Anyone following the AUS-IND match?

[Goatman]

AUS all out for 474. Clarke made a "magnificent" debut century, and Gilchrist also made a ton. Singh claimed a 5-fer.

Will 474 prove too much for the a Sachin-less IND?

[Goatman]

For those that belive Mcgraths career is dead and buried, he is currently on 2 wickets for 0 off 2........

[flanflinger]

Originally Posted by Goatman

Clarke made a "magnificent" debut century, and Gilchrist also made a ton. Singh claimed a 5-fer.

Not really surprsied, I got the feeling Clarke was going to be Australia's next big name...

Does demonstrate to me that India do not have a bowling attack that really can make them no 1.

[Notts Exile]

That Clarke has scored a test century on debut does seem to suggest to me that those wickets at the Rose Bowl are appalling. He barely scored any runs down there this season, almost not justifying his selection as an overseas player.

But how Hampshire can lay any claim to that ground being up to international standard I really do not know, the pitches down there favour the bowlers in all forms of cricket. Why anyone should want to play a Twenty20 match on a pitch like that I couldn't even guess.

[Notts Exile]

Originally Posted by flanflinger

Does demonstrate to me that India do not have a bowling attack that really can make them no 1.

Quite possibly a bit of that and also the fact that the Aussie's are very strong batting-wise. Now they will prove that their bowling is up to it as well, though defending 470 odd is always much easier than starting from scratch.

[flanflinger]

True NE, but if you read the argument in How Good are England Now going on about England and India, some blinkered people would have you believe that India have a brilliant bowling attack. My view is that if Kumble and Singh cannot make a huge impact on their own surfaces which have been created for them, then how are they ever going to get wins on surfaces that do not suit them?

[Beny]

Originally Posted by flanflinger 20784

True NE, but if you read the argument in How Good are England Now going on about England and India, some blinkered people would have you believe that India have a brilliant bowling attack. My view is that if Kumble and Singh cannot make a huge impact on their own surfaces which have been created for them, then how are they ever going to get wins on surfaces that do not suit them?

Or perhaps Clarke, Langer, Katich and Gillly just out played them.

Lets not forget that Kumble took his 400th wicket this match.

[flanflinger]

True...


But what Iam trying to point out is that India set out to create conditons that would favour them, and the fact is taht eve with those conditions they failed to bowl out this team for a reasonable score, what does that say about the strength of the Indian attack?

Just one point I understood that Langer's innings was not one of his best, and probably not to be put in the out-playing them class....

[Beny]

True what you say about Langer but 50 is still 50.

Aus beat Sri-lanka on doctord pitches facing the like of Murali and Vass. Alot of preperation has gone into this series from the Aussie side. Clarke and Katich are excelent players of spin which is why Im not raving about clarke yet... he's still got a bit to prove.

[Notts Exile]

The much vaunted Indian batting line up has all but failed. Only Laxman left to make any challenge for a respectable total, and against the seam bowlers too!