-
11th April 2006, 06:34 PM
#31
Member
Junior Hubber
Originally Posted by
sgokulprathap
Yeah, Australia may win this match. But how can a so called dominant team(
) allow B'desh to take 427 runs in an innings.
If Aus is really a dominant team they should b beating Ban atleast by an innings, which is clearly not possible in this match.
Dint you see how they whitewashed south africa in their own turf ?
-
11th April 2006 06:34 PM
# ADS
Circuit advertisement
-
11th April 2006, 07:41 PM
#32
Senior Member
Senior Hubber
Originally Posted by
sgokulprathap
Yeah, Australia may win this match. But how can a so called dominant team(
) allow B'desh to take 427 runs in an innings.
If Aus is really a dominant team they should b beating Ban atleast by an innings, which is clearly not possible in this match.
every dog has its day... Bangladesh has improved a lot in recent times and Australia could have been too complacement after winning against SA 3-0... At the same time credit to bangladesh for playing decently in the recent past.. When SL came into the international scene about 20-25 years ago, they are thrashed by all teams.. Slowly they developed a team which could play well at home with Duleep mendis, roy dias etc.. They started off losing a lot of test matches then settled for a draw in a few of them.. they won only 2 out of 29 matches they played between 81-90.. One of them against India at home & one against Pak at home.. The late 90's saw SL win a lot of games (particularly after their World cup win) thanks to Ranatunga, Jayasuriya, Murali, vaas and attapattu..
Bangladesh is slowly and similarly emerging with players like habibul bashir and haque who can take their cricket to the next level..
-
13th April 2006, 07:09 PM
#33
Member
Junior Hubber
Now where are the people talked ill about australia ?
-
17th April 2006, 12:19 PM
#34
Senior Member
Veteran Hubber
Originally Posted by
Vivek
Originally Posted by
sgokulprathap
Yeah, Australia may win this match. But how can a so called dominant team(
) allow B'desh to take 427 runs in an innings.
If Aus is really a dominant team they should b beating Ban atleast by an innings, which is clearly not possible in this match.
Dint you see how they whitewashed south africa in their own turf ?
A team beating SA (that too whitewashing) has struggled against Bangladesh in 1st test. After failing in both Batting & Bowling in 1st innings, they somehow managed to beat Ban by just 3 wkts. Had Gilchrist got out early in 1st innings, the result could b otherway round.
But ofcourse they r doin well in 2nd test.
-
21st April 2006, 06:35 PM
#35
Member
Junior Hubber
Originally Posted by
sgokulprathap
Originally Posted by
Vivek
Originally Posted by
sgokulprathap
Yeah, Australia may win this match. But how can a so called dominant team(
) allow B'desh to take 427 runs in an innings.
If Aus is really a dominant team they should b beating Ban atleast by an innings, which is clearly not possible in this match.
Dint you see how they whitewashed south africa in their own turf ?
A team beating SA (that too whitewashing) has struggled against Bangladesh in 1st test. After failing in both Batting & Bowling in 1st innings, they somehow managed to beat Ban by just 3 wkts. Had Gilchrist got out early in 1st innings, the result could b otherway round.
But ofcourse they r doin well in 2nd test.
Gokul, the essence of a good team is how it fights back to victory rather than how it failed miserably in the beginning. this situation gives lot more confidence to the team rather than a blind domination from the word GO.
-
22nd April 2006, 02:35 AM
#36
Senior Member
Devoted Hubber
Autralia will be dominating cricket for another decade. They've no problem in producing world class batsmen. They've enough batsmen to make another team which can be competitive. They've some problems in bowlers.. when McGrath and Warney hang their boots, the selection panel will have a tough job on hands.. Their bowling attack will be weak without mcgrath and warne but overall as a team, they'll be ahead of any other teams. I want them to make few changes in batting line up. drop clarke, martyn, and symonds from test side.. I think langer is also falling. if langer is out of form, then bring in Jacques to open.. Hussey should be at 5. bring in David Hussey in the place of martyn. the brothers will be competing each other for runs, that'll be fun to watch. for bowling, they've to groom Johnson... he's a fine tall left arm bowler and is considered to be the next big thing of Australi.. with Lee, Cullen and jellespie he'll have a good time.. I think so.
for one dayers.. get rid of katich.. and ask watson to spend some time in first class cricket. bring in congrave.. he's very young and an awesome player.. they don't really have a problem in odis.
-
21st July 2006, 08:52 PM
#37
Member
Junior Hubber
Though Australia seems to be showing a bit of slump in their level of performance in cricket recently, it cannot be said that they are loosing their dominance yet.
It is not the Australian players who are the real reason behind their sucess instead it is their Management the same can b said with SAF cricket as well. They have created a "system" and environment which seems to be producing good players and they inturn show the result. No individual player however good he might be are pampered neither does their media do .... their system only encourages players to think about their country's interest first and then their personal achievement. A player like steve waugh when started to show some weariness in his performance was promptly replaced .. and surprisingly their players also respond well ...
In other coutries especially Asian countries, they have their star player continue playing .. well past their prime and untill their presense will be found as a liability to the team , we get to hear qoutes like "so many thousand runs" "so many centuries" and cannot be left out of the team and so on.
This might show as if that we are ungratefull to players who have slogged for their contry ... answer is "No individual can be greater than his country" this has to be realised more importantly by the players themselves.
DevGUN -->"Every man dies but not every man really lives." -- Braveheart
-
4th December 2006, 12:21 PM
#38
see guys,
the average age of Aussies is 33 according world cup surve
the least age is 29 and most is 36
i think they will rule for another 1 year
after that its goona be a big disaster
Suddenly, Life is beautiful...
-
4th December 2006, 11:42 PM
#39
Moderator
Platinum Hubber
Originally Posted by
rockydeva
see guys,
the average age of Aussies is 33 according world cup surve
the least age is 29 and most is 36
i think they will rule for another 1 year
after that its goona be a big disaster
ippidiyE pala varushamaa sollittu irukkOm.
BUt because of the tought nature of their domestic circuit we have players making their debut late and performing extremely well.
For instance consider Hussey and Stuart Clark. Both of them made their debut at 30+ age and have taken to international cricket with ease. Hussey is even rumoured to be a long term captain prospect. Chaps like Michael Clarke,Lee are going to be around for a while. Aussies seem to have a longer shelf life and seem to have a continous supply of talent. So I don't think there'll be a disaster in a few years.
மூவா? முதல்வா! இனியெம்மைச் சோரேலே
-
4th December 2006, 11:51 PM
#40
Senior Member
Devoted Hubber
Well said. Their depth is stronger than many international XI. They've good bowlers and batsmen to replace the current XI.
P Jaques is on deadly form. He could replace any of the openers but when these openers're doing well, they won't tinker with the selection.
Have a keeper, Hadin, who's almost as good as Gilly.
Then there's M Hussey's brother D Hussey, who was unlucky to be born in Australia.
And they have a pace attack: Johnson and Tait. Both can swing the ball at 90+ mph.
People love to think Australia are on a decline as WI was after its dominance, but Australia has the best(?) domestic setup.
Bookmarks