Do not deride solid home performances but beware of the euphoria of a whitewash

[King Tendulkar]

I don't understand why people are questioning our prowess of playing outside SC. We have been THE most successful team outside home' date='after Australia in the past decade. One horrenoud series can't write off the efforts that had been put in the last decade.[/quote'] Exactly. It was a series with the worst prepartion and luck one can imagine. We are still class

[Trichromatic]

You can divide India's last years into two parts. 1. 2007-late 2009 : This was the time when India performed both home and away matches. During this period we saw many bowlers doing well for India in one series. But none of them continued their performance for long time. This was perfect time to go up as Australia was declining and England was building their team. SA, because of poor home record couldn't do much. This was time when concern about aging batsmen started. We were finding it difficult to replace 6 during later half. Zaheer Khan started performing well, Kumble retired and Bhajji's form declined. By the end of this time, we had one good pacer and aging batsmen who were losing their form. 2. 2009-mid 2011 : This was best time to search for new players. Our batsmen were struggling. But renaissance of SRT covered the batting failures. Sehwag, Gambhir, Dravid, Dhoni lost their test form and were very inconsistent with their form. Zaheer's fitness didn't allow him to appear in many matches. But since India was rank 1, selectors didn't care new players, replacement or bench strength. These problems affected our team earlier also. For ex - we struggled to win more than 1 match in many series even at home. Our batting managed draws for us, but bowling failed to take 20 wickets in many matches. That team was rated much higher than what it was. England tour revealed all those weaknesses together. Failure there has shaken the roots of Indian cricket and now selectors will have to go for basics. Finding good bowlers, concern about fitness. Indian cricket was suddenly pushed few years behind. If anyone thinks that by defeating England in some ODIs, India can take revenge then he/she is delusional about this. No matter how India defeats England, it won't affect England in same way as that series did to India. Now home performances. People think that we have very good team to dominate at home. Home performances shouldn't matter much for Indians. India was good at home for more than a decade. Compare this team with Indian team when Kumble and Bhajji were in form and Zaheer was fitter. I would say that this team would struggle to beat that team in India. We haven't become very strong at home either. Indian team has to look for bowlers and slowly replace batting stars. We have to play at home for next few years. This is best time to give chance to youngsters. This team has to start with dominating at home first. WI series is important. If selectors and captain are serious, then they should ensure that India wins at least 2 matches in that series. 1-0 would not be good result. Home series can be used for giving chance to new bowlers and finding our new spinners. Later those young players can gain more experience when we start our overseas tours.

[Cricket Tragic]

^Agree with most of that.

[Sachinism]

If this was a test series that India were dominating then fair enough' date=' at the end of the day england have been terrible in ODI's away from home forever so you cant take too much from it. If this series was a three test series instead it would have been far more interesting.[/quote'] It's not a test series, its an ODI series you guys agreed to play. If you turn up for a series, you should be playing to win or at least improve. India weren't bothered about the test series in England, but you guys still went and celebrated it with releasing a DVD :haha: Excuses like 'we've always been poor in ODIs' when you're aiming to dominate in all formats and looking to win the 2015 WC don't really fly. Suddenly 'You're **** and you know you are' becomes the perfect theme tune for your ODI side

[kubrickian]

I think all this revenge talk is rubbish to begin with. In sport, you win some and you lose some. Of course, India was thrashed in that series. The team will hopefully learn from their mistakes and improve and get better. I think too many people take cricket way too seriously in India. Its just a game, folks.

[Number]

Good title after a merge. :--D

[Crookbond]

Beware the euphoria of a whitewash http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/537467.html

All those astonished by the 3-0 scoreline in the five-match India v England ODI series, please raise your hands. To you, it can only be said: ye of little faith. Or rather, ye of short memory. Fine, so 4-0 and 3-0 are not the kind of souvenirs anyone in Indian cricket would have wanted from an English summer, but India are among the game's more accomplished shape-shifters. And so, the course of this ODI series, while enjoyable and entertaining, has been far from surprising. Simply put, India at home in the short game are very, very hard to beat. Despite a rapidly changing line-up and ever-growing injury lists, their players have become adept masters of their own conditions, be it the bowlers who extend their variety, or the batsmen's fearlessness in the crunch, considered by many to be one of the IPL's more valuable cricketing rewards. Over the last five years in the 50-over format, India have only gained in strength and have virtually reformatted their own record of winning at home. In the first five years of the 2000s, India approximately had the 55-45% win-loss record that television executives believe is the minimum needed to keep the home audience riveted. It is what they have done since that offers the pure weight of proof about their home advantage. From March 2000 to April 2005, India won 22 and lost 24 of their 47 ODIs at home. From October 2005 to date, India's record is 51 wins in 76 ODIs, and 27 in 36 over the last three years with a single defeat in 16 home ODIs in the last 12 months. In the 2000s, India have lost only six of 18 bilateral series at home (not counting a single BCCI Platinum Jubilee ODI against Pakistan as a series). There have been three humongous margins of victory at home in the last six years: 6-1 over Sri Lanka in 2005, 5-1 over England in 2005-06, and two "doughnut" results: a pre-World Cup bludgeoning of New Zealand last year, and before that a 5-0 drubbing of, erm, England again, in the interrupted seven-match series in 2008-09. Still overwhelmed by 3-0? Just because they had a poor tour of England doesn't mean the Indian team has forgotten how to play in India. In each of the ODIs this month, India have been impressive in their execution and methodical dismantling of England. Anything less, however, would have been disappointing. This is how world champions are meant to perform in their own backyards. In any case, amongst the frontline nations, England in India are relatively less problematic opposition than, say, Australia or South Africa. The Australians are the only touring team to win an ODI series in India in the last four years, not once but twice, and South Africa make a respectable fist of every format they play in here. The last time England won a series of any kind in India was in 1984-85; no matter how much they plan or how early they turn up, a tour of India usually seems to end up a discombobulating ordeal. In real terms, more than bring notions of revenge or delirium to Indian cricket, this series will sober England. In cricketing terms, India, however, are exactly where they were after the England tour, only happier, with more smiling faces. Suddenly the bench seems loaded with strength, playing off the back foot is an art well distributed along the batting order, the fielders have found their inner Jonty, and god alive, an Indian fast bowler who hits 145kph actually exists. If anything reflects Indian cricket's inability to think ahead, it lies in how its fast bowlers are handled: the career paths of Munaf Patel and Ishant Sharma at one point started exactly where Umesh Yadav's is at the moment India have had such eureka series over and over again in the past, only to have short-sightedness, mismanagement and poor scheduling helpfully fling one banana peel after another onto the team's path. If anything reflects Indian cricket's inability to think ahead, it lies in how its fast bowlers are handled: the career paths of Munaf Patel and Ishant Sharma at one point started exactly where Umesh Yadav's is at the moment. RP Singh was a successor to Zaheer Khan in 2007. As far as batsmen go, in 2008, Rohit Sharma was where Virat Kohli is now - and with success against Australia as his benchmark. The Indians have trundled ahead because talent is never in short supply. It comes through in a dazzling blaze; if one blaze is snuffed out, its vacant space is lit up by another. The only way this ODI series can have a greater significance beyond mere momentary delight is if it becomes a launch pad for India's ambitions. Or at least gives us a sign that, for a change, Indian cricket is thinking ahead. What India do in the tri-series against Australia and Sri Lanka next year is going to be noticed and remembered far longer than this result against England. Even if the temptation of producing another doughnut is what is keeping MS Dhoni in the last two ODIs. This when there's a clear choice of either taking a short ten-day break, or at least giving the gloves to Parthiv Patel. He often holds out his badly damaged and bent fingers when asked how he's doing. Until the tour of England his results have been preternatural, born out of an extremely cruel work load. But if Dhoni wants to be around when India defend their World Cup title, those fingers are not going to mend themselves out of sheer sympathy. The Indian team sheet at the 2015 tournament is going to look very different from what it did on April 2, 2011. To begin with, it will need new opening partnerships in both batting and bowling. To be competitive in Australia requires a wider range of skills than the ones India worked with when planning their 2011 campaign. In 2015 the players with those skills will need to have been seasoned over at least 80-odd ODIs (only two men in India's World Cup winning squad had played less than 50 ODIs and neither played in the final), which means that the most promising candidates must get a move on. India's selectors must at least work out their first steps in a general direction. These could be exhilarating times because the best selectors are both seers and clinical succession planners. The bloopers of K Srikkanth's committee though, are worrying evidence to the contrary. The echo of a resounding series win over England may drown out all references to India's errors in a woeful, revealing summer. With Australia beckoning, what is more important though, is that they are neither forgotten nor repeated.

I believe she has a point especially in context to the 2015 WC.

[ganeshran]

already posted

[Crookbond]

Ganguly and home ODI record Ganguly's home ODI series record as captain is pretty poor, surprisingly. For everything of it, we lost/drew a good amount of series at home against England, Australia, West Indies and Pakistan.

[daryl1985]

You can divide India's last years into two parts. 1. 2007-late 2009 : This was the time when India performed both home and away matches. During this period we saw many bowlers doing well for India in one series. But none of them continued their performance for long time. This was perfect time to go up as Australia was declining and England was building their team. SA, because of poor home record couldn't do much. This was time when concern about aging batsmen started. We were finding it difficult to replace 6 during later half. Zaheer Khan started performing well, Kumble retired and Bhajji's form declined. By the end of this time, we had one good pacer and aging batsmen who were losing their form. 2. 2009-mid 2011 : This was best time to search for new players. Our batsmen were struggling. But renaissance of SRT covered the batting failures. Sehwag, Gambhir, Dravid, Dhoni lost their test form and were very inconsistent with their form. Zaheer's fitness didn't allow him to appear in many matches. But since India was rank 1, selectors didn't care new players, replacement or bench strength. These problems affected our team earlier also. For ex - we struggled to win more than 1 match in many series even at home. Our batting managed draws for us, but bowling failed to take 20 wickets in many matches. That team was rated much higher than what it was. England tour revealed all those weaknesses together. Failure there has shaken the roots of Indian cricket and now selectors will have to go for basics. Finding good bowlers, concern about fitness. Indian cricket was suddenly pushed few years behind. If anyone thinks that by defeating England in some ODIs, India can take revenge then he/she is delusional about this. No matter how India defeats England, it won't affect England in same way as that series did to India. Now home performances. People think that we have very good team to dominate at home. Home performances shouldn't matter much for Indians. India was good at home for more than a decade. Compare this team with Indian team when Kumble and Bhajji were in form and Zaheer was fitter. I would say that this team would struggle to beat that team in India. We haven't become very strong at home either. Indian team has to look for bowlers and slowly replace batting stars. We have to play at home for next few years. This is best time to give chance to youngsters. This team has to start with dominating at home first. WI series is important. If selectors and captain are serious, then they should ensure that India wins at least 2 matches in that series. 1-0 would not be good result. Home series can be used for giving chance to new bowlers and finding our new spinners. Later those young players can gain more experience when we start our overseas tours.

Excellent post, VVS was also outstanding in this time period and played some wonderful knocks. The match winning 4th innings century in Sri Lanka, Mohali and the 90 odd in the 2nd test in South Africa.

[Serani]

It's not a test series, its an ODI series you guys agreed to play. If you turn up for a series, you should be playing to win or at least improve. India weren't bothered about the test series in England, but you guys still went and celebrated it with releasing a DVD :haha: Excuses like 'we've always been poor in ODIs' when you're aiming to dominate in all formats and looking to win the 2015 WC don't really fly. Suddenly 'You're **** and you know you are' becomes the perfect theme tune for your ODI side

Yeh India werent bothered about the test series, that must be it. I hope India win the next two games so you can paper over the cracks more and get to aus and take a beating.

[Sachinism]

Yeh India werent bothered about the test series' date=' that must be it. I hope India win the next two games so you can paper over the cracks more and get to aus and take a beating.[/quote'] Way to miss the point. Quite ironic you say 'you can paper over the cracks'

[saneindian]

Yeh India werent bothered about the test series' date=' that must be it. I hope India win the next two games so you can paper over the cracks more and get to aus and take a beating.[/quote'] England were dead serius about this ODI series (KP's return, nearly full strength team despite knowing India will be without key players, arrived in India 2 weeks before the series began, played a number of practice matches etc). Yet have been abysmal in the series so far, that oo on pitches which haven't turned much. Doesn't bode well for the 3 series in the sub continent that the World no 1 team will play over the next 12 months.

[Serani]

England got thrashed by aus in ODI's after destroying them in tests, not worried in the slightest.

[Sooda]

I agree with the principle of tests >> ODI's...but it is a bit hypocritical to suddenly act like you do not care about ODIs when youre losing

[Sachinism]

I agree with the principle of tests >> ODI's...but it is a bit hypocritical to suddenly act like you do not care about ODIs when youre losing

Exactly. Just a cop out. Most Indians care for T20, so England can shove their 4-0 test series win, coz hey Indians don't really care for tests

[Cricket Tragic]

I agree with the principle of tests >> ODI's...but it is a bit hypocritical to suddenly act like you do not care about ODIs when youre losing

Most Indians like ODIs more than tests. So the test series this summer doesn't count.

[jonas10]

Why is it no big deal when India dominate a first string England squad in India but England run around world beaters when they beat a depleted side in their country?

[Cricket Tragic]

Why is it no big deal when India dominate a first string England squad in India but England run around world beaters when they beat a depleted side in their country?

Because they beat us in a test series.

[Trichromatic]

Why is it no big deal when India dominate a first string England squad in India but England run around world beaters when they beat a depleted side in their country?

Last time India dominated England in a test series was way back in 1992-93.