India v Australia Test

India v Australia Test

Joined: 17 Oct 2013, 20:44

23 Feb 2017, 12:29 #1

I got up early(ish) to watch this, and how enjoyable day 1 has been. Absolute raging turner of a pitch, more like the ones England met in Bangladesh than the fairly flat ones of the India series, but India didn't bowl too well on it.

I think this was down to the superior footwork of the Aussie batsmen, compared with ours. Bowlers were under pressure all the time, even though Oz, like England, have lots of left-handed batsmen.

Big Yorkshire presence in the game. Yorkshire-born Renshaw, Mitchell Starc and Pujara, plus Kettleborough.

Most importantly, Peter Handscomb, who looks quite a tall lad, with an upright stance. I thought he played the spinners brilliantly, despite having to start his innings when they were in full flow. Perhaps an lbw candidate against seamers, nipping it around in April?

But he does look a thoughtful and well organised player. Not unlike Pujara, in fact.
Reply
Like

Joined: 21 Jan 2004, 19:13

23 Feb 2017, 16:55 #2

I only saw the last 3 hours but can't agree with you. But for an excellent 10th wicket partnership including Mitch Starc Aus would have been bowled out for about 200. We'll see how important this stand has been when India bat
Reply
Like

Joined: 21 Oct 2013, 13:37

23 Feb 2017, 20:26 #3

All the commentators thought that 250 was par and starcs late hitting got them there.
Reply
Like

Joined: 04 Jun 2015, 18:32

24 Feb 2017, 10:58 #4

In that case India well below par and short of runs. Kohli out second ball probably helps.

Handscomb may not suit some as a keeper but looks like he can catch flies in the slips
Reply
Like

Joined: 17 Oct 2013, 20:44

24 Feb 2017, 11:45 #5

Once again Handscomb batted quite beautifully. Only 19 runs, but worth many a fifty, if not more. I continue to be amazed at Smith's improvement.

India's problems with the bat accentuated the excellence of the Aussies' batting. And those on this forum who liked to criticise Cook's captaincy can be thankful we didn't have Kohli in that role. Cook may have lacked imagination and boldness, occasionally, but at least he stayed calm under pressure.

If you want to see a real wicket-keeper, Saha is probably the best around.
Reply
Like

Joined: 18 Apr 2014, 00:12

24 Feb 2017, 13:21 #6

While Peter Handscomb might be technically fluid with the bat, I don't see how lasting 34 balls on any sort of wicket is worth at least 50 runs.

One players credentials on the up is no other than Yorkshire's finest Matt Renshaw, who appears to be taking to test cricket like Joe Root did in his infancy. Maybe Moxon and Gale have their eye on him as a potential Overseas player for the future.
No Pyrah, no party
Reply
Like

Joined: 17 Oct 2013, 20:44

24 Feb 2017, 14:29 #7

I'll try to explain. On a pitch like that there's always going to be a ball with your name on it. When it comes, there's nothing you can do about it. The trick is to have a plan that allows you to score, and not to get out, to the more ordinary balls in between.

So shot selection is the key. The commentators, especially Manjrekhar, continually stressed that the straight-drive was a more dangerous shot than the reverse-sweep. All the Aussie top order appeared to have a method. Smith, for example, played and missed against Jadeja so often that he was laughing at him. He knew that as long as he played straight and defended his wicket, the ball that turned would easily beat the outside edge.

Renshaw and Handscomb were just as good, though Handscomb got the deadly ball and Renshaw, who was ill and had probably had enough, eventually fell to the above mentioned straight drive. Mitch Marsh had a different method, and his worked too.

I think there was a lot of Lehmann in the way they played. No modern player can have experience of a pitch like that, not even at club level in Australia, where I watched O'Keefe bowl without success one Saturday afternoon, at Manly Oval.

Equally, the Indian spinners did not really know how to bowl on it. Ashwin and Jadeja are brilliant bowlers on a flat pitch which gives them just a little help. I would have loved to see Jim Laker on it, or Wardle and Appleyard. Underwood, too, or the young Panesar, who learnt to bowl on something about halfway-similar at Northampton.

You wouldn't want every Test to be played on a pitch like this, but once in a while is great, because it challenges players outside their comfort zone. This is exactly what T20 has (rightly) been praised for doing - and wouldn't a T20 game be fun on a surface like this one? But not for those who think cricket is only entertaining when the ball is being slogged out of the stadium.
Reply
Like

Joined: 04 Jun 2015, 18:32

24 Feb 2017, 17:17 #8

Like 👍🏻
Reply
Like

Joined: 18 Apr 2014, 00:12

25 Feb 2017, 22:24 #9

I'll try to explain. On a pitch like that there's always going to be a ball with your name on it. When it comes, there's nothing you can do about it. The trick is to have a plan that allows you to score, and not to get out, to the more ordinary balls in between.

So shot selection is the key. The commentators, especially Manjrekhar, continually stressed that the straight-drive was a more dangerous shot than the reverse-sweep. All the Aussie top order appeared to have a method. Smith, for example, played and missed against Jadeja so often that he was laughing at him. He knew that as long as he played straight and defended his wicket, the ball that turned would easily beat the outside edge.

Renshaw and Handscomb were just as good, though Handscomb got the deadly ball and Renshaw, who was ill and had probably had enough, eventually fell to the above mentioned straight drive. Mitch Marsh had a different method, and his worked too.

I think there was a lot of Lehmann in the way they played. No modern player can have experience of a pitch like that, not even at club level in Australia, where I watched O'Keefe bowl without success one Saturday afternoon, at Manly Oval.

Equally, the Indian spinners did not really know how to bowl on it. Ashwin and Jadeja are brilliant bowlers on a flat pitch which gives them just a little help. I would have loved to see Jim Laker on it, or Wardle and Appleyard. Underwood, too, or the young Panesar, who learnt to bowl on something about halfway-similar at Northampton.

You wouldn't want every Test to be played on a pitch like this, but once in a while is great, because it challenges players outside their comfort zone. This is exactly what T20 has (rightly) been praised for doing - and wouldn't a T20 game be fun on a surface like this one? But not for those who think cricket is only entertaining when the ball is being slogged out of the stadium.
Well it seems Steve Smith has had the last laugh as he scores a match clinching century for Austtalia. Nothing wrong with batsmen playing and missing shots, luring bowlers into a false sense of security and bowl forthcoming deliveries into the batsmans slot.

Steve Smith might have taken an unorthodox approach to batting, but his quick hands and feet helped him stay at the crease to throw the Indian spinners off. In comparison, a fair number of Indian wickets fell to batsmen not moving their feet and being forced into playing strokes.

Peter Handscombes keeping might be a lot to be desired, but seems quick and agile when fielding close. This could prove useful whenever Adil Rashid is into the attack.


No Pyrah, no party
Reply
Like

Joined: 07 Aug 2014, 16:58

26 Feb 2017, 10:40 #10

What a brilliant knock from Smith, given the context of the match. It's nice to see India taken down a peg, even if it is by the Aussies. I'll still be amazed if India don't win the series.
Reply
Like