Australia v India, 4th Test, Sydney, 6-10 January 2015

lardbucket wrote:Starc and Burns come out of this game with credentials enhanced; that's about it.

Hazy's bowling has been pretty good.

skully wrote:Moral victory to the Bannies?

No. They probably have endured tougher conditions but have never been able to bowl us out.

skully: Yep, lots of dropped catches. The 'not out' decision on the stumping attempt of Rohit was also crucial.

Red: The Indians always get the moral victory.

Dropping VJ cost us about 2 hrs.

last over, then

Hattrick required.

yep, that's where you should have been bowling all day

Tweek clear MotS.

all over

The villains of the series were the curators. Who'd be a bowler?

So ultimately two flat pitches and two relatively ineffective attacks has meant we have had two draws.

there should be two MoS: Smith, Kohli, then daylight

lardbucket wrote:Starc and Burns come out of this game with credentials enhanced; that's about it.

Apart from his fielding. He will still need to prove himself overseas.

skully wrote:The villains of the series were the curators. Who'd be a bowler?

An article yesterday pointed out that nobody averaged below thirty-two with the ball and yet there were tons and half tons galore. Hard to know how good the batsmen are really on these pitches and with a lack of firepower.

He fields in slip normally; so he probably should be there. I'd stick Rogers back at short leg unless Cowan comes back into the team.

Big Dog wrote:

lardbucket wrote:Starc and Burns come out of this game with credentials enhanced; that's about it.

Apart from his fielding. He will still need to prove himself overseas.

Surely the jury is still out on Burns; he played well yesterday but came in under no pressure on a flattie against an impotent attack.

Smith deservedly named MOTS.

At least he looked comfortable at the crease in this match; unlike Melbourne. Showed enough IMO.

So bowling attack fails again on Day 5 of a Test.

Lyon really doesn't like being 'the man', does he.

2-0 is probably a fair result. Australia were better, but not THAT much better. With a bit more composure in the big moments, India could actually have won the series.

Henry wrote:Lyon really doesn't like being 'the man', does he.

2-0 is probably a fair result. Australia were better, but not THAT much better. With a bit more composure in the big moments, India could actually have won the series.

With better captaincy & fielding a 3-0 result would have been a fairer result.

With better catching it would have been 4-0.

As it was 2-0 feels right. India batted more than 80 overs in every innings except the Gabba I think so 4-0 wouldn't have felt right.

Crap pitches though - never really gave the bowlers a chance.

Big Dog wrote:

Henry wrote:Lyon really doesn't like being 'the man', does he.

2-0 is probably a fair result. Australia were better, but not THAT much better. With a bit more composure in the big moments, India could actually have won the series.

With better captaincy & fielding a 3-0 result would have been a fairer result.

India needed about 150 runs with 8 wickets in hand on the final afternoon in Adelaide. Even you must admit India should have won from that position. And in Brisbane they had Aus 200-6, trailing India's first innings 400 odd, before allowing them to get a first innings lead with awful bowling at Australia's tail.

Melbourne? Smith's declaration was poor, I'll give you that. So in an alternate scenario it COULD have been 2-1 to India.

That would have been a kartically correct result.

Lyon 23 wickets. ROFL.

Red wrote:.

Smith deservedly named MOTS.

Admirable jingoism