India v Australia, 2nd Test, Hyderabad, 4th day March 5, 2013

Losing after a first-innings declaration

Stats highlights from India's convincing win in the second Test of the four-match series
  shares 36

  • India's victory by an innings and 135 runs is their sixth-largest in Tests, and their second-best against Australia - they'd won by an innings and 219 in Kolkata in 1998. All of those six wins have come in the subcontinent - four in India and two in Bangladesh.

  • MS Dhoni has won 22 of his 45 Tests, the most by an Indian - Sourav Ganguly had won 21 out of 49. Seventeen of Dhoni's 22 wins have been in home Tests, where he has a 17-3 win-loss record in 26 matches. Mohammad Azharuddin is the next-best at home, with a 13-4 record. In away Tests, though, Dhoni's won only five out of 19 Tests, which is joint-second with Rahul Dravid (five out of 17). Ganguly won 11 out of 28 overseas.

  • Australia have lost at least two Tests in five of their last six series in India. During this period, South Africa, England and Pakistan all have better win-loss records in Tests in India.

  • This is the 11th instance of a team losing a Test after declaring in its first innings, but the first in which the team declaring has lost by an innings. The only other such instance for Australia was in the famous Headingley Test of 1981, when they declared at 401 for 9 in their first innings, and eventually ended up losing by 18 runs.

  • After an opening partnership of 56, Australia's next nine wickets put together only 75, their second-lowest ever against India (in innings in which they've been bowled out). Their only poorer effort was in the MCG Test of 1981, which they lost by 59 runs. In the fourth innings of that Test, Australia's last nine wickets put together 72.

  • Leaving aside the openers, the highest score by the other nine Australian batsmen in their second innings was Michael Clarke's 16. Only twice against India have Australia's nine batsmen from No.3 to No.11 had a lower top-score, in an innings in which they've been bowled out. In Mumbai in 2004, and in Delhi in 1969, the top-score by the non-openers was a run lesser.

  • Australia's batting average of 25.35 so far is their lowest in a series against India in which they've played at least two Tests.

  • R Ashwin's 5 for 63 in Australia's second innings is his eighth five-for, in his 14th Test. Only nine Indian bowlers have taken more five-fors. Among Indian bowlers who've taken at least eight five-fors, Ashwin's rate of 1.75 Tests per five-wicket haul is easily the best; the next-best is Subhash Gupte's 12 in 36 matches, a rate of one every three Tests.

S Rajesh is stats editor of ESPNcricinfo. Follow him on Twitter

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • POSTED BY on | March 5, 2013, 18:35 GMT

    In this test, Vijay (167) and Pujara (204) combined scored 371, which exceeded Australia's total runs 368 (237/9 and 131). I wonder how many such instances have occcured in a winning cause.

    Also, this game was one of notable partnerships. In each of the 3 innnings, one partnership dominated the rest of the innings combined. Aus first innings 145 out of 237/9 - 61.1 India first innings 370 out of 503 - 73.5% Aus second innings 56 out of 131 - 42.7% Even though the Aus first innings was declared, this must still be very rare for a test with a result. In total, the 3 partnerships accounted for 65.5% (571 out of 871) of runs scored.

  • POSTED BY on | March 5, 2013, 16:13 GMT

    Initially I was surprised by Clarke's declaration because I haven't seen till date any team declaring at just 237 in first innings, but on Analysis it sounded like a good and bold decision. If there have been a wicket or two then the whole context of the game would have changed. The best things everyone can do is criticize everyone, just put yourselves in Clarke's shoes and think about the decision. There is a high probability that last wicket pair would have added less than 10 runs to the total and that wouldn't have made much difference. The decision of Clarke would have caught Indian think-tank off guard and would have made them to burn midnight oil and come with a counter punch, fortunately it worked out for India. If it would have happened as Clarke expected then everyone would be praising him for the bold decision he made.

    Peoplel please remember sometimes even the best laid plans fail, just move on and don't hang on it.

  • POSTED BY kentjones on | March 5, 2013, 11:28 GMT

    I know lots of negative things have been said about Clarke's declaration in the first inning. I thought it was a brave and well calculated decision by him to try to force a turnaround in the game, whilst at the same time attempting to give his team a psychological boost from declaring. While the ends in this case did not justify the means, I welcome the courage and innovation of Mr. Clarke, it was a gamble, which I felt did not make a big difference to Australia's first inning total, but could have given Australia the edge if they bowlers were able to snag a few wickets and assume the ascendency. Cricket as we know is a funny old game and if the cat had gotten loose among the pigeons, there is no telling the final result. Mr. Clarke I salute your courageous optimism, your positive thinking adds interest qnd stimulation to the game. India I congratulate you on a very fine test win! All Indians should be proud of their team. Sincere congratulations also to MSD, India's best skipper

  • POSTED BY on | March 6, 2013, 11:43 GMT

    My Team ;

    Rogers, Cowan, Khawaja, Clarke, Wade, Johnson, Pattinson, Starc, Siddle, Harris, Hilfenhaus.

    Australia holds the Border-Gavaskar Trophy and will retain the Trophy if we win the next two Tests. To do this we must take 20-Wickets in this Test and this team can take 20-Wickets in a Test Match.

    Every bowler is quite capable with the bat so I am sure that they will adequately make up for the loss of a batsman.

    We bowl first and we bowl hard. Short spells only!!! Go hard or go home!!!

    20-Wickets .... Australia needs to take 20-Wickets.

  • POSTED BY on | March 6, 2013, 11:21 GMT

    Totally nonsense declaration............waste of resources............if he wanted to give last 3/4 overs to Ind he should have asked his batters to slog from over 7 so that they might have added 30/40 additonal runs in attacking fields & Ind had to bat with low moral in last 3 overs

  • POSTED BY thelapal on | March 6, 2013, 10:22 GMT

    Chances of mitchell johnson playing are fair because Indian batsmen palyed starc very comfortably in chennai test so maxwell might not be playing now he has to give way for mitchie or starc.Coming to spin department australia has only one spinner now doherthy if maxwell is axed lyon might join doherthy so question is who will be axed for lyon ..yes it can be either pattinson or siddle it will be another big decision for ACB.In batting department khawaja will be in for hughes. If they try to include smith it will be another blunder for australia because smith never played tests in india giving him chance now in the kind of situation the team is in will be nothing but another blunder and adding new selection headaches for the final delhi test.

  • POSTED BY on | March 6, 2013, 9:06 GMT

    @ sachin_vvsfan ..... this is one that I remember from some old reading that stuck in my mind. But I don't think that any of the big scores last year did it but I know it didn't happen when Lara scored his 400.

    @ Craig Dengate .... it was so nice that you picked out one of the five examples of bad Captaincy that I bought up. Obviously you have little to say on the other four so maybe we agree on those.

    So you reckon that Clarke worked the strike with Siddle?? While Dohni must have been finding it difficult to stand up, maybe after the first two overs Clarke may have realised that Siddle couldn't 'work the strike'. But there is one simple problem with your argument, "Why didn't he 'work the strike' with Pattinson??" As I pointed out Pattinson has a test average of 30+. Clarke should have 'worked the strike' with Pattinson if this was his intent.

    Ps. Most dropped catches/missed stumpings in a season. Wade was looking good for this, so they selected XD and GM over Lyon.

  • POSTED BY TheFloater on | March 6, 2013, 9:04 GMT

    A lot has been said n written about Aussies first innings declaration. I fail to understand what difference another 10-15 runs would have made. In the context of the game it was brave and an intelligent decision, had he got a wicket or two in those three overs probably the scenario would have been totally different. India must have been caught off guard by the declaration.

  • POSTED BY thelapal on | March 6, 2013, 7:58 GMT

    It was blunder by clarke declaring for such a low score when you allow your no.10 and 11 to bat when the team is already struggling it will help them to learn batting and build confidence. Even though if they get out cheaply they will know how the pitch the behaving when they come to bowl they will go even harder at the batsmen thinking that they failed with the bat.It will help them to improve batting for rest of the series. By declaring on day one clarke has given hint to india team that his bowlers can't bat on this pitch. Clarke knows that in his mind on day one itself that 1st innings score is not enough on that pitch and india batsmen are in peak form.Picking maxwell is a blunder he never look like a quality spinner if they took him as a allrounder already they have 2 allrounders watson n henriques. Another blunder is dropping lyon its steve waugh suggestion to rest him for recharging his batteries.Now entire team has to recharge except clarke so mr.waugh they all need rest ?

  • POSTED BY on | March 6, 2013, 7:55 GMT

    @Joseph Langford - Whilst I can tell from your comments you are clearly a Michael Clarke fan, just curious as to what you would do in the same circumstance? I mean I assume you average 50 plus with the bat at Test Cricket and would therefore have the ability to play with the tail. BTW, remember Steve Waugh and Michael Hussey. They used to give the strike to the tail as well - it used to give them confidence and occasionally turn into a big stand... I assume you rate them highly as well....

  • POSTED BY on | March 5, 2013, 18:35 GMT

    In this test, Vijay (167) and Pujara (204) combined scored 371, which exceeded Australia's total runs 368 (237/9 and 131). I wonder how many such instances have occcured in a winning cause.

    Also, this game was one of notable partnerships. In each of the 3 innnings, one partnership dominated the rest of the innings combined. Aus first innings 145 out of 237/9 - 61.1 India first innings 370 out of 503 - 73.5% Aus second innings 56 out of 131 - 42.7% Even though the Aus first innings was declared, this must still be very rare for a test with a result. In total, the 3 partnerships accounted for 65.5% (571 out of 871) of runs scored.

  • POSTED BY on | March 5, 2013, 16:13 GMT

    Initially I was surprised by Clarke's declaration because I haven't seen till date any team declaring at just 237 in first innings, but on Analysis it sounded like a good and bold decision. If there have been a wicket or two then the whole context of the game would have changed. The best things everyone can do is criticize everyone, just put yourselves in Clarke's shoes and think about the decision. There is a high probability that last wicket pair would have added less than 10 runs to the total and that wouldn't have made much difference. The decision of Clarke would have caught Indian think-tank off guard and would have made them to burn midnight oil and come with a counter punch, fortunately it worked out for India. If it would have happened as Clarke expected then everyone would be praising him for the bold decision he made.

    Peoplel please remember sometimes even the best laid plans fail, just move on and don't hang on it.

  • POSTED BY kentjones on | March 5, 2013, 11:28 GMT

    I know lots of negative things have been said about Clarke's declaration in the first inning. I thought it was a brave and well calculated decision by him to try to force a turnaround in the game, whilst at the same time attempting to give his team a psychological boost from declaring. While the ends in this case did not justify the means, I welcome the courage and innovation of Mr. Clarke, it was a gamble, which I felt did not make a big difference to Australia's first inning total, but could have given Australia the edge if they bowlers were able to snag a few wickets and assume the ascendency. Cricket as we know is a funny old game and if the cat had gotten loose among the pigeons, there is no telling the final result. Mr. Clarke I salute your courageous optimism, your positive thinking adds interest qnd stimulation to the game. India I congratulate you on a very fine test win! All Indians should be proud of their team. Sincere congratulations also to MSD, India's best skipper

  • POSTED BY on | March 6, 2013, 11:43 GMT

    My Team ;

    Rogers, Cowan, Khawaja, Clarke, Wade, Johnson, Pattinson, Starc, Siddle, Harris, Hilfenhaus.

    Australia holds the Border-Gavaskar Trophy and will retain the Trophy if we win the next two Tests. To do this we must take 20-Wickets in this Test and this team can take 20-Wickets in a Test Match.

    Every bowler is quite capable with the bat so I am sure that they will adequately make up for the loss of a batsman.

    We bowl first and we bowl hard. Short spells only!!! Go hard or go home!!!

    20-Wickets .... Australia needs to take 20-Wickets.

  • POSTED BY on | March 6, 2013, 11:21 GMT

    Totally nonsense declaration............waste of resources............if he wanted to give last 3/4 overs to Ind he should have asked his batters to slog from over 7 so that they might have added 30/40 additonal runs in attacking fields & Ind had to bat with low moral in last 3 overs

  • POSTED BY thelapal on | March 6, 2013, 10:22 GMT

    Chances of mitchell johnson playing are fair because Indian batsmen palyed starc very comfortably in chennai test so maxwell might not be playing now he has to give way for mitchie or starc.Coming to spin department australia has only one spinner now doherthy if maxwell is axed lyon might join doherthy so question is who will be axed for lyon ..yes it can be either pattinson or siddle it will be another big decision for ACB.In batting department khawaja will be in for hughes. If they try to include smith it will be another blunder for australia because smith never played tests in india giving him chance now in the kind of situation the team is in will be nothing but another blunder and adding new selection headaches for the final delhi test.

  • POSTED BY on | March 6, 2013, 9:06 GMT

    @ sachin_vvsfan ..... this is one that I remember from some old reading that stuck in my mind. But I don't think that any of the big scores last year did it but I know it didn't happen when Lara scored his 400.

    @ Craig Dengate .... it was so nice that you picked out one of the five examples of bad Captaincy that I bought up. Obviously you have little to say on the other four so maybe we agree on those.

    So you reckon that Clarke worked the strike with Siddle?? While Dohni must have been finding it difficult to stand up, maybe after the first two overs Clarke may have realised that Siddle couldn't 'work the strike'. But there is one simple problem with your argument, "Why didn't he 'work the strike' with Pattinson??" As I pointed out Pattinson has a test average of 30+. Clarke should have 'worked the strike' with Pattinson if this was his intent.

    Ps. Most dropped catches/missed stumpings in a season. Wade was looking good for this, so they selected XD and GM over Lyon.

  • POSTED BY TheFloater on | March 6, 2013, 9:04 GMT

    A lot has been said n written about Aussies first innings declaration. I fail to understand what difference another 10-15 runs would have made. In the context of the game it was brave and an intelligent decision, had he got a wicket or two in those three overs probably the scenario would have been totally different. India must have been caught off guard by the declaration.

  • POSTED BY thelapal on | March 6, 2013, 7:58 GMT

    It was blunder by clarke declaring for such a low score when you allow your no.10 and 11 to bat when the team is already struggling it will help them to learn batting and build confidence. Even though if they get out cheaply they will know how the pitch the behaving when they come to bowl they will go even harder at the batsmen thinking that they failed with the bat.It will help them to improve batting for rest of the series. By declaring on day one clarke has given hint to india team that his bowlers can't bat on this pitch. Clarke knows that in his mind on day one itself that 1st innings score is not enough on that pitch and india batsmen are in peak form.Picking maxwell is a blunder he never look like a quality spinner if they took him as a allrounder already they have 2 allrounders watson n henriques. Another blunder is dropping lyon its steve waugh suggestion to rest him for recharging his batteries.Now entire team has to recharge except clarke so mr.waugh they all need rest ?

  • POSTED BY on | March 6, 2013, 7:55 GMT

    @Joseph Langford - Whilst I can tell from your comments you are clearly a Michael Clarke fan, just curious as to what you would do in the same circumstance? I mean I assume you average 50 plus with the bat at Test Cricket and would therefore have the ability to play with the tail. BTW, remember Steve Waugh and Michael Hussey. They used to give the strike to the tail as well - it used to give them confidence and occasionally turn into a big stand... I assume you rate them highly as well....

  • POSTED BY ssenthil on | March 6, 2013, 7:20 GMT

    So Ashwin now have 8 five for in 14 tests and he is also 3rd best Test all-rounder in the world as well as Top 8th best test bowler. He is the only Indian to be ranked in all 3 categories as well.

  • POSTED BY sachin_vvsfan on | March 6, 2013, 6:46 GMT

    @Joseph Langford , @Cricket Spice No need to look that far for old records. i thought almost all of our matches in last tour to Australia created that record.LOL. I remember clarke scored a triple and a double hundred along with ricky but not sure how many of them were more than the combined score from opposition.

  • POSTED BY on | March 6, 2013, 5:07 GMT

    I feel too much has been made of Australia's first innings declaration. I find it quite a useless fact, that Australia is the first team to lose by an innings, after declaring in the first innings. Its not like Australia declared at 500/4 or even 400/6, and then went on to lose the test. They were 237/9, and lost their last 5 wickets for 29 runs. Clarke, made a bold decision to declare the innings, so that he could put the Indian openers (who both had a miserable first test match) under tremendous pressure, to play out the last 3 overs of the day! Well done Clarke. True Australian spirit- psychological warfare

  • POSTED BY Shaggy076 on | March 6, 2013, 5:06 GMT

    It was a 10th wicket partnership and history would show that they average probably below 10. Whats the big deal. An extra 20 (even 50) runs wasnt about to make Australias score adequate or even be game changing. Clarke went for an opportunity to make India start twice and hopefully get a couple of wickets. Whats the big deal?

  • POSTED BY on | March 6, 2013, 3:32 GMT

    Australian Test Cricket is DEAD now :( Hopeless :(

  • POSTED BY on | March 6, 2013, 0:11 GMT

    Pujara reaches 1000 in 11 tests, ties with Gavaskar as the fastest Indian in terms of number of tests and 4th fastest overall. He took 18 innings for his 1000, which is second fastest among Indians after Kambli - 14 innings.

  • POSTED BY WonkyBail on | March 5, 2013, 22:32 GMT

    Interesting that 5 wins out of 19 away has MSD as the second most successful on foreign shores, that is one impressive stat (26% win ratio)but not a match for Ganguly with a record breaking 39% win ratio abroad; some way to go to fill Ganguly's big boots for the silver fox methinks (abroad only).

  • POSTED BY on | March 5, 2013, 20:47 GMT

    @ Cricket Spice ....

    Woodfull/Bradman (Brisbane 1931)

  • POSTED BY on | March 5, 2013, 20:36 GMT

    Dubious record for Australia.... The Leeds test back into Botham Series, was also a follow on affair, like kolkata test. And they did everything to win, declared, made them allout in their 1st innings, and then lost by 18 runs, chasing 130. Only instance, when a team lost by runs (otherwise wickets), among those 11 matches.

  • POSTED BY on | March 5, 2013, 19:27 GMT

    THE DECLARATION

    There's a difference between good captaincy, bad captaincy, luck and grasping at straws. So let's dissect what happened before/after the declaration.

    1) MJC is a selector and selecting GM/XD was terrible ... it weaken the bowling and the batting. Lyon is a tenacious No11, who has at least three excellent 50+run 11th Wicket P/ships. BAD CAPTAINCY. 2) MJC, when batting with Siddle took singles on the 1st/2nd Ball. BAD CAPTAINCY. 3) MJC, when batting with Pattinson (Bat.Av:30+), had no intention of batting out the day & played a cross bat shot to get out. BAD CAPTAINCY. 4) MJC gets out and should have declared immediately or batted out the day. Allowing XD to bat reduced the number overs bowled from possibly 6 to 3. BAD CAPTAINCY. 5) MJC, after declaration, bowled Siddle with 3SL & a G, and Pattinson with 2SL & a G. If you are grasping at straws with the declaration, you should have had 7-players in catching positions. What is that if not BAD CAPTAINCY?!?!?

    Thoughts???

  • POSTED BY WalkingWicket11 on | March 5, 2013, 18:34 GMT

    Captain Obvious award to Raj Kumar. Seriously guys, everyone knows why Clarke declared (even the guys who call Clarke "arrogant").

  • POSTED BY Dhutugemunu on | March 5, 2013, 18:32 GMT

    Everybody criticizes Clarke's decision of 1st innings declaration. By doing so, he made history. Australia became the 1st team to be beaten by an innings after 1st inning declaration. "A new record."

  • POSTED BY on | March 5, 2013, 15:33 GMT

    no doubt its a great win for india but they always are termed as "home lions" by creating suitable home conditions i.e. dead & turning spin wickets but australians also take advantage of their own home conditions like any other test playing nation. bad luck australia but you have to learn more to play in every sort of conditions because its cricket and no apology is acceptable as being professionals, cricketers have to apply themselves in all the conditions. so, good luck australia and buck up india.

  • POSTED BY sachin_vvsfan on | March 5, 2013, 15:29 GMT

    @Haleos I dont think it was arrogance. The bounce was pretty good on the first day and clarke probably thought after seeing indian bowlers that his bowlers could exploit more on the very first day itself. 10 more overs they would have found out sehwag who is impatient now a days.

  • POSTED BY on | March 5, 2013, 14:30 GMT

    The declaration gave Murali Vijay the much needed psychological confidence after seeing through a session, and staying in the crease overnight. He was a lot more confident the next morning. Thanks a lot Aussies!

  • POSTED BY zarasochozarasamjho on | March 5, 2013, 14:29 GMT

    Declaring by Clarke has been portrayed as a negative. I am astounded. The chance of Australia adding a good partnership for the 10th wicket is a lot less than the chance of even a couple of Indian wickets in these very few overs. In fact I don't think Clarke even took a real risk. The opening partnership has consistently been failing for India and India was so much on top that Clarke tried to make things happen. This is typical of Australian cricketers who show their aggressiveness approach to the game in every shape and form. Yes, they have lost a few matches (not this one though) through such aggressive tactics but they have won a lot more too. History backs up this argument. Sledging is cheap and very uncivilised behaviour, we all know that; but aggressive tactics such as employed by Mushtaq Mohammad, and Javed Miandad, to give a couple of examples, is what makes great successes happen.

  • POSTED BY Haleos on | March 5, 2013, 13:11 GMT

    @ kentjones - what is brave in it? India would have lost one wicket at the most. which they did early next morning. It would not made any difference. It showed arrogance more than guts.

  • POSTED BY AhmedEsat on | March 5, 2013, 13:06 GMT

    How about selectors choosing only one spin bowler on a spin friendly pitch?

  • POSTED BY shillingsworth on | March 5, 2013, 12:54 GMT

    @kentjones - Fair comment. I've no problem with the principle of the declaration either, only that there were only 3 overs left in the day and insufficient time to get enough top order wickets to change the momentum. 10 overs to go and it's a much better gamble.

  • POSTED BY whoster on | March 5, 2013, 12:38 GMT

    A captain is only as good as his team, and credit to Clarke for at least trying to make things happen with the 1st innings declaration. He was on a hiding to nothing doing that - but Clarke is pretty much the single reason Australia have remained competitive over the past year, and he's been continually let down by batsmen lacking technique and discipline. With no Hussey to shore up the middle-order anymore, I'd be surprised if the series didn't end in a 4-0 whitewash. As for The Ashes, this looks like being the weakest Aussie side to visit England since 1985 - and they'll do well to avoid another hammering.

  • POSTED BY tfjones1978 on | March 5, 2013, 12:15 GMT

    Clarke made the right move in declaring just before stumps. India were on top and would have bowled three wide maidens to stop Australia from getting any runs and then gotten the last wicket in the final 10 minutes of the day. At the same time, Indian openers would have been thinking about walking off the field and heading back to their hotels. They would not have been thinking about walking out to the middle for 18 deliveries. As it turned out, Clarke wasnt lucky and didnt get a wicket. However it forced India after a day on top to do something they didnt want to do: Go out and bat for 18 deliveries. If Clarke had of been lucky and picked up a wicket, a tail-ender might have walked in meaning India could be 2 down early the next day. I believe Clarke is the smarted Captain Ive ever seen, our results given our level of talent proove that.

  • POSTED BY on | March 5, 2013, 11:45 GMT

    I agree with @kentjones . Bold moves always carry an element of risk and can backfire to point where one could be in a position to be ridiculed. But this was a calculated bold move with a clear method to the madness. He obviously wanted to turn a so-so first innings knock back in his favour. The risk was that he needed to get a wicket or two in short order. If he took the status quo route, he may got another 30 runs the next day destined to lose the test anyway. I think it was a very good strategic move and I commend him for giving it a go.

  • POSTED BY Fast_Track_Bully on | March 5, 2013, 11:42 GMT

    Team India did great. But need to rest Sehwag and Harbhajan as they seems to be useless.

  • POSTED BY Chris_Howard on | March 5, 2013, 11:37 GMT

    @sachin_vvsfan. I wouldn't be too worried about that collapse by India, they knew they had enough runs, so were just trying to make sure Doherty and Maxwelll get picked for the next Test!

  • POSTED BY on | March 5, 2013, 11:26 GMT

    How about the highest percentage of singles taken in the first two balls by a No.5 Batsman batting with the No.9 Batsman?? 100% MJ Clarke / P Siddle (Hyderabad 2013).

    How about the least number of wickets taken by an Australian Team in the first two test of a series?? 22 (2013 Chennai Hyderabad)

    How about the first time a bowler has been taken out of the attack after taking 2 wickets in the first 6-overs of a test?? Pattinson (2013 Chennai)

  • POSTED BY sachin_vvsfan on | March 5, 2013, 10:39 GMT

    What about losing 8 wickets for 104 runs and ending up winning by an innings that is a record too. Shame on lower order esp harbhajan , jadeja. #Reckless

  • POSTED BY sachin_vvsfan on | March 5, 2013, 10:39 GMT

    What about losing 8 wickets for 104 runs and ending up winning by an innings that is a record too. Shame on lower order esp harbhajan , jadeja. #Reckless

  • POSTED BY on | March 5, 2013, 11:26 GMT

    How about the highest percentage of singles taken in the first two balls by a No.5 Batsman batting with the No.9 Batsman?? 100% MJ Clarke / P Siddle (Hyderabad 2013).

    How about the least number of wickets taken by an Australian Team in the first two test of a series?? 22 (2013 Chennai Hyderabad)

    How about the first time a bowler has been taken out of the attack after taking 2 wickets in the first 6-overs of a test?? Pattinson (2013 Chennai)

  • POSTED BY Chris_Howard on | March 5, 2013, 11:37 GMT

    @sachin_vvsfan. I wouldn't be too worried about that collapse by India, they knew they had enough runs, so were just trying to make sure Doherty and Maxwelll get picked for the next Test!

  • POSTED BY Fast_Track_Bully on | March 5, 2013, 11:42 GMT

    Team India did great. But need to rest Sehwag and Harbhajan as they seems to be useless.

  • POSTED BY on | March 5, 2013, 11:45 GMT

    I agree with @kentjones . Bold moves always carry an element of risk and can backfire to point where one could be in a position to be ridiculed. But this was a calculated bold move with a clear method to the madness. He obviously wanted to turn a so-so first innings knock back in his favour. The risk was that he needed to get a wicket or two in short order. If he took the status quo route, he may got another 30 runs the next day destined to lose the test anyway. I think it was a very good strategic move and I commend him for giving it a go.

  • POSTED BY tfjones1978 on | March 5, 2013, 12:15 GMT

    Clarke made the right move in declaring just before stumps. India were on top and would have bowled three wide maidens to stop Australia from getting any runs and then gotten the last wicket in the final 10 minutes of the day. At the same time, Indian openers would have been thinking about walking off the field and heading back to their hotels. They would not have been thinking about walking out to the middle for 18 deliveries. As it turned out, Clarke wasnt lucky and didnt get a wicket. However it forced India after a day on top to do something they didnt want to do: Go out and bat for 18 deliveries. If Clarke had of been lucky and picked up a wicket, a tail-ender might have walked in meaning India could be 2 down early the next day. I believe Clarke is the smarted Captain Ive ever seen, our results given our level of talent proove that.

  • POSTED BY whoster on | March 5, 2013, 12:38 GMT

    A captain is only as good as his team, and credit to Clarke for at least trying to make things happen with the 1st innings declaration. He was on a hiding to nothing doing that - but Clarke is pretty much the single reason Australia have remained competitive over the past year, and he's been continually let down by batsmen lacking technique and discipline. With no Hussey to shore up the middle-order anymore, I'd be surprised if the series didn't end in a 4-0 whitewash. As for The Ashes, this looks like being the weakest Aussie side to visit England since 1985 - and they'll do well to avoid another hammering.

  • POSTED BY shillingsworth on | March 5, 2013, 12:54 GMT

    @kentjones - Fair comment. I've no problem with the principle of the declaration either, only that there were only 3 overs left in the day and insufficient time to get enough top order wickets to change the momentum. 10 overs to go and it's a much better gamble.

  • POSTED BY AhmedEsat on | March 5, 2013, 13:06 GMT

    How about selectors choosing only one spin bowler on a spin friendly pitch?

  • POSTED BY Haleos on | March 5, 2013, 13:11 GMT

    @ kentjones - what is brave in it? India would have lost one wicket at the most. which they did early next morning. It would not made any difference. It showed arrogance more than guts.