India’s 2-1 win in Australia is not the best triumph overseas, feels Sanjay Manjrekar

[Gollum]

13 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

but then current Aussie bowling is as good as any especially at home.  Only thing is i will always consider winning on the back of fast bowlers overseas over winning on the back of spinners.  it is not easy bowling opposition fast bowlers at their home. That is why 2007 England, 1986 England, and this Aussie win should be on top shelf. 

Only thing I will consider is winning overseas, no matter how it comes. And if it is tough to outbowl the opposition fast bowlers, imagine how tough it is to win with spinners against opposition fast bowlers? Our spin quartet was legendary and shouldn't be downplayed because of their bowling style. 

[R!TTER]

Just now, SK_IH said:

stop being a self loather. I am also not sure what would have happen if Smith and Warner was playing, however beating Aus in Aus is always a big achievement. 

It is but don't over-hype this achievement as if it's our greatest overseas win ever! This is Aus worst batting in 100+ years - fact! Current Aus bowling is also way overrated, just look at their numbers last year & this series, worst bowling avg & S/R among the top 5 or 6 test nations. So while it's hard to gauge things just based on reputation or anecdotes, the real numbers tell a different story! Also did I mention we're number 1 for about 3 years now, what's Aus ranking 

Edited January 10, 2019 by R!TTER

[Gollum]

26 minutes ago, ShoonyaSifar said:

Did you see anyone in Australia claim 2004 win in India was not their final frontier conquered? Sachin did not play in 3 Tests of the series and Aus saved Chennai test due to rains

Sachin did not play 2 tests and he wasn't the same player post tennis elbow. 

 

Based on what happened next year in Bangalore (Pak) and 2 years later in Mumbai (England) I will say Australia were robbed of a straightforward victory in Chennai due to rain. I give a 1 in a 100 chance of that out of form Indian batting unit pulling off that chase against that Aussie bowling on 5th day Chepauk track. 

Edited January 10, 2019 by Gollum

[rkt.india]

8 minutes ago, Gollum said:

Only thing I will consider is winning overseas, no matter how it comes. And if it is tough to outbowl the opposition fast bowlers, imagine how tough it is to win with spinners against opposition fast bowlers? Our spin quartet was legendary and shouldn't be downplayed because of their bowling style. 

win spinners in England and Aus is only possible if those team do not have good fast bowlers which was the case in 1971 England and WI.

[rkt.india]

7 minutes ago, R!TTER said:

It is but don't over-hype this achievement as if it's our greatest overseas win ever! This is Aus worst batting in 100+ years - fact! Current Aus bowling is also way overrated, just look at their numbers last year & this series, worst bowling avg & S/R among the top 5 or 6 test nations. So while it's hard to gauge things just based on reputation or anecdotes, the real numbers tell a different story! Also did I mention we're number 1 for about 3 years now, what's Aus ranking 

abey tutiye, their fast bowler's record is so bad this series because we played them well.  If they had averages of 20s in the series, you think Indian team would have won.  Most people on this forum had given in first session of this series itself when we were 40/4 saying this Aussie bowling will run through this batting line.

[R!TTER]

That was a relatively flat pitch, with Sehwag in that form, & lower order w/PP & Pathan doing really well last test I'd put the odds even at best. Of course it's hard to assume anything based purely on conjecture, so this is just a pointless exercise given we ultimately lost the series.

[Gollum]

3 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

win spinners in England and Aus is only possible if those team do not have good fast bowlers which was the case in 1971 England and WI.

I give up, you win. 

[R!TTER]

Just now, rkt.india said:

abey tutiye, their fast bowler's record is so bad this series because we played them well.  If they had averages of 20s in the series, you think Indian team would have won.  Most people on this forum had given in first session of this series itself when we were 40/4 saying this Aussie bowling will run through this batting line.

Abey bin pende ke, did you see their records in SA? We did bat better but cricket isn't a linear progression nor is it a 0 sum game -

 

Lets's say 0 is par, we had +5 batting & +5 bowling

They had -5 batting & +2 bowling

The difference is 10 in batting & 3 in bowling, it reflects disproportionately because we won the key moments & were generally competitive in all sessions!

 

On the one hand you overhype this Aus attack as better than anything we've faced in the past, except 2k, & on the other hand you say we batted so much better they were rendered impotent? Are you right in the head or what, if these guys don't have the numbers to back them up what does that say about your theory?

Edited January 10, 2019 by R!TTER

[Gollum]

2 minutes ago, R!TTER said:

That was a relatively flat pitch, with Sehwag in that form, & lower order w/PP & Pathan doing really well last test I'd put the odds even at best. Of course it's hard to assume anything based purely on conjecture, so this is just a pointless exercise given we ultimately lost the series.

Sehwag wasn't good in 4th innings. Our middle order was in poor form and Aussie bowlers had our measure, McGrath-Gillespie gave a masterclass in fast bowling that series. Moreover 5th day pitch and last innings have their psychological effect on batsmen, we huffed and puffed in Chennai 3 years earlier against the same team and that time we had in form batsmen against a rattled Australia. 

 

Agree with your bolded bit but have to make my points when so many Indian supporters assume that we were a lock-in to win that match. 

[R!TTER]

We had better chance to win that game than any other that series, that's all I'm gonna say. Chennai usually slows down a lot & that negates most pace bowlers, who aren't express quicks.

[Gollum]

In the year 1971, England was the number 1 ranked side in the world. How often does a number 1 ranked side lose at home, that too against a team from polar opposite conditions... SENAW in Asia or Asian teams in SENAW?

 

I can't recall any other instance of India beating a top ranked side away from home, these are our prominent away victories (don't rate wins against Bangla, Zim and minnow SLanka of 80s and early 90s)

NZ 1967...rank minnows yet special in its own way cos history created

WI 1971...England was no 1

Eng 1971 against number 1 side 

Eng 1985...mid tier team, ATG WI clear no 1

Pak 2004...ATG Aus no 1

WI 2006...ATG Aus no 1

Eng 2007...ATG Aus no 1

NZ 2009...India no 1

WI 2011/16...India no 1

SL 2015...RSA no 1

Aus 2018...India no 1

 

Those harping on about strengths of teams, that England team had Boycott (England Great), Knott (ATG), Edrich (EG), Dennis Amiss (EG), John Snow (EG), Underwood (ATG) besides some very capable players like Basil D'Oliveira, Illingworth and Keith Fletcher. If 2018-19 Australia was history created, so was 1971 England because we were the first Asian team to win a series there. In fact before 1971 our record there was dismal, P 19, W 0, L 15, D 4....that's right, ZERO test wins in England and just managing to draw every 5th test.

 

Add to the fact that the sport was run by the dictatorial and racist, supremacist Poms those days (Imperial Cricket Council) and we (applies to non-Aus/Eng, especially brown and black folk of the Commonwealth) were second class people with a piss poor and impotent cricket board, only worthy to be laughed and scorned at by the white masters. That victory was historical in more ways than one, our first overseas triumph against former colonial masters, similar to 1948 London Olympics field hockey but even more special because of the status of cricket in England and our miserable on field achievements/reputation in cricket compared to hockey. 

Edited January 10, 2019 by Gollum

[Gollum]

1971 was a dhamaka year for India...great time to be alive.

 

WI away series win

Eng away series win

Liberation of Bangladesh plus decimation of Pakistani army

[Straight Drive]

2 hours ago, Gollum said:

Yeah right. John Snow and Underwood were gully ke thulle. You like to argue for the sake of arguing. 

Good someone bought up the those names, especially Jon Snow.  What a treat it was to watch him bowl.  Terrific bowler.Underwood was good too.

 

To me 1971 was the best win i watched.  Nobody scored 774 in 4 tests on debut.  It's a record in 100+ years of test cricket. England 2007 was second best. Australia 2019 was my third best, England 1986 was my 4th.

 

I didn't see 1968 so i cannot comment on it.

 

Test Series wins outside Asia
(1) NZ /1967 / 4 / 3-1
(2) WI / 1971/ 5 / 1-0
(3) ENGLAND / 1971 / 3 / 1-0
(4) ENGLAND / 1986 / 3 / 2-0
(5) ENGLAND / 2007 / 3 / 1-0
(6) NZ / 2009 / 3 / 1-0
(7)AUSTRALIA / 2019 / 4 / 2-1

[Straight Drive]

15 minutes ago, Gollum said:

1971 was a dhamaka year for India...great time to be alive.

 

WI away series win

Eng away series win

Liberation of Bangladesh plus decimation of Pakistani army

Best year to watch cricket. Totally agree. Two overseas win one after another.

[CoverDrive]

If previous sides were so good why did they not win. Weak opposition argument does not stand good. We have toured in times when Aussie teams was seriously second string (Kerry Packer era) or missing big stars (Warne, McGrath in 2003) 

 

We are not talking about minor differences in result. OUr best results were draw vs. a clear series win.

[Real McCoy]

7 hours ago, Gollum said:

Sehwag wasn't good in 4th innings. Our middle order was in poor form and Aussie bowlers had our measure, McGrath-Gillespie gave a masterclass in fast bowling that series. Moreover 5th day pitch and last innings have their psychological effect on batsmen, we huffed and puffed in Chennai 3 years earlier against the same team and that time we had in form batsmen against a rattled Australia. 

 

Agree with your bolded bit but have to make my points when so many Indian supporters assume that we were a lock-in to win that match. 

Sehwag scored a 4th innings 80 in 60 balls and made sure we won that test in Chennai after 26/11. He was in that mood in 04 as well and that too at the same venue. Rain had to play spoil sport. If we have won that it would be 1-1 and we would have went into Nagpur with a better frame of mind.

[putrevus]

1986 England series win followed by this series  are no1 and no2. This nonsense that 1971 England series was better is ridiculous , England was better even in series loss.

1971 WI win was against a very weak attack on flat pitches. India never had attack of taking 20 wickets in that series also. winning any series 1-0 is purely due to luck more than anything else.

You need bowling to get 20 wickets both 1986 Indian team and this year's team had ability to take 20 wickets.1986 team is no1 because they never lost any test.They dominated England in England which led Gower to resign from captaincy also.This year's team lost Perth test and first test could have gone either way.

[Adi BB]

This is one of the best achievement ,have no doubts about it .we came so close in the past but just couldn't cross the line and it shows how hard it is to win in aus. 

This Australian team is not that weak as many feel ,its the Indian bowling which made them struggle else you wont see batsmen like marsh,khwaja struggling at home conditions. 

These same guys thrash other bowling line ups 

[Gollum]

1 hour ago, Real McCoy said:

Sehwag scored a 4th innings 80 in 60 balls and made sure we won that test in Chennai after 26/11. He was in that mood in 04 as well and that too at the same venue. Rain had to play spoil sport. If we have won that it would be 1-1 and we would have went into Nagpur with a better frame of mind.

Based on his overnight score of 12*? And that England 80 is an outlier, for every success Viru had 8 failures in 4th innings. Also I don't recall him having 2 big scores in the same match. 

 

2004 Aussie bowling was simply too good, especially their quicks. Their planning and execution was at peak form, compared to their other visits to SC. We struggled to get 150 odd against a weaker Australian attack (form-wise, tactics) in 2001, this despite a batting unit in full form and confidence. 2004 batters were out of sorts and a 230 target on day 5 against McGrath, Gillespie, Kasprowicz, Warne, Lehmann, Katich, Clarke backed by that fielding would have been a monumental struggle.  

 

Edited January 10, 2019 by Gollum

[Real McCoy]

8 minutes ago, Gollum said:

Based on his overnight score of 12*? And that England 80 is an outlier, for every success Viru had 8 failures in 4th innings. Also I don't recall him having 2 big scores in the same match. 

 

2004 Aussie bowling was simply too good, especially their quicks. Their planning and execution was at peak form, compared to their other visits to SC. We struggled to get 150 odd against a weaker Australia attack (form-wise, tactics) in 2001, this despite a batting unit in full form and confidence. 2004 batters were out of sorts and a 230 target on day 5 against McGrath, Gillespie, Kasprowic, Warne, Lehmann, Katich, Clarke backed by that fielding would have been a monumental struggle.  

 

He scored a 155* in the first innings and he struck a couple of fours in the final over off of Mcgrath in the offside that were majestic. We only needed 230 to chase and if he got going the next morning, we could have won it.