Net bowlers + a newcomer have bowled out Aussies under 400

[Real McCoy]

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.

 

 

If I want to be critical, only Smith's dismissal was unplayable. harris is not good on the short ball and paine too is susceptible to hook shot which may be on or off like Rohit. it was good bowling though. Labu's dismissal was a nice delivery on the channel but could have left on length but I'm not sure. They also created some edges of Warner that went to 3rd slip region which was empty not to mention that drop chance of Smith off Sundar in long off and the return catch off Green. but these are good deliveries and zen is not appreciating them for what they are.

[express bowling]

8 minutes ago, zen said:

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. 

 

 

My point is ... those 6 wickets were not the result of trying to score runs quickly in the 2nd innings. 

[zen]

4 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

 

My point is ... those 6 wickets were not the result of trying to score runs quickly in the 2nd innings. 

 

The SR would suggest that many of the batsmen were scoring quickly ... if they were playing to draw the game, they would have a different approach and mindset (including of leaving more deliveries and so on)

Edited January 18, 2021 by zen

[ShoonyaSifar]

1 hour 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+)

Abd how many times, do such teams lose all 20 wickets at home, even when trying to set a score, facing a test attack with a total experience of 5 tests? Can Statsguru with some filters give us the answer?

[Real McCoy]

1 minute ago, zen said:

 

The SR would suggest that many of the batsmen were scoring quickly ... if they were playing to draw the game, they would have a different approach and mindset (including of leaving more deliveries and so on)

You are clutching at straws here. We bowled Aus in the first innings under 400 and if not for the dropped catches, under 250 too. Also our senior batters played irresponsibly and that cost us getting a substantial lead which could have been a match winning one.

[express bowling]

9 minutes ago, zen said:

 

The SR would suggest that many of the batsmen were scoring quickly ... if they were playing to draw the game, they would have a different approach and mindset (including of leaving more deliveries and so on)

 

 

My impression is that they would have been dismissed off those 6 deliveries even if they were batting like a 1st innings.

 

Dismissals of Wade, Starc and Lyon were because of trying to score quickly.

Edited January 18, 2021 by express bowling

[zen]

7 minutes ago, Real McCoy said:

You are clutching at straws here. We bowled Aus in the first innings under 400 and if not for the dropped catches, under 250 too. Also our senior batters played irresponsibly and that cost us getting a substantial lead which could have been a match winning one.

 

I have not said that Ind did not compete well. In every game, there would be moments for both teams. If I take the lowest and highest stock price of the day, I would always make max $, however in real time, there are various factors that do into deciding the entry and exit points 

 

If Aus would have scored 400, would you have said that we did well to bowl out Aus under 500?

 

 

 

[Real McCoy]

2 minutes ago, zen said:

 

I have not said that Ind did not compete well. In every game, there would be moments for both teams. If I take the lowest and highest stock price of the day, I would always make max $, however in real time, there are various factors that do into deciding the entry and exit points 

 

If Aus would have scored 400, would you have said that we did well to bowl out Aus under 500?

 

 

 

I would not. The usual first innings score here was around 350. So we basically were not that far from it. That's why I see this is a monumental effort from a rookie bowling lineup

[zen]

6 minutes ago, Real McCoy said:

I would not. The usual first innings score here was around 350. So we basically were not that far from it. That's why I see this is a monumental effort from a rookie bowling lineup

 

Aus was at 213/5 iirc ... ended up at 369 ... the first session on day 2 went relatively well for Ind as they picked up 5 wkts (but the tail also got some runs in)

[zen]

10 minutes ago, express bowling said:

 

 

My impression is that they would have been dismissed off those 6 deliveries even if they were batting like a 1st innings.

 

Dismissals of Wade, Starc and Lyon were because of trying to score quickly.

 

I am not too sure as the approach mentally will be different when you are looking to play a long inning or score quickly ... when trying to score quickly, you are making an adjustments for good balls 

[Real McCoy]

3 minutes ago, zen said:

 

Aus was at 213/5 iirc ... ended up at 369 ... the first session on day 2 went relatively well for Ind as they picked up 5 wkts (but the tail also got some runs in)

Compare this with the first innings of Aus in the first test. They were 111/7 and the last 3 scored 80 runs and they were playing under lights with the pink ball. So its either their tail wags or our bowling despite who is playing is clueless to mop their tail. We had Bumrah, Shami, Yadav and Ashwin in that matchup. This one has Siraj as the leader Dude I know you won't give up and put more and more questions and stats to defend your opinion like its a gabba fortress. I want no part of it. Thanks and good night. You carry on

[maniac]

13 minutes ago, zen said:

 

I have not said that Ind did not compete well. In every game, there would be moments for both teams. If I take the lowest and highest stock price of the day, I would always make max $, however in real time, there are various factors that do into deciding the entry and exit points 

 

If Aus would have scored 400, would you have said that we did well to bowl out Aus under 500?

 

 

 

With this line up yes getting Aussie allout for under 400 Would still have been a monumental effort, the fact that we got them out for under 400 once and under 300 with a bowling line up of a guy in his 3rd test,2 debutants, 2 guys playing their 2nd test one of them only bowled 10 balls in one of those.

 

It shows bowlers having a plan, bowling to a plan, never giving up under pressure and constantly delivering.

 

You can nitpick a million things but it doesn’t change the fact that it was incredible bowling and grit displayed. What you think or analyze is pointless.

 

 

[zen]

3 minutes ago, Real McCoy said:

Compare this with the first innings of Aus in the first test. They were 111/7 and the last 3 scored 80 runs and they were playing under lights with the pink ball. So its either their tail wags or our bowling despite who is playing is clueless to mop their tail. We had Bumrah, Shami, Yadav and Ashwin in that matchup. This one has Siraj as the leader Dude I know you won't give up and put more and more questions and stats to defend your opinion like its a gabba fortress. I want no part of it. Thanks and good night. You carry on

 

Aus' tail is good while its top 6 needs consistency from Warner (did not play in the first 2 tests), Smith (hit his stride from test 3) & Labu 

[zen]

2 minutes ago, maniac said:

With this line up yes getting Aussie allout for under 400 Would still have been a monumental effort, the fact that we got them out for under 400 once and under 300 with a bowling line up of a guy in his 3rd test,2 debutants, 2 guys playing their 2nd test one of them only bowled 10 balls in one of those.

 

 

 

Scores are in relation to pitches, current form, etc. and not based on how what you imagined before the game or on rating Ind's other bowlers in the squad

[ShoonyaSifar]

29 minutes ago, zen said:

 

Scores are in relation to pitches, current form, etc. and not based on how what you imagined before the game or on rating Ind's other bowlers in the squad

Err, if you really believed in this, 80% of your nonsense threads using CI Statsguru filters wouldn't have been created in the first place!

[Rightarmfast]

If one has watched the match, not one of the Aussie wicket was lost because of trying to score fast. An argument could be made about Paine's wicket, however it was the individual brilliance of Shardul that got the wicket. The natural response of an Aussie batsman would be to hit a ball like that. 

Obviously, the only batsmen who tried to score quickly were the tail enders, but then if one believes they are the front line batsmen, thats a different issue.

 

Aussies had come with a timid mindset, there was no way they could throw their wicket in search of runs. 

As much as pitch conditions and a batsmans' form guides the final score, it eventually comes down to your bowlers how they perform and how much are they willing to bend their back. India did just that. It was all the effort of the Indian bowlers, not one Aussie threw his wicket away. Credit where its due!

Edited January 19, 2021 by Rightarmfast