Australia's Tour Of India - 2008

[Cricketman]

Except Kumble and Dravid's ratings, all are high. Ganguly deserved 8.

So did Laxman. 7.5 was harsh on them both.

 

[Chetan0304]

Chetan,Dravid won't be pick for the ODI he will be picked for the Test but will not score as he used to.Looked at his form. He hasn't scored many runs for the last 10 test matches as far as i know only 1 half century!!

Yes look up his Career give him some time and i m sure he will be back in form with a bang against England !!

lmfao at that above post. How much some people can get caught up in victory is amazing. That Indian news channel is so stupid its laughable. What dickheads! rofl.

every Media channel has it's point and the channel which said is India TV and for your knowledge kid,(Clarke's fan) the India TV channel is considered crap here and it doesn't count, We respect Australia game play and Spirit (even after the Umpire episode Punter>>Umpire ), I remember i saw on AAj Tak that Australian Media blaming Ganguly for wasting time on field (Bangalore test). he didn't get the Side screen right and that was counted as waste of time Pretty funny isn't it? Dickheads are all over even in Australia

 

[mattfb]

Like I said to KBC, I say "That indian news channel" referring to that one channel not every news channel in India :

Feelin Blue? added 3 Minutes and 55 Seconds later...

Dravid is past it. When we are closer to the series I will make an avvy challenge with you.

If Dravid scores a century in the series I will have a "Dravid is better then Clarke" avvy. If he doesn't you can have a "Clarke is better then Dravid" avvy. Deal?

Personally I think Dravid is a waste at Number 3. If your going to play him, you play him early to take the shine off the ball then Tendulkar at 3 to go lift the temp or if he has to face Lee with a new ball. No point pretecting him from the new ball at Number 4.

Hey Feelin Blue?, do you remember the agreement we had before the series started? That if India won the series, you would change your avvy to an India flag with the sign India > Australia?

I haven't forgotten.

Actually, you have forgotten because the Avvy Challenge was if Dravid doesn't score a ton you will have to have a Clarke is better then Dravid avvy. Its on the first page, so time to change your avvy mate

 

[KBC]

LOL Okay. :

Don't bother about them, they know they're crap and let's move onto cricket.


I wasn't happy at all with CricInfo giving laxman a 7.5 overall. He deserved more than that in the series. Although, he didn't score in the mohali test, where he went on attacking the bowlers as sachin was on the other end in desperate efforts for getting past brian lara's record, He tried to take the pressure off the match for some time and got out. He didn't bat in the second innings. Other than that, he has done pretty well, considering the come-back time of the series, which came from the third test was the turning-point, till then he was pretty much on the par with a duck and 42 in the first test. He played a key-role till the end of the series.

 

[sifter132]

A good captain, in my opinion, brings the best out of mediocre players. Dhoni brings a positive mood to the team (of course, he needs to be tested when the team is under the hammer). There's no better example than the mediocre fielder Mishra creating a run out that probably settled the series.

I appreciate your returning arguments, but I still don't agree with you. Dhoni is not the captain of mediocre players for starters, so by your definition we don't yet know if Dhoni is a good captain. Ship him to New Zealand or the West Indies or Bangladesh and see how he goes there. He had a good team behind him and used them well, yes he deserves credit, but no where near the amount he is getting.

That's why I used the example of Stephen Fleming a lauded captain with a mediocre group of players. He never took NZ to the top of world cricket and they never will - they just don't have the talent. Captains need talent to win... Hence my point that captaincy is overrated and that Ricky Ponting's captaincy suddenly looks worse when he has average bowlers rather than above average ones.

As for Mishra's runout it could be luck for all anyone knows. Even the best fielders in the world don't hit the stumps all that often, so that implies that there is a lot of luck/variation in each run out attempt. Ask Mishra. Was he just lucky or was he inspired by Dhoni? Or has he been working hard on hitting the stumps in training? Who knows??

 

[sohum]

I appreciate your returning arguments, but I still don't agree with you. Dhoni is not the captain of mediocre players for starters, so by your definition we don't yet know if Dhoni is a good captain. Ship him to New Zealand or the West Indies or Bangladesh and see how he goes there. He had a good team behind him and used them well, yes he deserves credit, but no where near the amount he is getting.

Again, you ignore the part of my argument where I say that all these countries have completely different dynamics. Why don't you compare his captaincy to Kumble's, for God's sake, which would make a far more reasonable argument? Kumble had essentially the same team that Dhoni had give or take one player. However, he was unable to extract as much productivity from them. You can blame it on luck, but I think captaincy (which is heavily based on luck) has a lot to do with that. Captains obviously don't know what to do, but they follow their gut... and good captains do it well. For example, in the 3rd Test, I believe, India under Kumble weren't able to break a partnership but as soon as Kumble left the field and Dhoni took over, India picked up a couple.

That's why I used the example of Stephen Fleming a lauded captain with a mediocre group of players. He never took NZ to the top of world cricket and they never will - they just don't have the talent. Captains need talent to win... Hence my point that captaincy is overrated and that Ricky Ponting's captaincy suddenly looks worse when he has average bowlers rather than above average ones.

Of course captains need talent to win. But that does not preclude one from being a better captain than another. For example, one lauds Fleming's captaincy even when New Zealand is losing, and one dissects Ponting's even when Australia are winning. In fact, your argument that Fleming is held as a great captain only argues against your idea that Ponting is a good captain. When both have a mediocre team at their disposal, it is Fleming who is still regarded as a better captain.

As for Mishra's runout it could be luck for all anyone knows. Even the best fielders in the world don't hit the stumps all that often, so that implies that there is a lot of luck/variation in each run out attempt. Ask Mishra. Was he just lucky or was he inspired by Dhoni? Or has he been working hard on hitting the stumps in training? Who knows??

We don't know but the point I'm getting across is that the players were much more active and "in the game". If you don't have a captain who is constantly keeping his players tuned in, you will have wandering minds which will lead to chances being missed. The very phrase that "Dhoni brings out the best in his players" means that with him at the helm, India let the game drift less and the players are concentrating harder.

 

[India2011]

Like I said to KBC, I say "That indian news channel" referring to that one channel not every news channel in India :

Feelin Blue? added 3 Minutes and 55 Seconds later...





Actually, you have forgotten because the Avvy Challenge was if Dravid doesn't score a ton you will have to have a Clarke is better then Dravid avvy. Its on the first page, so time to change your avvy mate

Yes, I remember, however then we were talking about it in some other thread, after which we changed it to whether or not the team won,

 

[mattfb]

I honestly don't remember changing it. Sure that wasn't last tour because I think I made an avvy bet with you then.

 

[angryangy]

I see Sifter's point as being about the focus on "captaincy" rather than cricket in general. I mean Mike Brearley, often argued as one of the greatest ever leaders, won 18 from 31 Tests. It's probably safe to say he punched above his weight, but captains like Bradman, Waugh and Ponting have better winning percentages. It really goes back to something that many have said, but I think Richie Benaud has said best, that you should take all the credit as captain when you win, because when you lose, no other bugger will.

 

[m_vaughan]

Very true. Comparisions are not the way to go at this stage in my opinion. Dhoni still has a long way to go, and it has to be seen if he can lead the team as well as Fleming or Brearly (the best ever).

So far he (Dhoni) has done well though, so credit goes to him for that. As far as the "too much" credit is concerned, if you are going by the so-called news channels in India, then you are the fool to watch it in the first place. Those who think Sun and Marca are crap, should really see what kind of news we have back in the subcontinent.

 

[Harrypotter_fan]

India TV is now showing some crap about the match being fixed.

 

[Chetan0304]

India TV is now showing some crap about the match being fixed.

The Channel deserves a Ban! what a crap how the hell they show this crap!!

First they called one Political a "Gonda" many people emailed them with abusive language to stop featuring false news and such words for any Political leader as the Situation passed days were hard in Maharashtra.. they always have false and fake news :

 

[sifter132]

Again, you ignore the part of my argument where I say that all these countries have completely different dynamics. Why don't you compare his captaincy to Kumble's, for God's sake, which would make a far more reasonable argument? Kumble had essentially the same team that Dhoni had give or take one player. However, he was unable to extract as much productivity from them. You can blame it on luck, but I think captaincy (which is heavily based on luck) has a lot to do with that. Captains obviously don't know what to do, but they follow their gut... and good captains do it well. For example, in the 3rd Test, I believe, India under Kumble weren't able to break a partnership but as soon as Kumble left the field and Dhoni took over, India picked up a couple.

I'd be happy to compare Dhoni's captaincy to Kumble's - that is what got the argument started in the first place

Dhoni is a better captain :happy

My point originally was that I believe that even if Kumble had captained all sessions in all the tests India would have won the series anyway. That led me to say that captaincy is overrated and players are more important. In fact one of the main problems with Kumble's captaincy was that he himself was in the bowling attack - and he couldn't get wickets. Replacing Kumble's bowling with Mishra or Harbhajan has a bigger effect in my reckoning than replacing Kumble's captaincy with Dhoni's. Sure Dhoni's captaincy seemed to mprove India a bit, but they were also vastly improved by being able to include a spinner who actually looked threatening...but no one seems to have noticed that.

We don't know but the point I'm getting across is that the players were much more active and "in the game". If you don't have a captain who is constantly keeping his players tuned in, you will have wandering minds which will lead to chances being missed. The very phrase that "Dhoni brings out the best in his players" means that with him at the helm, India let the game drift less and the players are concentrating harder.

Again I agree with you to an extent that Dhoni is a bit better and seems more active. I'm just against the credit he is getting for absolute luck.

Example?? I read an article somewhere reputable (I wish I remember where - but it wasn't written by an Indian, an Aussie/Englishman I think) where it mentioned how Dhoni had made some 'inspired' bowling change in the last test bringing on Harbhajan when Hayden was going well in the 12th over to replace Zaheer Khan. He even mentioned that Zaheer had gone for 44 runs in his 6 overs. My reaction reading this was why was this inspired?? ANY captain would be looking to replace Zaheer after his expensive opening. ANY captain would be looking to introduce spin on a last day pitch. and ANY captain would choose Harbhajan to be that spinner. The only other option was Mishra (or Sehwag I guess) as Zaheer was leaking runs and Ishant was bowling already. Yet the change was called brilliant?? Dhoni dropped Hayden second ball of the over and Hayden went on to make another 50 or 60 more. So if anything Dhoni should be blamed here. Perhaps the brilliant captaincy brainwaves were conflicting with his wicketkeeping skills...

I noted that the article also mentioned the bringing on of Mishra on the last day to get Hussey. Yet Dhoni started out after lunch with Sehwag!! Was this inspired?? No!! Hayden took pleasure in lofting him over the fence and in Sehwags last over he was coming down the track to most of the deliveries looking to attack. Mishra was plan B, yet should have been plan A. Kumble/Ponting might have been criticised, especially if plan B Mishra hadn't got a wicket, yet everyone forgets plan A didn't work for Dhoni, 'ohh but plan B did' they clamour to say/write, of course without mentioning that is was plan B...

It sickens me really. Bowling changes are merely making the best choice of what you have. If your side is playing 4 bowlers like India, you only have 2 choices of who can come on next. So 50/50 chance of making an 'inspired' choice. Mark Taylor was known for making inspired bowling changes. His best example was Ricky Ponting coming on to get Jimmy Adams (maybe?) out LBW back in the 90's. But he would be the first to tell you that he was lucky with his bowling changes quite often and that the real success of his captaincy was having Warne and McGrath to bowl for him. Indian fans will soon discover that too, sometimes the captains moves come off and sometimes they don't - Dhoni included...

So in summary, Dhoni seems a good captain and will help India be better than under Kumble. But I wish people would stop pretending he won the series for India through his great strategies, motivation, bowling changes etc. India won because their batting was too strong for the Aussies, which in my reckoning has very little to do with Dhoni's captaincy.

 

[sohum]

Sifter, it is not as simple as mathematics. A lot of thoughts go into a change in the bowling. You are also ignoring the whole aspect of field placing which, in my opinion, is far more important than making a change in the bowling. With field placings, you are actually making the batsman think about what type of shot he can play and combined with the different bowling, that gets people out.

As for the article about "inspired captaincy" I think you are taking away too much credit for following a gut instinct. As someone once said, captaincy is 90% about luck. Good captains are good captains because their gut instinct turns out to be correct most of the time. Is it luck? Yes. However, there is something about that person's decision-making skills that make them a quality captain.

With regards to Hussey being removed by Mishra, I actually think what preceded was an example of poor captaincy on Dhoni's part... which shows that he still has something to learn. I thought Mishra should have been a lot earlier than he was.

And one final thing with Dhoni is since he is behind the stumps, he knows better than anyone else out there, except the batsmen, how the pitch is behaving. That is naturally going to make his captaincy slightly better if he can use this information, because he can make decisions more accurately, depending on how the pitch is playing.

 

[manee]

I go for a few days and come back to see the quality of discussion in the Australia's Tour of India thread at an intellectual high.