Australia vs India, 4th test at the SCG, Jan 3rd - 7th

The Swans Blog

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Apr 19, 2013
Posts
9,700
Likes
5,954
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
The Swans Blog
Thread starter #1
Well, the series is already won for the Indians, claiming an unassailable 2-1 lead. Consecutive batting collapses left the Aussies reeling with more than 100 runs on the board and just two wickets to spare. Pat Cummins did his absolute best with bat and ball, and may well have won the Man of the Match if it wasn't for Bumrah's masterful first innings display, also picking up 9 wickets.

Now it's pride on the line and the genuinely unwanted tag of the first team to ever let India win a series on Australian soil. We can't let Kohli have that now, can we?



Cummins was the only highlight for the Australian side, picking up 9-99 and scoring 80 runs, 17 more runs than the next best Shaun Marsh with 63. Marsh's second innings 44 was as predictable as his first innings failure, an innings that only serves to save his career when a result was already out of the question.

Mitchell Marsh copped the boos when he was recalled into the team ahead of struggling Peter "Butters" Handscomb, but like Peter, struggled with the bat, scoring just 19 runs and taking no wickets from 26 overs. There are huge question marks over his place in the side for the final test with Marnus Lubaschagne recalled to the team and expected to take his spot in the side.

Pat Cummins' performance was good enough to propel him into the top-3 ranked bowlers in the world, according to the ICC player rankings. He leaped over Nathan Lyon, who had an abysmal match with ball, taking just 1-150 while Jadeja took 5-127, and out-of-sorts Mitchell Starc. Nathan Lyon's performance was rated so poorly, he dropped out of the top-10, leaving Pat Cummins as the only top-10 rated bowler in the world from Australia, and the 7th rated all rounder.
https://sports.ndtv.com/cricket/icc-rankings/test-bowling

It's hard to see where the Aussies can pick themselves up and pull the rabbit from the hat, having surpassed 300 runs once in a calendar year, yet to score a century this series and Pat Cummins clearly the best player by some margin. The top-6 batsman are all failing and throwing away their wickets at the worst times, and seem incapable of batting time.

Hours of play:
Local: 10.30 start, Lunch 12.30-13.10 Tea 15.10-15.30, Close 17.30
SA: 10.00 start, Lunch 12.00-12.40, Tea 14.40-15.00, Close 17.00
QLD: 09.30 start, Lunch 11.30-12.10, Tea 14.10-14.30, Close 16.30
WA: 07.30 start, Lunch 09.30-10.10, Tea 12.10-12.30, Close 14.30

Umpires:
Ian Gould
Richard Kettleborough
Marais Erasmus (3rd)

Broadcast:
Foxtel 501
Channel 7

Follow on ESPN Cric Info:
http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/...tralia-vs-india-4th-test-india-in-aus-2018-19
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Bwillow11

Team Captain
Joined
Sep 16, 2016
Posts
360
Likes
219
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Melbourne Stars
#2
Cummins was the only highlight for the Australian side, picking up 9-99 and scoring 80 runs, 17 more runs than the next best Shaun Marsh with 63. Marsh's second innings 44 was as predictable as his first innings failure, an innings that only serves to save his career when a result was already out of the question.
What a load of garbage that is. The target was still achievable, so you cannot discredit his innings whatsoever. Personally I wouldn't call his first innings a failure, especially since he was out lbw to a super good ball. His second innings wicket was personally a very poor call from Erasmus, although it was proven to be clipping the stumps I don't know he could confidently say that the bails were going to be knocked off by that ball.

Maybe you should edit the op and make it more insightful.

(ps. the series is won but no India still have to win it. How does that make any sense?)
 

The Swans Blog

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Apr 19, 2013
Posts
9,700
Likes
5,954
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
The Swans Blog
Thread starter #3
What a load of garbage that is. The target was still achievable, so you cannot discredit his innings whatsoever. Personally I wouldn't call his first innings a failure, especially since he was out lbw to a super good ball. His second innings wicket was personally a very poor call from Erasmus, although it was proven to be clipping the stumps I don't know he could confidently say that the bails were going to be knocked off by that ball.

Maybe you should edit the op and make it more insightful.

(ps. the series is won but no India still have to win it. How does that make any sense?)
If it was clipping the stumps, how was it a bad call? That's probably one of the worst arguments I've ever read on BigFooty, and there's an entire forum called Bay 13 for outlandish and nonsensical crap.

And for your second point, with a drawn series, they retain the trophy, so they've "won" the trophy, or won the series. In order for an outright win, to consign Australia to their first home-series defeat to India, they have to prevent Australia from winning the final test, any way possible.
 

Bwillow11

Team Captain
Joined
Sep 16, 2016
Posts
360
Likes
219
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Melbourne Stars
#4
If it was clipping the stumps, how was it a bad call? That's probably one of the worst arguments I've ever read on BigFooty, and there's an entire forum called Bay 13 for outlandish and nonsensical crap.

And for your second point, with a drawn series, they retain the trophy, so they've "won" the trophy, or won the series. In order for an outright win, to consign Australia to their first home-series defeat to India, they have to prevent Australia from winning the final test, any way possible.
Had the umpire had given it not out, it rightfully would have been fine. With the old rules that would not have been given out, as it seemed to me like it was less than 25% of the ball.
 

Bwillow11

Team Captain
Joined
Sep 16, 2016
Posts
360
Likes
219
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Melbourne Stars
#5
If it was clipping the stumps, how was it a bad call? That's probably one of the worst arguments I've ever read on BigFooty, and there's an entire forum called Bay 13 for outlandish and nonsensical crap.

And for your second point, with a drawn series, they retain the trophy, so they've "won" the trophy, or won the series. In order for an outright win, to consign Australia to their first home-series defeat to India, they have to prevent Australia from winning the final test, any way possible.
Also next time maybe have a dig at Finch, not the second highest run scorer.
 

The Swans Blog

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Apr 19, 2013
Posts
9,700
Likes
5,954
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
The Swans Blog
Thread starter #6
Had the umpire had given it not out, it rightfully would have been fine. With the old rules that would not have been given out, as it seemed to me like it was less than 25% of the ball.
Umpires call is umpires call. If he called it out, it's out. We got away with one when Kohli was caught in Perth, so don't go picking holes in swiss cheese.

Also next time maybe have a dig at Finch, not the second highest run scorer.
Already said my piece on Finch, he's just about the luckiest cricketer going around. Must have some incriminating evidence on Langer, his daughter, or someone at CA. I did say before the series started he was a slogger and he would be in trouble.
 

PhatBoy

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
May 5, 2016
Posts
15,171
Likes
15,547
AFL Club
Geelong
#8
What a load of garbage that is. The target was still achievable, so you cannot discredit his innings whatsoever. Personally I wouldn't call his first innings a failure, especially since he was out lbw to a super good ball. His second innings wicket was personally a very poor call from Erasmus, although it was proven to be clipping the stumps I don't know he could confidently say that the bails were going to be knocked off by that ball.

Maybe you should edit the op and make it more insightful.

(ps. the series is won but no India still have to win it. How does that make any sense?)
He came in at 2-33 and it was soon 3-63. So yeah, the game was effectively done.

Good decision or not, and your assessment of it is just as debatable as the decision itself, he got beaten and he paid the price.

Are we just going to ignore every time a batsman fails now if it’s to a good ball?
 

Greendogg5

Club Legend
Joined
Jun 1, 2013
Posts
1,581
Likes
718
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Borussia Dortmund, Utah Jazz
#10
India will be very motivated to win a series here. I wouldn't expect them to let up. We need to find a way to remove Pujara early in the first innings, he has been so so good in blunting our attack.
 

PhatBoy

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
May 5, 2016
Posts
15,171
Likes
15,547
AFL Club
Geelong
#11
Also lol at OP not knowing the difference between a series and a trophy.

Indian apparently having won the series despite leading by 1 test with 1 to play :$
The poster is pretty knowledgeable - just poorly worded I’d imagine. He acknowledged that Australia can deny them a series win.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Blue1980

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jun 9, 2011
Posts
8,526
Likes
7,738
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Carlton
#12
Also lol at OP not knowing the difference between a series and a trophy.

Indian apparently having won the series despite leading by 1 test with 1 to play :$
In my mind it’s a massive difference between them winning here and drawing a series here, retaining the trophy aside.

Would of England have been as happy if they drew 2-2 with us in 10-11 as opposed to 3-1?

Winning in India in 2004 was about winning the series, not drawing it (though we had to win the series to get the trophy back, point still stands that a drawn series wouldn’t of really registered as much)
 

corbies

Premium Platinum
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Posts
2,318
Likes
3,042
Location
Newcastle
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
S'roos, New Jets, WHam, Cronulla
#13
He came in at 2-33 and it was soon 3-63. So yeah, the game was effectively done.

Good decision or not, and your assessment of it is just as debatable as the decision itself, he got beaten and he paid the price.

Are we just going to ignore every time a batsman fails now if it’s to a good ball?
The game was not done. If SMarsh makes 144 and not 44 Australia (probably) win.
 

PhatBoy

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
May 5, 2016
Posts
15,171
Likes
15,547
AFL Club
Geelong
#14
The game was not done. If SMarsh makes 144 and not 44 Australia (probably) win.
If he makes an extra 100 the margin becomes less and they still lose.

If Pat Cummins made an extra 100, or Nathan Lyon did likewise, you could make the same argument. But we all know the game was dusted.

The salient facts are these. He made 44 when the odds of Australia winning were in 50-1 territory. He made enough to keep his spot - and bear in mind I’m a solid Marsh supporter - no more, and he did it when the outcome was all but decided.
 

The Swans Blog

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Apr 19, 2013
Posts
9,700
Likes
5,954
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
The Swans Blog
Thread starter #15
He came in at 2-33 and it was soon 3-63. So yeah, the game was effectively done.

Good decision or not, and your assessment of it is just as debatable as the decision itself, he got beaten and he paid the price.

Are we just going to ignore every time a batsman fails now if it’s to a good ball?
Mitchell Johnson bowled what I would call the greatest seamer I've seen in my time watching cricket. It was unplayable, a fair delivery and didn't depend on insane seam assistance off the pitch or variable bounce.

The ball that got Marsh out should have been defended, instead he was on the front foot trying to whip it fine. Aaron Finch has almost the same technique and footwork issues when the ball is straight and moving on to the pads - big step out across the wickets, head moves towards covers, body shape starts falling over, ball dips, swings and/or seams, plummer than Christmas Pudding.

Consider that it was poor technique that put him in that position and a distinct inability to read the ball out of hand, than some magic ball.
 

The Swans Blog

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Apr 19, 2013
Posts
9,700
Likes
5,954
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
The Swans Blog
Thread starter #16
The poster is pretty knowledgeable - just poorly worded I’d imagine. He acknowledged that Australia can deny them a series win.
Won trophy - hence won the series, when you consider who takes the trophy home. Outright win, 2-1/3-1 is still on the cards and probably inevitable. I just can't see any team with Marnus Labuschagne or Mitch Marsh challenging.

Despite collapses, Handscomb's fielding and batting was not just a cut above those two, it was stratospherically separated; earth -> sun.
 

frankrizzo

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jan 6, 2004
Posts
7,896
Likes
5,161
Location
jfgjgfj
#18
The poster is pretty knowledgeable - just poorly worded I’d imagine. He acknowledged that Australia can deny them a series win.
Nah he and others in the third test thread pretty much said this next test is a dead rubber because we cant regain a trophy nobody ever really cared about.

India will see this as a huge **** up if they dont clsoe out the series, retaining the trophy wont mean much if they lose this test and fail to get their first ever win here so this test is alive as is the series.
 

Doodlesweaver

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Apr 17, 2010
Posts
12,853
Likes
5,006
Location
London
AFL Club
Fremantle
#19
Mitchell Johnson bowled what I would call the greatest seamer I've seen in my time watching cricket. It was unplayable, a fair delivery and didn't depend on insane seam assistance off the pitch or variable bounce.

The ball that got Marsh out should have been defended, instead he was on the front foot trying to whip it fine. Aaron Finch has almost the same technique and footwork issues when the ball is straight and moving on to the pads - big step out across the wickets, head moves towards covers, body shape starts falling over, ball dips, swings and/or seams, plummer than Christmas Pudding.

Consider that it was poor technique that put him in that position and a distinct inability to read the ball out of hand, than some magic ball.
Johnson bowled possibly the best slower ball I've ever seen to Sehwag in India. He was done like a turkey at Christmas and my god, didn't he know it. One of the things I liked about Sehwag, had a bad poker face.
 

Pacman Carney

Team Captain
Joined
Aug 13, 2015
Posts
480
Likes
443
AFL Club
Collingwood
#22
Won trophy - hence won the series, when you consider who takes the trophy home. Outright win, 2-1/3-1 is still on the cards and probably inevitable. I just can't see any team with Marnus Labuschagne or Mitch Marsh challenging.

Despite collapses, Handscomb's fielding and batting was not just a cut above those two, it was stratospherically separated; earth -> sun.
India have retained the trophy, they haven’t won the series (not yet anyway)
The series can still be drawn. A drawn series means the current holder of the trophy retains.
Massive difference to actually winning the series.
If this test is an Australia win, and the series is drawn, Kohli will be filthy. He wants a series win.
He certainly doesn’t want a drawn series, regardless of the trophy.
 

Tugga27

All Australian
Joined
Jun 19, 2017
Posts
769
Likes
1,097
AFL Club
West Coast
#23
The poster is pretty knowledgeable - just poorly worded I’d imagine. He acknowledged that Australia can deny them a series win.
The poster is pretty knowledeagble?

This is the same guy who said when India were 2/280 that they should play for the draw.
Said a draw was the only possible outcome on this pitch.

And is now saying because they're retained the trophy they've won the series.

Give me a spell!
 

Coasters7

Club Legend
Joined
Nov 27, 2014
Posts
1,710
Likes
2,138
AFL Club
West Coast
#24
Shuffling the deckchairs really. Handscomb making “tweaks” to his technique is bull****. Absolutely no way a couple of days in the nets (for the Melbourne Stars ffs) has changed anything, lbw or bowled for single figures again.

Finch for Marnus I actually don’t mind.. not necessarily because I rate Marnus a whole lot, but from what he did in the UAE he seems a lot more reliable than Finch.

Just think Wade or Maxwell are better options (in the short term at least). We really have to either go one way or the other with that number 6. Either go right to the top of the Shield run scorers (which is a very sad sight to see looking through that list the other day), or take a chance on a kid. Can’t keep going to these mid 20 “all rounders” who are average/poor at both batting and bowling and wouldn’t be getting picked solely on either attribute.
 

PhatBoy

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
May 5, 2016
Posts
15,171
Likes
15,547
AFL Club
Geelong
#25
SEN reporting that:
Finch, MMarsh out
Handscome, Lamaushagne in

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app
The fox sports preview today was fairly funny, talking up handscomb’s imminent return on the basis that he’s some specialist against spin. A) he’s okay against it, he’s not remarkable. B) they’re playing in Sydney. Not Hyderabad
 
Top Bottom