I'll have what Warney's having, please!

From http://www.rediff.com/cricket/2009/jan/29tendulkar-key-for-india-warne.htm :

The former leg-spin wizard defended Australia's loss to India in the sub-continent, saying Ricky Ponting's [Images] men are not on the decline but other team's are catching up with them.

"I think they're playing excellent cricket, other sides are just catching up," Warne said.

"I think Australia is going through a change in period and India is always hard to beat in India... I thought it was a wonderful series and India just outplayed Australia and were a better team, there is no disgrace in that.

"Australia were in a position to win three-nil against South Africa [Images] recently, but lost the series. But there are signs early in 2009 that Australia will be a very strong team," he added.

Pinky

We were missing Subi Clark which weakened our bowling

In the first Test South Africa chased over 400 to win ....Being 400+ in front is in a POSITION to win the Test ...we didn't bowl well enough and South Africa batted brilliantly ...

In the second Test JP Duminy and Dale Steyn batted nearly a full day to take South Africa from a follow on POSITION to a lead ...bad bowling , bad catching and good batting ...

Oz won the third Test

So we were in a POSITION to win 3-0 ...but lost two of the important battles to end up as 2-1 losers

"Australia were in a position to win three-nil against South Africa [Images] recently, but lost the series. "


That's quite true. In the first two matches we had the foot on the throat, but let the Jaapies get out of trouble.

"I'll have what Warney's having, please!"
That'd be loads of money, free trips around the world to play poker, more ood-looking women than he deserves throwing themselves at him...

Sure, count me in.

Cool if we're playing what if's, then let me add England were in a position to win the series against SA 3-1

Cheers.

"Cool if we're playing what if's, then let me add England were in a position to win the series against SA 3-1

Cheers."


Exactly.

The trouble is, it's actually an indictment of the teams' performances, whereas Warney is talking about it as though it is some kind of mitigation.

I blame Ponting.

Still, what's he supposed to say? "Most of the talent has retired and the captain's a moron."

Zat wrote:"I'll have what Warney's having, please!"
That'd be loads of money, free trips around the world to play poker, more ood-looking women than he deserves throwing themselves at him...

Sure, count me in.

Yeah, I had all of that plus more in mind ...

OP Tipping wrote:Still, what's he supposed to say? "Most of the talent has retired and the captain's a moron."

Why not? He'd win a whole generation of new fans.

JKLever wrote:Cool if we're playing what if's, then let me add England were in a position to win the series against SA 3-1

Cheers.

And India were in a position to win the series 3-1 in Aus last year ..

In theory it could have been 3 nil but after winning all three tosses (and the Sydney one was vital given the pitch), we should have been able to close out the series if we were good enough.

The big difference (and Punter had articulated this prior to the series) was who won the big moments. He expected, that as usual, we would nail the Proteas in this area. It was SA though who prevailed at the pivotal times.

embee wrote:Pinky

We were missing Subi Clark which weakened our bowling

In the first Test South Africa chased over 400 to win ....Being 400+ in front is in a POSITION to win the Test ...we didn't bowl well enough and South Africa batted brilliantly ...

In the second Test JP Duminy and Dale Steyn batted nearly a full day to take South Africa from a follow on POSITION to a lead ...bad bowling , bad catching and good batting ...

Oz won the third Test

So we were in a POSITION to win 3-0 ...but lost two of the important battles to end up as 2-1 losers

Such IFs and BUTs just don't cut ice. That way every side can claim moral victory. An Indian could say that the Chennai test against Pak was lost in 1999 by a mere 16 runs. India couldn't get Anwar out after taking 5 wickets for 20 runs and dropped his catch and that cost us the Kolkotta test in the second innings. So India could have won 3-0 then as well as last year when we couldn't get Misbah out in 2 tests that he helped finally draw. If one discounts the Sydney events, India should have been hypothetically winning the series 2-1 in Aus. By that logic we should be blaming Parthiv Patel's sloppy keeping that let us down terribly in the 2004 home series against Aus and the rains for denying us a win at Chennai.

All bollocks in the end. If a side can't get another side out despite scoring 400 runs or asking them to follow on, it is plain bad cricket all round. Merely blaming bowling or fielding is just a whinge. A side that loses a series can't claim moral victories if their first choice team merely has a player or 2 out to injury. Nevertheless bad performance is bad performance no matter which aspect of the game one blames. Aus were plain crap both in India as well as against SA the way India were crap against Sri Lanka last test series. Credit has to be given to winning team for winning rubbers from hopeless positions. It just highlights the collective crapness of the losing side.

Zat wrote:

OP Tipping wrote:Still, what's he supposed to say? "Most of the talent has retired and the captain's a moron."

Why not? He'd win a whole generation of new fans.

Seriously sage.

There are people who are not already fans? Since when has Mick Sawyer been 'a legion'?

No moral victory claimed , Vikas

Just an assessment of where we lost the series ...key battles rather than "never a chance"

Key battles is mainly a "coaching/captaincy/tactics" problem ....never in it is mainly a personnel problem

Warney is the new Djinghis Khan