lol in India?
If we can have a go at India for failing outside of Asia surely the same charge applies to Australia in Asia?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
lol in India?
If we can have a go at India for failing outside of Asia surely the same charge applies to Australia in Asia?
We have won in Asia.
Not with this team.
It’s telling that India could not even defeat the woefully weak Australian team of 1985/1986, essentially the same as the weakest team to tour England in the past half-century (excluding new Test nations). The Indians did have the better of three Tests but could not win even one against as weak a team as they would have faced abroad ever.Don't matter we have still won in India, a series as well, India have never won in SA and Australia, and they have only one one or two series in the UK and WI, so yes they are (expletive) in every aspect.
It’s telling that India could not even defeat the woefully weak Australian team of 1985/1986, essentially the same as the weakest team to tour England in the past half-century (excluding new Test nations). The Indians did have the better of three Tests but could not win even one against a team.
India were also very unlucky not to win the 1977/1978 series, which saw their great spinners Chandrasekhar and Bedi in wonderful form (wouldn’t it have been a boost to the ACB’s finances to have spin of that quality all along??)
That gives are two series here India should have won, but it is still really telling that they have never actually capped it off!
The 1970 tour of South Africa by the Australians was as comprehensive a thrashing as I can recall. Thankfully, it was only a 4 Test series.
Aussie batsmen only made 10 scores of 50 or more and no centuries. South Africa made 6 100s and 12 50s. Ian Chappell couldn't buy a run after being touted as the best batsman in the world by Bill Lawry, only 3 batsmen averaged higher than 30, and Graham McKenzie took only 1 wicket for the series at a cost of 333 runs.
Test 1 South Africa won by 170 runs
Test 2 South Africa won by an Innings & 129 runs
Test 3 South Africa won by 307 runs
Test 4 South Africa won by 323 runs
An absolute mauling
We crushed the Windies here 5-0 in 2000-2001 when the only good player the Windies had was a hot and cold Lara and three has beens and only one century was scored in that series by a Windies batsman. Windies surrendered terribly in three of those tests.
Don't matter we have still won in India, a series as well, India have never won in SA and Australia, and they have only one one or two series in the UK and WI, so yes they are s**t in every aspect.
...except playing at home, where they're dominant.
I don't rate the current Indian side particularly highly due to their struggles outside of the sub-continent, but you can't pretend like they're not a formidable opponent at home.
Way to contribute to the thread
(yes I'm a hypocrite)
It's also worth mentioning that we only used the 12 players for the entire series.Don't overlook the 89 Ashes.
1. England playing at home.
2. England overwhelming favorites.
3. The first innings Lead to Australia in each tests was - 171, 242, 182, 187, 347, and 183.
4. There were 2 drawn tests. In the 3rd test, England passed the follow-on with 9 wickets down - then it rained and so was a draw. In the 6th test, England passed the follow-on with 8 wickets down - then it rained, and so was a draw.
5. The best England bowler took 12 wickets at 35. The worst of Australia's main 4 bowlers took 11 wickets at 27.
6. There were 12 Australian century partnerships - 2 for England.
7. 0-301 - one of only 5 instances of an opening partnership batting through the first day of a test.
And repeat Point 2 - England were overwhelming favorites. No one gave Australia a chance. But for rain, it would certainly have been 6-0.
I don't rate the current Indian side particularly highly due to their struggles outside of the sub-continent
I was surprised by their very poor record in sri lanka, i mean we are dodgy in asia and yet we have won 3 of our 4 test series in sri lanka so it can't be that hard a place to win.
Home does not matter, when you have never won a series in Australia or SA, both the Aussies and SA have won series in India.
We have won once in India and it was 10 years ago.
We have won once in India and it was 10 years ago.
in this era yes. won many times before that in indiaWe have won once in India and it was 10 years ago.
Away from home, yes. Somebody said recently that Indian batsmen are like faithful husbands - they only perform at home Expecting more of the same when they visit Australia later this year.India always cop a pounding.
India's number 11 in that 1977/78 series was Dilip Doshi. He was so bad, that he would have made Glenn McGrath look like Don Bradman. If I recall correctly after 37 years, his first runs of the series came in the final Test in Adelaide - a nick through the slips for 4.It’s telling that India could not even defeat the woefully weak Australian team of 1985/1986, essentially the same as the weakest team to tour England in the past half-century (excluding new Test nations). The Indians did have the better of three Tests but could not win even one against a team.
India were also very unlucky not to win the 1977/1978 series, which saw their great spinners Chandrasekhar and Bedi in wonderful form (wouldn’t it have been a boost to the ACB’s finances to have spin of that quality all along??)
That gives are two series here India should have won, but it is still really telling that they have never actually capped it off!
Not that he was actually that bad a batsman normally, but Ajit Agarkar's run of outs in the 1999/2000 series here was one for the ages.India's number 11 in that 1977/78 series was Dilip Doshi. He was so bad, that he would have made Glenn McGrath look like Don Bradman. If I recall correctly after 37 years, his first runs of the series came in the final Test in Adelaide - a nick through the slips for 4.