia. South African pitches have more purchase for fast bowlers than Australian pitches.

This psychological stuff is always overblown and exaggerated. If current South Africa tour Australia today they will get wrecked in spite of their record in Australia in recent times.

Yes, the current South African team would likely get whitewashed. That wouldn't have been the case in 2018 as the Australian team was in crisis and South Africa weren't as bad as they are today.

 

[Mamoon]

But, SA have won every series in Australia since 2008 while they have struggled to beat Aus in SA.

They finally managed to beat Aus in SA in 2018.

Pretty sure they would've backed themselves to win in Aus again had they toured in 2018 with Smith and Warner missing.

Historical record means nothing.

Pakistan has been a joke in Australia for 20+ years. However, if Pakistan becomes a top team tomorrow and Australia regresses, Pakistan would be very likely to win in Australia regardless of its track-record.

People will go to any lengths to try and prove that winning a series in Australia against their full-strength attack in 2018 was not an achievement.

 

[Mamoon]

Yes, the current South African team would likely get whitewashed. That wouldn't have been the case in 2018 as the Australian team was in crisis and South Africa weren't as bad as they are today.

I don’t think so. I highly doubt if 2018 South Africa would have matched India’s batting and bowling performance in Australia.

 

[Last Monetarist]

I don’t think so. I highly doubt if 2018 South Africa would have matched India’s batting and bowling performance in Australia.

Sandpapergate was an existential crisis for many Australians and South Africa had pummeled their team including Warner and Smith a few months earlier. If we are talking hypothetically, de Villiers might not have retired either. An attack comprising Steyn, Rabada, and Philander was comparable to anything the Indians served up.

It's a moot point nonetheless, India deserving credit for winning that series is not a debate for me.

 

[Ashmal]

Historical record means nothing.

Pakistan has been a joke in Australia for 20+ years. However, if Pakistan becomes a top team tomorrow and Australia regresses, Pakistan would be very likely to win in Australia regardless of its track-record.

People will go to any lengths to try and prove that winning a series in Australia against their full-strength attack in 2018 was not an achievement.

No one is saying that it wasn't an achievement.

I've already said that India did really well to grab that opportunity and only Ind and SA could have done it.

However, it's a fact that it came against an Aussie team which was missing it's 2 best players and India were lucky to be touring Aus at the right moment.

Btw...SA in 2018 wasn't as weak as the current team and Aussies were at their lowest.
SA won in 2016 with a depleted squad against Aus (with Smith & Warner).

 

[Nikhil_cric]

South Africa had the psychological advantage over Australia after sandpapergate, they would definitely have beaten them in 2018/19 had there been another series.

South africa had AB and a Rabada who had not yet had a stress fracture. Without AB's presence and a lesser version of Rabada, they were getting by whitewashed by SL at home at the time .

 

[Rajdeep]

No one is saying that it wasn't an achievement.

I've already said that India did really well to grab that opportunity and only Ind and SA could have done it.

However, it's a fact that it came against an Aussie team which was missing it's 2 best players and India were lucky to be touring Aus at the right moment.

Btw...SA in 2018 wasn't as weak as the current team and Aussies were at their lowest.
SA won in 2016 with a depleted squad against Aus (with Smith & Warner).

But Australia was playing at home. In India, even without 2 main players....India would beat any team in the world. So Australia lost at home just because they were missing 2 players seems to be an excuse. That team would still dish out innings defeat to other Asian sides. India won that tour on the back of some terrific all round cricket and would have won 3-1 had the Sydney test not washes out.

Even in this series, India won a test match and competing so well without half of its players. And they are playing away unlike Aussies who were missing players at home in 2018.

So these caveats and asterics that people assign of our win back in 2018 is silly and purely out of jealousy.

 

[subshakerz]

People will go to any lengths to try and prove that winning a series in Australia against their full-strength attack in 2018 was not an achievement.

No we are just factchecking your statement that only India could have beaten at the time which was not true.

 

[Rajdeep]

People who always reminds us that Australia were missing 2 players would never say that they were playing at home.

 

[Last Monetarist]

South africa had AB and a Rabada who had not yet had a stress fracture. Without AB's presence and a lesser version of Rabada, they were getting by whitewashed by SL at home at the time .

No, they were hammering Pakistan at home at the time. The Sri Lanka series was a freak result.

That Australian team wasn't much cop in the batting, I don't know why that is being debated.

 

[Abdullah]

Pucovski and Green are elite talents. Ballance and Vince are average players, about the same class as someone like Wade.

We know how potential works , or doesn't in some cases. Even elite talents need time.

 

[AamchiMumbaikar]

Except for that 1 freak session (36 ao), India has competed well for most part of the series so far. I would be okay to draw one more game and go down 1-2 when we do not have 4 test regulars.

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

If we manage to draw this match I will remove my asterisk from our 2018 win in Australia. Rest should also remove their respective asterisks.

 

[B_Positive]

All the asterisks have been removed if there were any... Brilliant draw man...