Nathan Lyon

[Power Raid]

Pretty questionable the notion that india have the weaker batting, ask any spinner in the world if they would rather have a go at our top 6 or india's.

Really against all bowling india's top 6 looks stronger than ours right now, difference is we were facing inferior quicks to what they faced all series.

spot on. our top six was flattered by the flat tracks and an impotent indian pace attack.

Roger's career was all but finished and salvaged by the this test, it is too early to make a call on burns, SMarsh is not a test batsmen, MMarsh should turn into a good replacement for watson, watson is a lemming and who knows if Clarke will be around for much longer.

 

[Mateyman]

Pretty questionable the notion that india have the weaker batting, ask any spinner in the world if they would rather have a go at our top 6 or india's.

Really against all bowling india's top 6 looks stronger than ours right now, difference is we were facing inferior quicks to what they faced all series.

Disagree. Smith=Kohli
Clarke=Rahane
Warner I slightly prefer to Vijay

The rest are much of a muchness and no other Indian batsmen made any runs

 

[Carbine Chaos]

Disagree. Smith=Kohli
Clarke=Rahane
Warner I slightly prefer to Vijay

The rest are much of a muchness and no other Indian batsmen made any runs

Smith=Kohli is fair enough. If anything I'd slightly prefer Kohli.

Rahane is nowhere near a fit Clarke yet.

Vijay isn't as good as Warner either (except when he feasts on us!)

 

[BarneyBent]

Lyon also got to bowl to a weaker batting lineup. Ashwin looked more dangerous then Lyon aswell.

Weaker batting lineup? Really? Especially when we're talking about spin? Against good quality spin, I'd take India's top 7 over ours any day of the week.

Our pacemen, our ability to score quickly, our tail, and Nathan Lyon's first test 12fer were what set us apart from India this series. For our Smith, they had Kohli. For our Warner, they had Vijay. For our Rogers, they had Rahane (not same batting position, but similarly performed).

Lyon is far from a perfect bowler. He drops his head, and his trajectory, too quickly when things aren't going his way. But he's solid, and has developed in leaps and bounds from where he was 2 years ago. People looking at Ashwin and thinking he gave Lyon a bowling lesson are deluded. Apparently, if you're Australian, you must be absolutely flawless to pass muster, but if you're from the opposition then only your good performances matter.

 

[Moist Biscuit]

Weaker batting lineup? Really? Especially when we're talking about spin? Against good quality spin, I'd take India's top 7 over ours any day of the week.

Our pacemen, our ability to score quickly, our tail, and Nathan Lyon's first test 12fer were what set us apart from India this series. For our Smith, they had Kohli. For our Warner, they had Vijay. For our Rogers, they had Rahane (not same batting position, but similarly performed).

Lyon is far from a perfect bowler. He drops his head, and his trajectory, too quickly when things aren't going his way. But he's solid, and has developed in leaps and bounds from where he was 2 years ago. People looking at Ashwin and thinking he gave Lyon a bowling lesson are deluded. Apparently, if you're Australian, you must be absolutely flawless to pass muster, but if you're from the opposition then only your good performances matter.

First Point. Stop Bringing up Lyons 12 for in Adelaide. Aswhin didn't even get the opportunity to bowl there, so not sure how thats relevent to Lyon outbowling Ashwin in the tests that they played. Ashwin took more wickets then Lyon in head to head matches, that is fact. Lyon gets to bowl here for a minimum of 4 tests a year, he is used to the conditions and should be taking more wickets. Ashwin doesn't have that luxury, he bowls on pitches which he is accustomed to using and are completely different to the Australian pitches.

Second Point. The it is a myth that Indians are still excellent players of spin. As seen with Moeen Ali's 19 wickets against them last year and Lyons 12 wickets in Adelaide, so I definitely wouldn't say they have a better batting lineup then us against spin. I would take a fully fit Clarke and Smith over any indian batsman when facing spin.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Lyon's issue is variation and it shows on the last days of test matches. You need something that goes the other way. Ashen has his carrom ball. Lyon has nothing that goes the other way. You need an arm ball, I'm amazed that hasn't been drilled into his head.

 

[carnthemlions]

Weaker batting lineup? Really? Especially when we're talking about spin? Against good quality spin, I'd take India's top 7 over ours any day of the week.

Our pacemen, our ability to score quickly, our tail, and Nathan Lyon's first test 12fer were what set us apart from India this series. For our Smith, they had Kohli. For our Warner, they had Vijay. For our Rogers, they had Rahane (not same batting position, but similarly performed).

Lyon is far from a perfect bowler. He drops his head, and his trajectory, too quickly when things aren't going his way. But he's solid, and has developed in leaps and bounds from where he was 2 years ago. People looking at Ashwin and thinking he gave Lyon a bowling lesson are deluded. Apparently, if you're Australian, you must be absolutely flawless to pass muster, but if you're from the opposition then only your good performances matter.

If Ashwin played for Australia, everyone would complain about him bowling darts and his carrom ball being too easy to read.

 

[frankrizzo]

Disagree. Smith=Kohli
Clarke=Rahane
Warner I slightly prefer to Vijay

The rest are much of a muchness and no other Indian batsmen made any runs

I was talking more about the two batting lineups lyon and ashwin(and the quicks) actually bowled at in this series and with clarke out for most of it i think that puts india's batting ahead, even with clarke in we are the team spinners would rather have a shot at.

 

[frankrizzo]

If Ashwin played for Australia, everyone would complain about him bowling darts and his carrom ball being too easy to read.

Ashwin averages 60 outside indian turners, if he was an aussie we would have sacked him and tried 8 other blokes by now.

Has to be another warne out there right?

 

[BarneyBent]

First Point. Stop Bringing up Lyons 12 for in Adelaide. Aswhin didn't even get the opportunity to bowl there, so not sure how thats relevent to Lyon outbowling Ashwin in the tests that they played. Ashwin took more wickets then Lyon in head to head matches, that is fact. Lyon gets to bowl here for a minimum of 4 tests a year, he is used to the conditions and should be taking more wickets. Ashwin doesn't have that luxury, he bowls on pitches which he is accustomed to using and are completely different to the Australian pitches.

Second Point. The it is a myth that Indians are still excellent players of spin. As seen with Moeen Ali's 19 wickets against them last year and Lyons 12 wickets in Adelaide, so I definitely wouldn't say they have a better batting lineup then us against spin. I would take a fully fit Clarke and Smith over any indian batsman when facing spin.

Do you think Ashwin would have taken 12 wickets in Adelaide? Do you think he would have bowled as well as Lyon did? Lyon vastly, VASTLY outbowled the bowler the Indian selectors judged to be better than Ashwin for that Test. When talking about Lyon's performance, you can't just ignore that.

As to your second point, that's a circular argument if ever I heard it. "Nathan Lyon took 12 wickets against India. Therefore, India aren't any good at playing spin. Therefore, Nathan Lyon's wickets mean nothing."

India are better at playing spin than Australia. You think Australia are immune to good spells of pace bowling? Of course not, we'll still get dismantled by great pacemen occasionally, but we're still among the best players of pace bowling in world cricket. Moeen Ali taking 19 (in a series, mind you) is not all that remarkable either. He's a very capable bowler, and the type to get the most out of English conditions. Throw in a bit of luck and it's fair to say that far stranger things have happened.

Indian batsmen grow up facing more spinners, on more spin-friendly decks. They then play more international cricket against other subcontinental teams, who also have a greater proportion of spinners, and play on spin-friendly decks. India are better at playing spin than Australia. Granted, both Clarke and Smith are exceptional players of spin, and their ability in that regard is a match for any Indian batsman at present. The rest of our lineup are battlers at best. Warner, much as I love him, relies on getting his eye in against the pacemen before he can get his feet moving, and even then, he's significantly less confident. Rogers has worked extremely hard to improve, and is now passable. Watson is rubbish, unless he has his eye in and license to slog, which isn't often in Test cricket. Less said about Sean Marsh the better. Burns actually looked OK, as did Mitchell Marsh, though again, pass mark, that's all. Haddin, meh.

We have two world class players of spin. One of them only played the one match, and under duress. The rest are average to poor. Compare that to India, who have one, maybe two, world class players of spin, while the rest are above average (even if a bunch are average to poor facing good quality pace).

 

[Seagrave_Holmes]

Lyon's issue is variation and it shows on the last days of test matches. You need something that goes the other way. Ashen has his carrom ball. Lyon has nothing that goes the other way. You need an arm ball, I'm amazed that hasn't been drilled into his head.

I think Murali was working with Lyon over the winter to develop new deliveries, he probably has some but isn't confident enough yet to bowl them anywhere but the nets. Also whatever happened to Jeff?