Net bowlers + a newcomer have bowled out Aussies under 400

[Rightarmfast]

Any top order batsman did not fire is not an excuse. Nobody asked them not to perform. Credit goes to bowling.

[zen]

4 minutes ago, maniac said:

they did not fire because there was good bowling, great fielding and good captaincy and coaching (plans and field setups)

Not necessarily ... I did not see them get out due to any of those 

[Trichromatic]

Aussies were cautious on day 1 and that was impact of bowling in first 3 tests.

 

Same batting line up would be 330/5 on day 1 against this attack if it was first test.

[coffee_rules]

Last match in Brisbane  against the world’s Best bowling attack

 

https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/icc-world-test-championship-2019-2021-1195334/australia-vs-pakistan-1st-test-1183530/full-scorecard

[WC2011INDIA]

 

Ravi shastri kA jalwa

[maniac]

12 minutes ago, zen said:

Not necessarily ... I did not see them get out due to any of those 

did you see Rohits slip catch or Siraj’s seam position when he got Warner or the way Sundar acknowledged the plan was a success when they got rid of Smith?

 

my friendly advise “watch the game”

 

You said the quality of wickets taken were not that good even in McG test

[zen]

40 minutes ago, maniac said:

did you see Rohits slip catch or Siraj’s seam position when he got Warner or the way Sundar acknowledged the plan was a success when they got rid of Smith?

 

my friendly advise “watch the game”

 

You said the quality of wickets taken were not that good even in McG test

Warner was gone in 4 balls without getting his eye in (a good wkt early on). Siraj only picked up 1 wkt in the inning .... Smith’s was a loose shot against the run of play (he has done that in this series) 

Having a plan is no big deal as there is usually always one - bowling a full toss can be a plan too (a batsman getting out on it in a test can be considered unfortunate or dumb for e.g.). Also no one is saying Ind did not do this or that. There are various angles to a play. Here without big contributions from Warner & Smith, Aus got 350+ 

 

 

 

Edited January 16, 2021 by zen

[express bowling]

This test match is also a testament to ... what diffence having a fast bowling culture in the team makes.

 

There is a lot of shared knowledge, both direct and indirect. These youngsters must have benefited immensely by seeing Bumrah and Shami train and operate and discussing bowling plans with them.

 

 

[rkt.india]

9 hours ago, zen said:

Not necessarily ... I did not see them get out due to any of those 

Not always you get wickets on good balls. 

[coffee_rules]

Twice, nobody expected these bowlers to take 10 wickets. Let alone 20. 

[coffee_rules]

On 1/16/2021 at 12:18 PM, zen said:

Warner was gone in 4 balls without getting his eye in (a good wkt early on). Siraj only picked up 1 wkt in the inning .... Smith’s was a loose shot against the run of play (he has done that in this series) 

Having a plan is no big deal as there is usually always one - bowling a full toss can be a plan too (a batsman getting out on it in a test can be considered unfortunate or dumb for e.g.). Also no one is saying Ind did not do this or that. There are various angles to a play. Here without big contributions from Warner & Smith, Aus got 350+ 

 

 

 

nobody asked Smith and Warner not to score. 

[BacktoCricaddict]

On 1/16/2021 at 12:03 PM, maniac said:

did you see Rohits slip catch or Siraj’s seam position when he got Warner or the way Sundar acknowledged the plan was a success when they got rid of Smith?

 

my friendly advise “watch the game”

 

You said the quality of wickets taken were not that good even in McG test

Seam position on that ball - it was like Shami was back!  

[Real McCoy]

Should change title to "Net bowlers + a newcomer have bowled out Aussies under 400 - TWICE"

[zen]

13 minutes ago, Real McCoy said:

Should change title to "Net bowlers + a newcomer have bowled out Aussies under 400 - TWICE"

Unless a team is bowled out relatively cheaply in the 1st inning,  the 2nd inng score is usually lower than the first one (and when the team is looking to set a chase of 300+)

Edited January 18, 2021 by zen

[coffee_rules]

9 minutes ago, zen said:

Unless a team is bowled out relatively cheaply in the 1st inning,  the 2nd inng score is usually lower than the first one (and when the team is looking to set a chase of 300+)

capn obvious, the point is Aus got all out in both innings. There’re in a spot of bother at 123-4 against a 3rd string attack, nobody expected Aus to get all out in both innings against this attack

[Real McCoy]

16 minutes ago, zen said:

Unless a team is bowled out relatively cheaply in the 1st inning,  the 2nd inng score is usually lower than the first one (and when the team is looking to set a chase of 300+)

Nonetheless, this is the one of the fewest times where a visiting side has bowled out Aus twice at the Gabba. That is some achievement for a C-level attack

[zen]

31 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

capn obvious, the point is Aus got all out in both innings. There’re in a spot of bother at 123-4 against a 3rd string attack, nobody expected Aus to get all out in both innings against this attack

 

If a team is pressing for a win, it is taking more chances with the bat so there is always a possibility of losing wkts (many batsmen played at a SR of 60+ early on in those conditions on the 4th day esp. since Aus bats deep) ... If a team got bowled out for 369 in the 1st, the chances of doing a 300/6 dec for e.g. are relatively less esp. when the key batsmen are playing at a high SR .... my point was on the "400" though 

Edited January 18, 2021 by zen

[express bowling]

27 minutes ago, zen said:

 

If a team is pressing for a win, it is taking more chances with the bat so there is always a possibility of losing wkts (many batsmen played at a SR of 60+ early on in those conditions on the 4th day esp. since Aus bats deep) ... If a team got bowled out for 369 in the 1st, the chances of doing a 300/6 dec for e.g. are relatively less esp. when the key batsmen are playing at a high SR .... my point was on the "400" though 

 

 

The interesting part is ... most of the wickets of the top 7 batsmen fell when they tried to defend. 

 

Wade is the only exception.

 

Smith, Harris and Paine were dismissed off snorters.

 

 

[prudent_kreeda]

1 minute ago, express bowling said:

 

 

The interesting part is ... most of the wickets of the top 7 batsmen fell when they tried to defend. 

 

Wade is the only exception.

 

Smith, Harris and Paine were dismissed off snorters.

 

 

 Pitch could  provide very good bounce to those big Aussie bowlers at 140+ .tomorrow .  Tough day 

[zen]

3 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

 

The interesting part is ... most of the wickets of the top 7 batsmen fell when they tried to defend. 

 

Wade is the only exception.

 

Smith, Harris and Paine were dismissed off snorters.

 

 

Batsmen will play a mix of aggressive and defensive shots based on the quality of the ball, lengths, snorters, ball hitting certain areas on the pitch, etc.