Australian Resilience exposes India's pathetic Performance

[Try_Ball]

Watching how Australia played today against a momentum team like Pakistan despite playing in total alien conditions just thoroughly exposes how bad and dismal India was during the tournament. 

 

The way Australia batted to chase an over par 170 - India would have never won this game in the way they played  . Each Australian batsman seemed to believe in himself and tried to stay in the middle and apply themselves.  None played selfishly and tried to do what's the best for the team - Smith and Maxwell instead of playing at SR of 100 like Pant and Pandya chose to go after the bowling to put the pressure back on Pakistan rather than secure their place in the team....

 

India has been playing in UAE for quite a long time and despite knowing the conditions played extremely poorly and just shows how poor the Indian batting was against Pakistan.  India got snake bitten after Afridi's wickets and were frozen against him but what destroyed the momentum on how badly they played against pedestrian bowlers like Imad and Haris Rauf -  These two bowlers were smacked to no end by Warner / Mitch and Stoinis but Indian batters were playing Imad and Haris Rauf as the next coming of Warne/McGrath out there.  Even if Afridi took wickets ,  Imad and Haris should have been pumped for 10-12 runs an over but instead Indian batsman were taking dot balls and singles off these two .

 

and Lastly,  compare how the middle /lower order of  Maxwell/Stoinis and Wade have been doing vs  Pant/Pandya and Jadeja .   -   These overhyped Indian sloggers and all rounders were struggling to put bat on ball whereas Australian lower middle order scored 70-80 odd runs in less than 7-8 overs under pressure.

 

Edited November 12, 2021 by Try_Ball

[nsareen]

Watching how Australia played today against a momentum team like Pakistan despite playing in total alien conditions just thoroughly exposes how bad and dismal India was during the tournament. 
 
The way Australia batted to chase an over par 170 - India would have never won this game in the way they played  . Each Australian batsman seemed to believe in himself and tried to stay in the middle and apply themselves.  None played selfishly and tried to do what's the best for the team - Smith and Maxwell instead of playing at SR of 100 like Pant and Pandya chose to go after the bowling to put the pressure back on Pakistan rather than secure their place in the team....
 
India has been playing in UAE for quite a long time and despite knowing the conditions played extremely poorly and just shows how poor the Indian batting was against Pakistan.  India got snake bitten after Afridi's wicket and were frozen against him but what destroyed the momentum on how badly they played against pedestrian bowlers like Imad and Haris Rauf -  These two bowlers were smacked to no end by Warner / Mitch and Stoinis but Indian batters were playing Imad and Haris Rauf as the next coming of Warne/McGrath out there.  Even if Afridi took wickets ,  Imad and Haris should have been pumped for 10-12 runs an over but instead Indian batsman were taking dot balls and singles off these two .
 
and Lastly,  compare how the middle /lower order of  Maxwell/Stoinis and Wade have been doing vs  Pant/Pandya and Jadeja .   -   These overhyped Indian sloggers and all rounders were struggling to put bat on ball whereas Australian lower middle order scored 70-80 odd runs in less than 7-8 overs under pressure.
 

Non sense, India while chasing did not give anybody chance to make it interesting… In the warm up games against England / Australia while chasing, India had a breeze, never looked panicked & won with ease.. By now everyone knows defending scores against good oppositions is extremely difficult here in Dubai.. India could not adapt to the wicket while batting first, but nothing pathetic about it when the conditions vary so much that it influences the match outcome by more than 80% just by the toss..


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[nitinbwj]

Had India chased in both the matches, it would have won. Plain and Simple. 

[Try_Ball]

2 minutes ago, nsareen said:

Non sense, India while chasing did not give anybody chance to make it interesting… In the warm up games against England / Australia while chasing, India had a breeze, never looked panicked & won with ease.. By now everyone knows defending scores against good oppositions is extremely difficult here in Dubai.. India could not adapt to the wicket while batting first, but nothing pathetic about it when the conditions vary so much that it influences the match outcome by more than 80% just by the toss..


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I wish you spent a bit more time reading than emotionally replying.

India only played two relevant games in the whole T20 - Pakistan and NZ -     Warmup games and Games again Afghanistan/Scotland and the third team doesn't even count.

Pakistan batted first today and scored 170+ against a potent Aussie attack  -   Why didn't India do so?   India was struggling quite poorly against NZ and Pakistan - only two teams which they had a relevant match against.

India played quite poorly in the tournament when it mattered and their approach was quite timid 

[Try_Ball]

3 minutes ago, nitinbwj said:

Had India chased in both the matches, it would have won. Plain and Simple. 

 

So you're saying had India been chasing 170+ against Pakistan -  Rohit and KL rahul wouldn't have gotten out ?   or You're implying that when Pant and Pandya would have come to the crease to chase - they would have had he same hitting game as Wade/ Stoinis and Marsh ?    Yeah .......No.

[nsareen]

I wish you spent a bit more time reading than emotionally replying.
India only played two relevant games in the whole T20 - Pakistan and NZ -     Warmup games and Games again Afghanistan/Scotland and the third team doesn't even count.
Pakistan batted first today and scored 170+ against a potent Aussie attack  -   Why didn't India do so?   India was struggling quite poorly against NZ and Pakistan - only two teams which they had a relevant match against.
India played quite poorly in the tournament when it mattered and their approach was quite timid 

you are being naive that’s why the emotional reply, this pitch was way better than what india played on, even the commentators & Aaron Finch acknowledged he wanted to Bat first, that’s how good it looked, not the case with Indian matches. Secondly one should realise indians have never played Afridi Riaz regularly & the class those bowlers have, you need some Luck to start your innings like how Mitch Marsh was saved by umprire’s call.. Had Sky / Pant not got out at those times they did, india would have scored 180+.. not that it would have mattered with Bhuvi in the mix , but at least 20-30 extra runs to play with..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jay]

18 minutes ago, Try_Ball said:

Watching how Australia played today against a momentum team like Pakistan despite playing in total alien conditions just thoroughly exposes how bad and dismal India was during the tournament. 

 

The way Australia batted to chase an over par 170 - India would have never won this game in the way they played  . Each Australian batsman seemed to believe in himself and tried to stay in the middle and apply themselves.  None played selfishly and tried to do what's the best for the team - Smith and Maxwell instead of playing at SR of 100 like Pant and Pandya chose to go after the bowling to put the pressure back on Pakistan rather than secure their place in the team....

 

India has been playing in UAE for quite a long time and despite knowing the conditions played extremely poorly and just shows how poor the Indian batting was against Pakistan.  India got snake bitten after Afridi's wicket and were frozen against him but what destroyed the momentum on how badly they played against pedestrian bowlers like Imad and Haris Rauf -  These two bowlers were smacked to no end by Warner / Mitch and Stoinis but Indian batters were playing Imad and Haris Rauf as the next coming of Warne/McGrath out there.  Even if Afridi took wickets ,  Imad and Haris should have been pumped for 10-12 runs an over but instead Indian batsman were taking dot balls and singles off these two .

 

and Lastly,  compare how the middle /lower order of  Maxwell/Stoinis and Wade have been doing vs  Pant/Pandya and Jadeja .   -   These overhyped Indian sloggers and all rounders were struggling to put bat on ball whereas Australian lower middle order scored 70-80 odd runs in less than 7-8 overs under pressure.

 

lmao india would have chased this down easily. not once did india get an opportunity to chase. INdia has problems when they bat first. Not sure about what target to set. Fatigue from IPl played a major role in our defeats early against paksitan and new zealand. Honestly india dont seem to even care about t20s. Why would they? TOO much IPL mullah. We need to ensure only young hungry players get opportunities to play in t20 WCs in the future. Oldies like ro ko dont seem to be interested and their style of play doesnt translate well. 

[Try_Ball]

1 minute ago, nsareen said:

you are being naive that’s why the emotional reply, this pitch was way better than what india played on, even the commentators & Aaron Finch acknowledged he wanted to Bat first, that’s how good it looked, not the case with Indian matches. Secondly one should realise indians have never played Afridi Riaz regularly & the class those bowlers have, you need some Luck to start your innings like how Mitch Marsh was saved by umprire’s call.. Had Sky / Pant not got out at those times they did, india would have scored 180+.. not that it would have mattered with Bhuvi in the mix , but at least 20-30 extra runs to play with..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

The pitch that India played on had no demons in them as well..... India went into their shell - pitch wasn't doing ugly things and neither did the pitch change so drastically that Pakistan won by 10 wickets.

Secondly,  Australia does not play Pakistan regularly as well and doesn't have much experience against Afridi.  

Each Australian batsman applied themselves and put a value on their wicket - SKY played a horrendous shot to a nothing delivery and Pant played dot balls and was more focused on not getting out rather than attacking the batsman like Wade did .   It's just how they chose to play. -  Batting first or second / exposure to Afridi / Pitch all these are just excuses tbh.    India played horridly with no plans and no intent.   Australia with minimal experience of UAE conditions and exposure to Pakistani bowlers batted with pure intent and a game plan .

[Jay]

6 minutes ago, Try_Ball said:

 

So you're saying had India been chasing 170+ against Pakistan -  Rohit and KL rahul wouldn't have gotten out ?   or You're implying that when Pant and Pandya would have come to the crease to chase - they would have had he same hitting game as Wade/ Stoinis and Marsh ?    Yeah .......No.

yea they would have chased it down. chasing is easier. teams batting second won 16 out of 17 games on this venue. Get real. Even with wrong selections india would romp to victory on these placid slow wickets had they chased last. 

[nitinbwj]

7 minutes ago, Try_Ball said:

 

So you're saying had India been chasing 170+ against Pakistan -  Rohit and KL rahul wouldn't have gotten out ?   or You're implying that when Pant and Pandya would have come to the crease to chase - they would have had he same hitting game as Wade/ Stoinis and Marsh ?    Yeah .......No.

Yes 

[nsareen]

 

The pitch that India played on had no demons in them as well..... India went into their shell - pitch wasn't doing ugly things and neither did the pitch change so drastically that Pakistan won by 10 wickets.

Secondly,  Australia does not play Pakistan regularly as well and doesn't have much experience against Afridi.  

Each Australian batsman applied themselves and put a value on their wicket - SKY played a horrendous shot to a nothing delivery and Pant played dot balls and was more focused on not getting out rather than attacking the batsman like Wade did .   It's just how they chose to play. -  Batting first or second / exposure to Afridi / Pitch all these are just excuses tbh.    India played horridly with no plans and no intent.   Australia with minimal experience of UAE conditions and exposure to Pakistani bowlers batted with pure intent and a game plan .

Absolutely wrong.

 

Both the tosses Virat said he wanted to bowl as well.

 

Australia has played series with Pakistan in Dubai & in Australia so that’s a bummer, they knew about these bowlers, plus hayden effect..

 

India lost due to adaptability & DEW.. nothing more to make of it..

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Try_Ball]

1 minute ago, Jay said:

lmao india would have chased this down easily. not once did india get an opportunity to chase. INdia has problems when they bat first. Not sure about what target to set. Fatigue from IPl played a major role in our defeats early against paksitan and new zealand. Honestly india dont seem to even care about t20s. Why would they? TOO much IPL mullah. We need to ensure only young hungry players get opportunities to play in t20 WCs in the future. Oldies like ro ko dont seem to be interested and their style of play doesnt translate well. 

 

Why bother showing up to the tournament then ?

[nitinbwj]

India walloped Aus and Eng without breaking a sweat in warmups when they chased. Why do you think everyone who wins the toss is electing to bowl. It's a HUGE factor. 

[nsareen]

 
The pitch that India played on had no demons in them as well..... India went into their shell - pitch wasn't doing ugly things and neither did the pitch change so drastically that Pakistan won by 10 wickets.
Secondly,  Australia does not play Pakistan regularly as well and doesn't have much experience against Afridi.  
Each Australian batsman applied themselves and put a value on their wicket - SKY played a horrendous shot to a nothing delivery and Pant played dot balls and was more focused on not getting out rather than attacking the batsman like Wade did .   It's just how they chose to play. -  Batting first or second / exposure to Afridi / Pitch all these are just excuses tbh.    India played horridly with no plans and no intent.   Australia with minimal experience of UAE conditions and exposure to Pakistani bowlers batted with pure intent and a game plan .

You can easily say no plan & stuff from outside , you think India was in the mood to loose the tournament hence forgot about planning ? absolutely ludicrous!!! They had plans but no execution, it’s international cricket for god sake, you should relive yourselves of these qualms..

[Try_Ball]

Just now, nsareen said:

Absolutely wrong.

Both the tosses Virat said he wanted to bowl as well.

Australia has played series with Pakistan in Dubai & in Australia so that’s a bummer, they knew about these bowlers, plus hayden effect..

India lost due to adaptability & DUE.. nothing more to make of it..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am not asking what Virat's desires were.

Same pitch where India couldnt put bat on ball , Pakistan won by 10 wickets.

A series with Pakistan did not give some sort of crystall ball to the Aussies on how to beat Pakistan .   India has had enough experience playing in UAE and against Babar/Imad/Malik most of their team previously.

India lost due to poor intent and horrendous play. 

[nsareen]

I am not asking what Virat's desires were.

Same pitch where India couldnt put bat on ball , Pakistan won by 10 wickets.

A series with Pakistan did not give some sort of crystall ball to the Aussies on how to beat Pakistan .   India has had enough experience playing in UAE and against Babar/Imad/Malik most of their team previously.

India lost due to poor intent and horrendous play. 

Whatever it’s free will , you can say what you want, doesn’t make it right..

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Try_Ball]

2 minutes ago, nitinbwj said:

India walloped Aus and Eng without breaking a sweat in warmups when they chased. Why do you think everyone who wins the toss is electing to bowl. It's a HUGE factor. 

 

It's a factor.  Team batting second might have an advantage.  but batting first you gotta still put a decent total on board. 

Warmups do not matter

In the two games that mattered against Pakistan and NZ -  India had pretty poor totals - Batting first isn't bad on these pitches as Pakistan and England showed.  India couldn't manage that as well , let alone defending 

[Try_Ball]

1 minute ago, nsareen said:

Whatever it’s free will , you can say what you want, doesn’t make it right..

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Exactly... Opinions are subjective and personal.   I don't agree to yours and you don't have to agree to mine . 

[vayuu1]

10 minutes ago, nsareen said:

You can easily say no plan & stuff from outside , you think India was in the mood to loose the tournament hence forgot about planning ? absolutely ludicrous!!! They had plans but no execution, it’s international cricket for god sake, you should relive yourselves of these qualms..

Tumhari to planning thi na kya ukhaad liya,girna pehli seedhi se,girna second last seedhi se,girna to girna hi hai na,ulta chot waha se jyada lagti hai

[Jay]

16 minutes ago, Try_Ball said:

 

Why bother showing up to the tournament then ?

exactly. no accountability. soooooperstar culture. * them and their retard fans.