Smith is "RATTLED"

[Vilander]

1 hour ago, putrevus said:

It is not just preparation, they have serious talent too.Other than 2013 series, Aussies even though they lost they have always fought very hard and were so close to winning almost all the matches they lost.To me 2013 was anomaly and I put that debacle mainly on two men Clarke and Arthur.

Clarke might have been very good instinctive captain on the field but Ponting and Waugh were better leaders of men.

Aussie fighting spirit is the reason why Australian series gets top billing.This young Australian team even if they lose this series has  brighter future than Indian team as they have fast bowlers.

 

Define fast bowlers can you. Did you see yadav/Ishant bowl ? what are they according to you ?

[CG]

This is not inferiority complex , may be you have that complex that's why you see everything in that prism, it is a fact they have better fast bowlers and teams with better fast bowlers travel better.

 

Greatest teams from India have never won more than single test in SA,Aus, England and NZ. Australian team under Smith has already won more tests NZ in series than any other Indian team. They are yet to tour Eng and SA.

You can't compare India touring NZ to AUS touring NZ.Aus touring Lanka would be apt comparison.

[Vilander]

22 minutes ago, putrevus said:

This is not inferiority complex , may be you have that complex that's why you see everything in that prism, it is a fact they have better fast bowlers and teams with better fast bowlers travel better.

 

Greatest teams from India have never won more than single test in SA,Aus, England and NZ. Australian team under Smith has already won more tests NZ in series than any other Indian team. They are yet to tour Eng and SA.

they got white washed by SA at home. And stay in the present. What according to you is fast bowling over 150k ? - Starc did that in one spell in one over, other than that was he medium pacer too ?

Edited March 8, 2017 by Vilander

[putrevus]

Just now, CG said:

You can't compare India touring NZ to AUS touring NZ.Aus touring Lanka would be apt comparison.

I don't think it is wrong comparison, playing away from home who will win more matches India or Australia even if you count Asia in one test cycle.

Aussies even with their losses in Asia have still won more matches since retirement of Warne and Mcgrath in last decade. India was at his peak during this period in 2009-11 for one reason alone they have better fast bowlers.

1 minute ago, Vilander said:

Define fast bowlers can you. Did you see yadav/Ishant bowl ? what are they according to you ?

Do you think they better than Starc and Hazelwood?  I wish they were better. They have done very admirable support job but taking the leading role is still foreign to them.

[BeautifulGame]

they got white washed by SA at home. And stay in the present. What according to you is fast bowling over 150k ? - Starc did that in one spell in one over, other than that was he medium pacer too ?

 

They didn't.Lost 2-1.

 

They also won in SA in the reverse tour.

[Vilander]

1 minute ago, putrevus said:

I don't think it is wrong comparison, playing away from home who will win more matches India or Australia even if you count Asia in one test cycle.

Aussies even with their losses in Asia have still won more matches since retirement of Warne and Mcgrath in last decade. India was at his peak during this period in 2009-11 for one reason alone they have better fast bowlers.

Do you think they better than Starc and Hazelwood?  I wish they were better. They have done very admirable support job but taking the leading role is still foreign to them.

you said 

" This young Australian team even if they lose this series has  brighter future than Indian team as they have fast bowlers. "

 

Meaning Aus team have 'bright future' as they have fast bowlers that Indian team does not have hence not the said bright future. I am asking you what are Ishant/Yadav then arnt they fast bowlers. What is your definition of fast bowlers that India apparently does not seem to have.  I am not comparing anyone here. Dont deviate, explain how India does not have fast bowlers and what are fast bowlers according to you.

[putrevus]

Just now, Vilander said:

they got white washed by SA at home. And stay in the present. What according to you in fast bowling over 150k ? - Starc did that in one spell in one over, other than that was he medium pacer too ?

They won last test, they lost the series.It is not about speed alone, it is about ability to take wickets and they are better than Indian fast bowlers. In long series where fast bowlers need to do bulk of work Australia will always have upper hand.

[Vilander]

3 minutes ago, BeautifulGame said:

 

They didn't.Lost 2-1.

 

They also won in SA in the reverse tour.

OK lost 2-1 does not change the fact that they are falliable , now back to fast bowling that India does not have according to sir putyourverseeverywhere.

Edited March 8, 2017 by Vilander

[Vilander]

Just now, putrevus said:

They won last test, they lost the series.It is not about speed alone, it is about ability to take wickets and they are better than Indian fast bowlers. In long series where fast bowlers need to do bulk of work Australia will always have upper hand.

Then say that they are have better fast bowlers, which in itself may be arguable in certain conditions. Dont say they have fast bowlers as if India does not.

[putrevus]

1 minute ago, Vilander said:

you said 

" This young Australian team even if they lose this series has  brighter future than Indian team as they have fast bowlers. "

 

Meaning Aus team have 'bright future' as they have fast bowlers that Indian team does not have hence not the said bright future. I am asking you what are Ishant/Yadav then arnt they fast bowlers. What is your definition of fast bowlers that India apparently does not seem to have.  I am not comparing anyone here. Dont deviate, explain how India does not have fast bowlers and what are fast bowlers according to you.

When was the last time any Indian fast bowler was ranked in top 10 test rankings and when did we have two in top 10. To win overseas consistently especially away from Asia  you need fast bowlers and I don't think we have fast bowlers who can do the job better than their fast bowlers.

[Vilander]

@putrevus

 

you said 

" This young Australian team even if they lose this series has  brighter future than Indian team as they have fast bowlers. "

 

Meaning Aus team have 'bright future' as they have fast bowlers that Indian team does not have hence not the said bright future. I am asking you what are Ishant/Yadav then arnt they fast bowlers. What is your definition of fast bowlers that India apparently does not seem to have.  I am not comparing anyone here. Dont deviate, explain how India does not have fast bowlers and what are fast bowlers according to you

[Vilander]

Just now, putrevus said:

When was the last time any Indian fast bowler was ranked in top 10 test rankings and when did we have two in top 10. To win overseas consistently especially away from Asia  you need fast bowlers and I don't think we have fast bowlers who can do the job better than their fast bowlers.

again that does not equate to India not having fast bowlers. 'fast bowlers who can do the job' - what BJ ??, fast bowlers who are in top 10..be specific then. dont say India does not have them, dont belittle what is on the ground delivering ball after ball at 140 in the heat thats something.

[BeautifulGame]

OK lost 2-1 does not change the fast that they are falliable , now back to fast bowling that India does not have according to sir putyourverseeverywhere.

 

Yes our fast bowling is nowhere near the level of Australia.Any unbiased person can see that.

 

SA won in Australia because they had matched their pace attack and their batting was better.

 

 

This is the same Indian pace attack which lost in SA NZL England and Australia.How many new seamers have even debuted since then ?

 

It is nonsense to claim our seam attack is better than Aussie attack .Our seam attack always does well at home struggles badly overseas because there they have to be primary wicket takers unlike the supporting act at home .

 

 

 

 

[Vilander]

1 minute ago, BeautifulGame said:

 

Yes our fast bowling is nowhere near the level of Australia.Any unbiased person can see that.

 

SA won in Australia because they had matched their pace attack and their batting was better.

 

 

This is the same Indian pace attack which lost in SA NZL England and Australia.How many new seamers have even debuted since then ?

 

It is nonsense to claim our seam attack is better than Aussie attack .Our seam attack always does well at home struggles badly overseas because there they have to be primary wicket takers unlike the supporting act at home .

 

 

 

 

who the f is claim that ? where. read the comments again and understand the context.

Edited March 8, 2017 by Vilander

[BeautifulGame]

 

who the f is claim that ? where. read the comments again and understand the context.

 

 

 

 

Yeah I thought he said better fast bowlers not fast bowlers.Fair enough .

 

 

 

That was wierd if anything we probably have the fastest attack in the world if Shami is fit.

 

Doesn't mean anything though.

[Vilander]

Just now, BeautifulGame said:

 

Yeah I thought he said better fast bowlers not fast bowlers.Fair enough .

 

 

thanks, would have been good if you read the comments before.

 

so back to @putrevus

 

you said 

" This young Australian team even if they lose this series has  brighter future than Indian team as they have fast bowlers. "

 

sir what is fast bowlers that India does not have. Waiting for your pearls of wisdom.

[putrevus]

1 minute ago, Vilander said:

again that does not equate to India not having fast bowlers. 'fast bowlers who can do the job' - what BJ ??, fast bowlers who are in top 10..be specific then. dont say India does not have them, dont belittle what is on the ground delivering ball after ball at 140 in the heat thats something.

Yes India does not have fast bowlers who perform. I will accept that India has fast bowlers when they prove they can win a series where they out perform Indian spinners.

 

I don't care about speed guns .When Indian fast bowlers show they can consistently take wickets over a series then I can accept we have fast bowlers.

[sandeep]

Way to derail the thread.  

 

Get it back to the subject at hand.  Smithy and his rattled DRS review.  What happens next?  Does more video evidence get discovered? Rumor has it Lehmann and Smithy were last seen curled up in a fetal position in their bedrooms praying to the Kangaroo gods that the broadcasters don't find any dirt.  

[Vilander]

Just now, putrevus said:

Yes India does not have fast bowlers who perform. I will accept that India has fast bowlers when they prove they can win a series where they out perform Indian spinners.

 

I don't care about speed guns .When Indian fast bowlers show they can consistently take wickets over a series then I can accept we have fast bowlers.

you are discounting any instance of Indian fast bowlers 'performing' or taking more wickets in a match than spinners or consistently take wickets in a series is it then.

 

lol keep it coming. haha..

[putrevus]

Just now, Vilander said:

thanks, would have been good if you read the comments before.

 

so back to @putrevus

 

you said 

" This young Australian team even if they lose this series has  brighter future than Indian team as they have fast bowlers. "

 

sir what is fast bowlers that India does not have. Waiting for your pearls of wisdom.

I really thought I gave you enough  pearls of wisdom . But if you still think India has fast bowlers well I can't help it .