What is that in Australian cricket team?

[salamehyderabad]

People I know Indians are cricket freaks. To my best knowledge India has been the only team that in a way checkmates the Aussies. Recently Australia sweeped the test seris againt pakistan 3-0.



I am just creating this thread to know the views about what makes the Aussies better than rest of the teams which in the recent years as watched has become extremely unstoppable. Also write your views on which area do the Indians need to improve to better Australia.

[Habitual Perfectionist]

I feel that the Aussies have achieved this success due to a mix of a lot of factors. Here's what I can think of at this moment.



1. Talent : No team can make it big without talent. And the aussies have had an abundance of it in recent times. They have a blazing top order in Gillie, Hayden, Langer and Ponting; a resilient middle order in Lehmann, Clarke, Symonds & Martyn and a bowling line-up strong in both pace as well as spin - McGrath, Gillespie, Lee, Kasprowicz, Warne & McGill. And mind you, their tail can wag furiously as Gillespie, Warne & Lee have shown time and again.



2. Depth : Any team that has players of the calibre of Lehmann, Lee and Clarke sitting on the bench will always have the luxury of switching from one line-up to another very easily if things go wrong. And today, the Aussies have the best reserve strength among all cricket playing nations. This also gives the team a lot of flexibility in terms of resting off-form players, thus taking the stress off the players' head - something that India hasn't been able to do due to lack of a tested bench.



3. Hunger : Their initial success didn't make them complacent - but hungry for more. And that's something that differentiates the champions from the rest.



4. Aggression : Legend has it that the monkey king Vali had magical powers that made him sap his opponent's strength to half and gain the same himself. The same goes with any team that has the all-conquering aura of the Aussies. The post WW-II Aussies, the Proteas just before they were banned, the Windies of the 70s and early 80s - they all had the same aura around them that would overawe their opponents.



5. Dedication : Aussies are passionate about their sports and that makes them an extremely dedicated lot. I've heard from sources close to the game that nobody tops the aussies when it comes to punctuality for practice. Something for the other teams to learn.



6. Strategy : Right from the Simpson-Border era, they've had extremely smart thinkers at the helm of the game. Be it captains like Taylor, Waugh and Ponting or coaches like Simpson & Buchanan, they are all keen students of the game and they come out with a lot of innovative strategies and tactics to down their opposition.



7. System : The Aussies have a strong cricketing system which catches 'em young; bloods them with a lot of care and unleashes them to the world with a lot of thinking and panache. They have a stable first class system and also a very proactive players' union. All this makes he Aussie cricketing setup a thing of remarkable beauty.



And finally, dame luck. They've had their fair share of luck (ala Herschelle Gibbs dropping Waugh in the 1999 WC).



I think that sums it up fairly.

[Habitual Perfectionist]

Oops...I forgot to add the Vile Aussie umpires brigade there. Their contribution to the aussie success cannot be discounted.

[salamehyderabad]

Oops...I forgot to add the Vile Aussie umpires brigade there. Their contribution to the aussie success cannot be discounted.

hehehe tat was a phunny one dude

[lizard king]

It is very true that every talented cricketing country but australia has forgotten the 3 D of sport.

[ilayaraja_fan]

7. System : The Aussies have a strong cricketing system which catches 'em young; bloods them with a lot of care and unleashes them to the world with a lot of thinking and panache. They have a stable first class system and also a very proactive players' union. All this makes he Aussie cricketing setup a thing of remarkable beauty.

I think this is THE reason... everything kind of comes back to this. The level of intensity and competetion in sheffield shield cricket is unparallaled.



I remember hearing a comment during the recent Aus/Pak series.. Sir Garfield Sobers played 3 years of shield cricket and apparently he has said that those were the toughest 3 years of domestic cricket he had ever played.

[lizard king]

Oops...I forgot to add the Vile Aussie umpires brigade there. Their contribution to the aussie success cannot be discounted.

the other point u must have missed out is the fact that cricket is not over rated in Australia to make the players big heads like the ones we find in the sub continent, they are just normal people who live like normal people. this takes off the pressure off them to perform or to live up to the standards of the expectants.

[Sharjeel]

Methinks it is mostly because of the positive mood, not in their day-to-day cricket, but in their general approach.



I have been around sportspersons all my life, and one things that Champions have in common is that they are very positive in their approach to their respective sport.



Like say in Karate. In Sparring competitions one comes across all kinds of players: Counter players, Attacking players, some players who will score a point and then will defend for the rest of the match. But the Champions who win again and again in sparring competitions are those who are aggressive and always look to attack, even if they are on a lead.

[akhilis2cool]

The aussies just never believe they will loose.



There have been several occasions when they have shown this.

Like the 1999 World cup Semi Final against the SAfs where players came up with scintilating performances just when it mattered. Then, the SAfs were the only team that cld beat the aussies, but in the dying moments of the match it were the aussies who held there nerves. What happened next is History.



There can b several reasons for this. most of them have been covered by HP and sherry. But One thing I would like to add here is the captains that they have had over the years.



Right from Sir Donald Bradman to Allan Border to Mark Taylor.....to Steve Waugh and now Ricky Ponting they have had some gr8 people to lead them. They happen to b champion performaers who have led by example.



Another reason is the Selectors. They take hard/tough decisions. Like for example dropping one the best ever wicket keeprs, Ian Healy, to accomodate Adam Gilchrist. We all know what a difference he has made to the team.



Good topic Salame Hyderabad



PS: No matter how good aussies are, i will always support the Indian TEam

[salamehyderabad]

Good topic Salame Hyderabad

PS: No matter how good aussies are, i will always support the Indian TEam

This is a pure sport folks. Aint no patroitism involved in soprts. The best performer is the winner n also the hero. Dont take me otherwise Akhil. I am just fed up of Indian lineup cuz they just don perform to the mark. I am redundant about the resons behind them. Its just a great team which underperforms.

Wining a test (not a seris) in 15yrs does not speak the glory of Indian cricket, listing in world records does not show performance, Unlike Aussies which has alround perofrmance. I want Indian players to be agreessive which I think are not? Any reason behind it?

[akhilis2cool]

[quote="salamehyderabad I want Indian players to be agreessive which I think are not? Any reason behind it?[/quote] I think the Indan Team has done exceedinlgy well under ganguly. they are a lotmore aggressive than they used to be. And i think this will remain with the team even after ganguly retires. We need to develop a decent bench strength. which calls for better playing conditions at the junior levels.



One of the reasons why indians did badly against the aussies was our poor bench strength. we do not have ne one to fall back on if sachin tendulkar.....or anil kumble are injured. there fore there is a huge pressure on them as well as the other players like laxman, dravid.



PS. the recent loss to bangladesh was due to too much experimentation. it exposed our poor bench strength.

[3 T'z]

[quote="salamehyderabad I want Indian players to be agreessive which I think are not? Any reason behind it?

I think the Indan Team has done exceedinlgy well under ganguly

.

yes agreed but i still feel they havent excelled.. to their full potential..

One of the reasons why indians did badly against the aussies was our poor bench strength.

The present team can b called as almost perfect for india wid a mix of sr's n jr's ...a nice mix of experienced n hungry for success playerz..
as i said itz a great team now but wht after sachin,kumble...dravid n ganguly retire?! i think it will take lotz of yrz 2 buildup a team like da present one. The whole team usually depend on da sr. players most of the time the best ex. being "sachin".. when he's not playing usually the team hardly performz..
after these gr8 players there's no one 2 fall back on ..
PS. the recent loss to bangladesh was due to too much experimentation. it exposed our poor bench strength.[/quote]



2 much experimentation as well as over confidence !

[3 T'z]

I feel that the Aussies have achieved this success due to a mix of a lot of factors. Here's what I can think of at this moment.

1. Talent : No team can make it big without talent. And the aussies have had an abundance of it in recent times. They have a blazing top order in Gillie, Hayden, Langer and Ponting; a resilient middle order in Lehmann, Clarke, Symonds & Martyn and a bowling line-up strong in both pace as well as spin - McGrath, Gillespie, Lee, Kasprowicz, Warne & McGill. And mind you, their tail can wag furiously as Gillespie, Warne & Lee have shown time and again.

2. Depth : Any team that has players of the calibre of Lehmann, Lee and Clarke sitting on the bench will always have the luxury of switching from one line-up to another very easily if things go wrong. And today, the Aussies have the best reserve strength among all cricket playing nations. This also gives the team a lot of flexibility in terms of resting off-form players, thus taking the stress off the players' head - something that India hasn't been able to do due to lack of a tested bench.

3. Hunger : Their initial success didn't make them complacent - but hungry for more. And that's something that differentiates the champions from the rest.

4. Aggression : Legend has it that the monkey king Vali had magical powers that made him sap his opponent's strength to half and gain the same himself. The same goes with any team that has the all-conquering aura of the Aussies. The post WW-II Aussies, the Proteas just before they were banned, the Windies of the 70s and early 80s - they all had the same aura around them that would overawe their opponents.

5. Dedication : Aussies are passionate about their sports and that makes them an extremely dedicated lot. I've heard from sources close to the game that nobody tops the aussies when it comes to punctuality for practice. Something for the other teams to learn.

6. Strategy : Right from the Simpson-Border era, they've had extremely smart thinkers at the helm of the game. Be it captains like Taylor, Waugh and Ponting or coaches like Simpson & Buchanan, they are all keen students of the game and they come out with a lot of innovative strategies and tactics to down their opposition.

7. System : The Aussies have a strong cricketing system which catches 'em young; bloods them with a lot of care and unleashes them to the world with a lot of thinking and panache. They have a stable first class system and also a very proactive players' union. All this makes he Aussie cricketing setup a thing of remarkable beauty.

And finally, dame luck. They've had their fair share of luck (ala Herschelle Gibbs dropping Waugh in the 1999 WC).

I think that sums it up fairly.

Apart from all da above factorz... they have evry thing else u can or cant even think of!

aussiezzzz

[salamehyderabad]

[quote="salamehyderabad I want Indian players to be agreessive which I think are not? Any reason behind it?

I think the Indan Team has done exceedinlgy well under ganguly

.

yes agreed but i still feel they havent excelled.. to their full potential..

One of the reasons why indians did badly against the aussies was our poor bench strength.

They are agressive in batting, talking about fielding I think India is at their worst. Its only the younsters (yuvraj, kaif) who put to their full potential on the grass.



If fielding can save 20 runs its an addition of 20 runs to the scoreboard. I think that the Indian fielding attitude seems to be like we can score the same 20 in batting. Pick n throw was never a part of out game except for Ajju bhai n jadeja. Our throws suck they never are to the keeper.

This is one region where we need to excel in to perform to the fullest.



Another poor thing.. India a country populated by 1,065,070,607 (July 2004 est.) cannot produce a full time wicketkeeper. Dravid has done extremely well as wk-batsmen but the catch is we still play 4 regular bowlers wherein we need to fill in the spot of the keeper for a fifth bowler. How well is playin 4 bowlers justified?

[3 T'z]

i know thts jst so weird n shameful 2 b honest tht wid so many cricket playin indianz...loverz... we'r yet to find a full time wicket keeper..

jst when i though partiv waz doin ok...ahh...he endz up actin like charlie chaplin... though i think dinesh is doin good...



ohhh n apart frm all diz there'z usually a prob bout da openin as well...i dnt suppose even the coach or board have any idea about da no' of playerz they have experemented wid ..

[Habitual Perfectionist]

as i said itz a great team now but wht after sachin,kumble...dravid n ganguly retire?! i think it will take lotz of yrz 2 buildup a team like da present one. The whole team usually depend on da sr. players most of the time the best ex. being "sachin".. when he's not playing usually the team hardly performz..
after these gr8 players there's no one 2 fall back on ..

Which era are you living in? The Indians have constantly proved that they can win without Sachin performing.

As for after the stalwarts retire....its only Kumble who is close to retirement. Dravid, Sachin & Ganguly still have atleast 3-4 years of cricket left in them atleast. And we are in the process of discovering a really good talent pool. Sehwag, Kaif, Yuvraj, Mongia, Chopra, Gambhir, Bhajji, Balaji, Pathan, Dinesh Kartik, Dhoni and a host of others who haven't really been tested at the international level though. Proper application by the selectors can definitely take the team smoothly through the transition phase.

i know thts jst so weird n shameful 2 b honest tht wid so many cricket playin indianz...loverz... we'r yet to find a full time wicket keeper..
jst when i though partiv waz doin ok...ahh...he endz up actin like charlie chaplin... though i think dinesh is doin good...

Aah...the perils of misinformation and the bigger perils of the "I'm too smart" syndrome. India has quite a few wicketkeepers who have the potential to do well - Parthiv included. Poor kid goes through a low run of form and you call him Charlie Chaplin? What about all those matches when he did extremely well for the team? Especially against the Aussies.

The blame lies more with the selectors here. They haven't really had the balls to go out and try these youngsters out. Although persisting with Dravid is working out as a short term ploy - its quite an effective measure...but the team could do better with a specialist keeper - keeping in mind the future.

[quote=3 T'z"]Apart from all da above factorz... they have evry thing else u can or cant even think of!
aussiezzzz
[/quote]



Enlighten me O great one.

[3 T'z]

as i said itz a great team now but wht after sachin,kumble...dravid n ganguly retire?! i think it will take lotz of yrz 2 buildup a team like da present one. The whole team usually depend on da sr. players most of the time the best ex. being "sachin".. when he's not playing usually the team hardly performz..
after these gr8 players there's no one 2 fall back on ..

Which era are you living in? The Indians have constantly proved that they can win without Sachin performing.

As for after the stalwarts retire....its only Kumble who is close to retirement. Dravid, Sachin & Ganguly still have atleast 3-4 years of cricket left in them atleast. And we are in the process of discovering a really good talent pool. Sehwag, Kaif, Yuvraj, Mongia, Chopra, Gambhir, Bhajji, Balaji, Pathan, Dinesh Kartik, Dhoni and a host of others who haven't really been tested at the international level though. Proper application by the selectors can definitely take the team smoothly through the transition phase.

i know thts jst so weird n shameful 2 b honest tht wid so many cricket playin indianz...loverz... we'r yet to find a full time wicket keeper..
jst when i though partiv waz doin ok...ahh...he endz up actin like charlie chaplin... though i think dinesh is doin good...

Aah...the perils of misinformation and the bigger perils of the "I'm too smart" syndrome. India has quite a few wicketkeepers who have the potential to do well - Parthiv included. Poor kid goes through a low run of form and you call him Charlie Chaplin? What about all those matches when he did extremely well for the team? Especially against the Aussies.

The blame lies more with the selectors here. They haven't really had the balls to go out and try these youngsters out. Although persisting with Dravid is working out as a short term ploy - its quite an effective measure...but the team could do better with a specialist keeper - keeping in mind the future.

[quote=3 T'z"]Apart from all da above factorz... they have evry thing else u can or cant even think of!
aussiezzzz

Enlighten me O great one.[/quote]



ahmm...u got something against me pal?!



Those were just my views not any expert cricket comments



Am probably like some Indian cricket lovers ..when they win 10 matches am happy but if they lose few get real disappointed

Yeah i think i went a bit far with the partiv comment..,well in the end it all comes down to whose to blame? selectors, captain,board,coach...playerz??I think their combined suggestions n efforts can make India no.1 ...

I dont think am "too smart " (though nothing wrong in doing so )...just want the team to be perfect n No. 1 thatz all

[akhilis2cool]

Aah...the perils of misinformation and the bigger perils of the "I'm too smart" syndrome. India has quite a few wicketkeepers who have the potential to do well - Parthiv included. Poor kid goes through a low run of form and you call him Charlie Chaplin? What about all those matches when he did extremely well for the team? Especially against the Aussies.

Parthiv patel got more than his fair share of chances inspite of india not winning matches they shd. have won only b'coz of his wicket keeping (example: Sydney test) Rahul dravid cld. keep better than him. i believe patel doesnt deserve another chance for atleast another 2 years. let him learn to keep wickets on indian wickets atleast.

I dont question his batting talent....but he is in the team to keep wickets!

The blame lies more with the selectors here. They haven't really had the balls to go out and try these youngsters out. Although persisting with Dravid is working out as a short term ploy - its quite an effective measure...but the team could do better with a specialist keeper - keeping in mind the future.

I think Dinesh Kartik, with a little improvement in his approach to batting, will make a gr8 player. ofcourse he need to b given some time....atleast half of what patel got

[Sharjeel]

Agree with A2C. Dun want to be disrespectful to Parthiv, but he got soooooooooooo many chances, with people saying he is a prodigy and all that.



He needs to get his confidence and WKing back on track. His batting is perfect.

[3 T'z]

ahhhhh....finally some ppl agree wid me!

n incase ppl dnt watch tv he waz voted zero no.1....

he should b given a chance for nt in da near future...

[Habitual Perfectionist]

I have nothing against you 3 T'z. Chill.



As for Parthiv, he did get his chances and except for his last couple of series, he did well too. Let me see anyone proving me wrong there. I feel that we fans are doing an injustice to players by mistaking a slump in form with a lack of abilities.



Parthiv was a prodigy. But he definitely was not up to the rigours of international cricket and he was thrust into it way too early. A couple of years on the domestic circuit would have done him a whale of good, but that never happened unfortunately. Parthiv is not the first one to be subjected to this kind of a treatment. We have the case of Amol Muzumdar that comes to mind whenever we think of such follies by selectors. Poor kids were thrown to the wolves before they had learnt some finer tricks of the trade. Not everyone is Sachin Tendulkar.



And minor adjustments, like the ones Parthiv needs, are something that every player needs from time to time. For that matter, even the Sachin of today has to go back to the nets to tweak out some irregularities that have gotten into his game. This usually happens with a loss of form. It is very unfair to say that Parthiv shouldn't get another chance for 2 years.

[akhilis2cool]

A slump in form usually lasts for a couple of months.



That sydney test I mentioned happened way back in Jan 2004. Compare that performance to the test matches against the same oppenent on home soil that too after a good 10 months. Theres hardly ne change.

He shd. have been replaced immediately after that tour of australia, but the selectors persisted (there have been players who have been done away with even after doing reasonably well). The result was there to see. This time he was dropping sitters off fast bowlers too.

He was a prodigy when he started. But When players like Kumble and Dravid start getting frustrated (as was visible on TV) I think its high time some thing had to b one.

Patel seems a little too young for the International scene, as HP sar says he was thrust in too early, to his credit he did well with the bat, but keeping has to b the top priority.



I believe Dinesh Kartik and MS Dhoni are old enuf to handle the pressure. And if the selectors show as much belief in them as they did in Patel, I am sure the result will b gr8.

[Habitual Perfectionist]

A slump in form usually lasts for a couple of months.

That sydney test I mentioned happened way back in Jan 2004. Compare that performance to the test matches against the same oppenent on home soil that too after a good 10 months. Theres hardly ne change.
He shd. have been replaced immediately after that tour of australia, but the selectors persisted (there have been players who have been done away with even after doing reasonably well). The result was there to see. This time he was dropping sitters off fast bowlers too.
He was a prodigy when he started. But When players like Kumble and Dravid start getting frustrated (as was visible on TV) I think its high time some thing had to b one.
Patel seems a little too young for the International scene, as HP sar says he was thrust in too early, to his credit he did well with the bat, but keeping has to b the top priority.

I believe Dinesh Kartik and MS Dhoni are old enuf to handle the pressure. And if the selectors show as much belief in them as they did in Patel, I am sure the result will b gr8.

Prior to the Sydney test, Parthiv has performed commendably even as a keeper in a lot of tests and one dayers. Agreed that his performances of late haven't been that good. But that, in no way means that he's lacking in abilities.



A slump in form is not dependant on time, but on other factors like motivation, training, practice etc. Take the example of players like Virender Sehwag, Yuvraj Singh etc., who had much longer slumps in form - but came out good finally. Infact, the best example of this is Marvan Atapattu. If you remember, he debuted against India, where he scored 1 run in his first 3 tests (5 Ducks including 2 first ball ducks). And today, he is the captain of the team and also holds the distinction of the maximum double centuries among all currently playing batsmen.



I'm not saying that Parthiv should be in the team right now. But at the same time, he shouldn't be ridiculed the way he is being ridiculed now. Agreed that Dhoni and Kartik are looking like good bets but so was Parthiv. I feel its too early to judge both Kartik and Dhoni as better than Parthiv. Let them prove it over a period of time. Also, a bigger pool of talent doesn't harm anyone. The board should take an initiative in helping him iron out his deficiencies as a keeper. And finally, let the best man win.

[3 T'z]

A slump in form usually lasts for a couple of months.

That sydney test I mentioned happened way back in Jan 2004. Compare that performance to the test matches against the same oppenent on home soil that too after a good 10 months. Theres hardly ne change.
He shd. have been replaced immediately after that tour of australia, but the selectors persisted (there have been players who have been done away with even after doing reasonably well). The result was there to see. This time he was dropping sitters off fast bowlers too.
He was a prodigy when he started. But When players like Kumble and Dravid start getting frustrated (as was visible on TV) I think its high time some thing had to b one.
Patel seems a little too young for the International scene, as HP sar says he was thrust in too early, to his credit he did well with the bat, but keeping has to b the top priority.

I believe Dinesh Kartik and MS Dhoni are old enuf to handle the pressure. And if the selectors show as much belief in them as they did in Patel, I am sure the result will b gr8.

Prior to the Sydney test, Parthiv has performed commendably even as a keeper in a lot of tests and one dayers. Agreed that his performances of late haven't been that good. But that, in no way means that he's lacking in abilities.

A slump in form is not dependant on time, but on other factors like motivation, training, practice etc. Take the example of players like Virender Sehwag, Yuvraj Singh etc., who had much longer slumps in form - but came out good finally. Infact, the best example of this is Marvan Atapattu. If you remember, he debuted against India, where he scored 1 run in his first 3 tests (5 Ducks including 2 first ball ducks). And today, he is the captain of the team and also holds the distinction of the maximum double centuries among all currently playing batsmen.

I'm not saying that Parthiv should be in the team right now. But at the same time, he shouldn't be ridiculed the way he is being ridiculed now. Agreed that Dhoni and Kartik are looking like good bets but so was Parthiv. I feel its too early to judge both Kartik and Dhoni as better than Parthiv. Let them prove it over a period of time. Also, a bigger pool of talent doesn't harm anyone. The board should take an initiative in helping him iron out his deficiencies as a keeper. And finally, let the best man win.

kinda agree wid ya there...

[3 T'z]

A slump in form usually lasts for a couple of months.

That sydney test I mentioned happened way back in Jan 2004. Compare that performance to the test matches against the same oppenent on home soil that too after a good 10 months. Theres hardly ne change.
He shd. have been replaced immediately after that tour of australia, but the selectors persisted (there have been players who have been done away with even after doing reasonably well). The result was there to see. This time he was dropping sitters off fast bowlers too.
He was a prodigy when he started. But When players like Kumble and Dravid start getting frustrated (as was visible on TV) I think its high time some thing had to b one.
Patel seems a little too young for the International scene, as HP sar says he was thrust in too early, to his credit he did well with the bat, but keeping has to b the top priority.

I believe Dinesh Kartik and MS Dhoni are old enuf to handle the pressure. And if the selectors show as much belief in them as they did in Patel, I am sure the result will b gr8.

Prior to the Sydney test, Parthiv has performed commendably even as a keeper in a lot of tests and one dayers. Agreed that his performances of late haven't been that good. But that, in no way means that he's lacking in abilities.

A slump in form is not dependant on time, but on other factors like motivation, training, practice etc. Take the example of players like Virender Sehwag, Yuvraj Singh etc., who had much longer slumps in form - but came out good finally. Infact, the best example of this is Marvan Atapattu. If you remember, he debuted against India, where he scored 1 run in his first 3 tests (5 Ducks including 2 first ball ducks). And today, he is the captain of the team and also holds the distinction of the maximum double centuries among all currently playing batsmen.

I'm not saying that Parthiv should be in the team right now. But at the same time, he shouldn't be ridiculed the way he is being ridiculed now. Agreed that Dhoni and Kartik are looking like good bets but so was Parthiv. I feel its too early to judge both Kartik and Dhoni as better than Parthiv. Let them prove it over a period of time. Also, a bigger pool of talent doesn't harm anyone. The board should take an initiative in helping him iron out his deficiencies as a keeper. And finally, let the best man win.

kinda agree wid ya there...