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

Henry wrote:

beamer wrote:It's always the new boy's spot isn't it, whichever team you are talking about, as nobody else wants it!

It's a bit amateurish that it's the new guy who gets the job, rather than the fielder who is best in that position. A specialist short leg can be a big asset.

i might be wrong here cos were going back a bit but didnt david boon make a specialty of it even when he was a long way from being a newbie?

Ethics? The Gall! wrote:

Henry wrote:

beamer wrote:It's always the new boy's spot isn't it, whichever team you are talking about, as nobody else wants it!

It's a bit amateurish that it's the new guy who gets the job, rather than the fielder who is best in that position. A specialist short leg can be a big asset.

i might be wrong here cos were going back a bit but didnt david boon make a specialty of it even when he was a long way from being a newbie?  

Gus Logie was another who was brilliant at short leg and far from a debutant.

I don't know why England let Ian Bell field anywhere else - it's by far his best position.

Eknath Solkar spent most of his career (when not bowling) there, didn't he? He has a reputation of being superb in that position.

Ethics? The Gall! wrote:

Henry wrote:

beamer wrote:It's always the new boy's spot isn't it, whichever team you are talking about, as nobody else wants it!

It's a bit amateurish that it's the new guy who gets the job, rather than the fielder who is best in that position. A specialist short leg can be a big asset.

i might be wrong here cos were going back a bit but didnt david boon make a specialty of it even when he was a long way from being a newbie?  

Boonie was superb in that position. Two short legs!

Brian Close was also superb at short leg. His name was apt.

I guess the younger players tend to have better reactions and movement, which you need for that position, all other things being equal? So unless you have a genuine specialist it sort of makes sense.

Seems the moral victory has been claimed

"The announcement was expected. Australia's captain Steve Smith was declared the man of the series in the four-Test contest that ended on Saturday. But was that the right choice? Wasn't Virat Kohli, India's latest Test captain, equally or more deserving?
...
Kohli smashed 692, also with four centuries, at an average of 86.50. His ground-fielding too was outstanding. The Delhi cricketer often flung himself to stop drives, generally successfully.

The run out of Shaun Marsh on 99 in Melbourne was an outstanding example in accurate throwing and athleticism. As a captain, Kohli fares worse of the two: 1 loss, 1 draw.
...
Kohli's runs came off quality pacemen such as Mitchell Johnson, Ryan Harris and Josh Hazlewood. He had to earn his runs much harder. If he had been facing his own bowlers, he would have probably scored much more.

With Dhawan and Pujara failing regularly, Kohli often came out to bat to avoid a crisis or a collapse.
...
In this backdrop, the award should have gone to Kohli, or even shared between the two cricketers. It has happened in the past. Unfortunately, the judges went by statistics, and ignored perspective."

-------------------------

LOL - Coli should have been MotS because his bowlers and top order are shit.

A Karticle if ever I've seen one.

Ahh yes just because you are less inept than the rest of the team, that gets you player of the series.

So officially there were more runs scored in this series than any other series with four tests or fewer.

Red wrote:So officially there were more runs scored in this series than any other series with four tests or fewer.

And unofficially?

skully wrote:Seems the moral victory has been claimed

"The announcement was expected. Australia's captain Steve Smith was declared the man of the series in the four-Test contest that ended on Saturday. But was that the right choice? Wasn't Virat Kohli, India's latest Test captain, equally or more deserving?
...
Kohli smashed 692, also with four centuries, at an average of 86.50. His ground-fielding too was outstanding. The Delhi cricketer often flung himself to stop drives, generally successfully.

The run out of Shaun Marsh on 99 in Melbourne was an outstanding example in accurate throwing and athleticism. As a captain, Kohli fares worse of the two: 1 loss, 1 draw.
...
Kohli's runs came off quality pacemen such as Mitchell Johnson, Ryan Harris and Josh Hazlewood. He had to earn his runs much harder. If he had been facing his own bowlers, he would have probably scored much more.

With Dhawan and Pujara failing regularly, Kohli often came out to bat to avoid a crisis or a collapse.
...
In this backdrop, the award should have gone to Kohli, or even shared between the two cricketers. It has happened in the past. Unfortunately, the judges went by statistics, and ignored perspective."

-------------------------

LOL - Coli should have been MotS because his bowlers and top order are shit.

A Karticle if ever I've seen one.

It's pretty incredible that two batsmen scored 4 centuries in this series.

taipan wrote:

Red wrote:So officially there were more runs scored in this series than any other series with four tests or fewer.

And unofficially?

The unofficial results are finally in


Banindia now holds the record for most runs scored in a 4 test series just beating South Africa who fell one run short (when all seemed in their favor)

but really the only upshot of this series (made a snorefest by the inappropriate intervention of CA and woeful curators who made the pitches lifeless, bannie-friendly blanc manges) is that the Bannies have manitained their record of never winning a series in OZ.

Until the Bannies are able to regularly win away test series in Oz, SA and Pomgolia, they will continue to be rated as a second tier cricket nation.

I wonder which team benefited more from the highways served up in Tests 1-4?

Terrible pitches, one and all. Utterly boring and uninspiring series.

True, was taxing at the end. There were good periods in matches, but still largely dominated by bat.

And why were the boundary ropes pulled in?

First Test was a classic under extremely tough circumstances, but the rest was a bit of a snooze. India need to find some pace bowlers, as ever... they seem as weak as I can remember though, with no attack leader and not even a world class spinner to fall back on.

Is Prabhakar available for selection?