Is Australia's dominance over? October 23, 2008

Down or out?

The defeat in Mohali has underlined that Australia are more vulnerable than ever. Does it mark the end of their decade and more of domination, though?
  shares 31



The mighty have fallen © Getty Images

Kim Hughes
former Australia captain
The challenge I feel is now for India to follow up this victory in the next two Tests. Australia played very well in Bangalore and could've won that game if the Indian tailenders had not played so well. To be the best you need to beat the opposition convincingly. To be No.1 you've to be the best for at least two years, and Australia have been for the last ten years at least. So for countries like India the reality is that a few of their own legends are going to retire soon.

Bishan Singh Bedi
former India captain
Let's not kid ourselves. After being on top for a very long time, one doesn't just vanish. It's all part of the game. They will plug the holes very quickly because they have a very strong system. I wouldn't hasten to judge the present situation. The Aussies have always performed consistenly over a longish period, and that is well established.

Mike Gatting
former England captain
Certainly, from what they were, when you lose world-class players like Glenn McGrath, Shane Warne and Adam Gilchrist, you just can't replace that at all. So one would say they aren't as strong as they were. I would say their dominance is likely to be challenged from all parts of the world. India obviously have shown they can do that. But England, South Africa, and even Sri Lanka at home will fancy their chances. Australia have come down towards the major pack again, and there'll be quite a bit of fight happening there.

Ray Jennings
former South Africa coach
Australian cricket still has the depth - probably not enough to dominate in the way they've dominated in the past but still to be in the top three. In sport you do have ways of dominance. I mean India have also dominated because of the quality players, the seniors, they've got. They'll have to start looking for new permutations. South Africa are in the same boat. But Australia's rebuilding phase will be a lot quicker than most countries because they've got the depth and they've got the experience of playing around the world.

Interviews by Nagraj Gollapudi

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • POSTED BY vs2190 on | October 25, 2008, 15:31 GMT

    To even speculate about the downfall of the Aussies seems childish.People talked a lot about 2007 World Cup being an open one.But what happened eventually?As an Indian, I am really very happy about the Indian drubbing of the Aussies.But I am always carefull in judging teams especially teams like Australia.They need just one criticism about their bad performance to kindle their spirits.They don't get discouraged by criticisms.You can take the World Cup 2007 as the best example.So as Indians, Please don't even utter a word against Aussies for they will come really hard at you and you'll regret all the talk!!!!!!

  • POSTED BY Daiya on | October 25, 2008, 12:38 GMT

    There is absolutely no doubt that Australia is a good side. It was just one bad game so far, after years of dominance. This may just be an illusion. The mark of a great side is rising up from the dust to compete. We saw Aussie lose the Ashes, people were pointing fingers at Ponting, out of form players were dropped, and yet after that series Australia still dominated until now. I would not be suprised if they come hard and strong in the next game, just like India did in the second test against Sri Lanka (after being out played in the first). There is no doubt that the team from down under will miss the brilliance of Gilly, or the magic of Warne. However, it gives younger players the opportunity to make a name for themselves. Perhaps they may not be as good as Warne but you never know. For ex; Mendis has just come in and he is making Murali seem impotent at the moment anyway. Sure the younger players have a lot to learn, but Aussie still have the resources to defeat anyone on any day.

  • POSTED BY Sprewell on | October 25, 2008, 3:01 GMT

    I'd put my money on Australia being on top of the ICC test rankings without hesitation. India might play well against Australia, but they are pretty average against others - as shown in Sri Lanka series. It will be interesting to see how England fair against India, Sth Africa against Australia, all good series. Indians have lots of close to retirement players, maybe 1 or 2 years behind the Australian retirees. Enjoy the Indian performance (if it lasts longer than 1 series) whilst you can. Marsh, Pomersbach, Ronchi, Hilfenhaus, Tait are all waiting...

  • POSTED BY Superbat on | October 25, 2008, 1:35 GMT

    No Doubt Australia Is Still A Very Good Side. The Loss To India Is Hugh Blow To Them. They May Lose Their No: 1 Slot, But They Can Maintain Their Stance In The Top 3 For Some Time. The Biggest Problem For The Aussies Is They Don't Have A Good Spinner Now In The Class Of Shane Warne. They Will Win Matches At Home, Because Of Their Pace Attack, But In The Asian Region They Will Continue To Perform Poorly, Unless They Find A Good Spinner To Some Standard. Australia Should 've Played A Extra Spinner Long Side Warne. Then By Now He Would Have Got The Experience. Sri Lanka Is A Very Good Example, They Have Found Ajantha Mendis While Muriali Is Playing. Also Their Batsman Don't Use Their Feet To The Spinners. Very Soon India Pakistan & Sri Lanka Will Be Top Teams In World Cricket. Good Luck To The Poor Aussies!

  • POSTED BY nikku_h on | October 24, 2008, 22:06 GMT

    I feel that once Symmo comes back and rookie Marsh hits his stride the Aussies will be head and shoulders above everyone else once more. Did anyone see how their A team handled india's A team before the tour started? Australia has very capable back ups and in a short while they will find their place in the line up.

  • POSTED BY ARKrishnan on | October 24, 2008, 10:37 GMT

    I totally agree with Mr.Bedi. One doesn't stay on top of other teams just by fluke. They have a very strong system in place and more importantly the self-belief about whatever they carry out doing. They maybe challenged on more occasions but that does not bring down their level. The onus is now on India to sustain their momentum and be more consistent in different conditions. For that to happen, we need to prepare better pitches in India to assist the fast bowlers that we have at our disposal now. Australia will definitely have a rethink on its strategies with regard to bowling and field placements for the third test.

  • POSTED BY SachinIsTheGreatest on | October 24, 2008, 10:07 GMT

    I do agree that it will take 2-3 years (or more) for Australia to be "back to the pack".

    But and thats a very big but for Australia to be considered weakened teams like South Africa and Sri Lanka have to beat them and till date we have seen only a lot of talking from the others when it comes to playing Australia.

    My whole point has been that India stands above the rest because of their ability to raise the game against Australia as compared to what the so-called "teams better than India" have managed.

  • POSTED BY bobagorof on | October 24, 2008, 4:41 GMT

    I find it interesting that the definition of who is the best team seems to be circling around India's performances against Australia - holding Australia to a draw or getting the occasional win. To me, that doesn't sound like the best team in the world, it sounds like a team trying to convince other people. India (or any other team, for that matter) will be regarded as the best team when they regularly beat opposition from all over the globe, home and away, on a regular basis. Considering how they lost to Sri Lanka (being thumped in their 2 lossses), an impressive showing in this series isn't yet enough to dislodge Australia in my opinion. Australia certainly don't have the dominance they are used to over the last 10-15 years, and they are quickly coming back to the pack. But I believe it will take another 2-3 series losses before Australia's position is seriously challenged. The challenge for India is to maintain their standard when their current stars retire over the next year.

  • POSTED BY ashwin_547 on | October 24, 2008, 3:55 GMT

    You're not just Australia for nothing, they're champions and will stay, they're just down but never out, watch them bounce back as they have previously done. It is inevitable. Australia shall dominate once again, it is sad but true. Hopefully India can change things and maybe this time make it permanent, say seal the deal with a kiss?

  • POSTED BY Maestro_bats on | October 24, 2008, 3:05 GMT

    The current Australian team is definitely vulnerable at least in India. Having said that they are still a very aggressive team. Thanks to Sachin and Sourav for bailing out India from a demoralizing position at Mohali. What Indians achieved after finishing 1st innings was definitely special.

    Indian team has been doing well when it comes bowling for a long time now. However, they were never got a strong support from the batting line-up. Mohali stats (there were only 2 hundreds scored - Gambhir and Ganguly) clearly shows that Indians won because of contribution from every individual in the team. There was no big score from a single player.

    Australians have achieved this consistently since last 10yrs or even more I guess. They have always played as a team and thus their success rate is not surprising. If Indians focus on achieving a team performance (Rather than focusing on a single outstanding victory at Mohali) as they did in Mohali, they won't be far from becoming a champion either.

  • POSTED BY vs2190 on | October 25, 2008, 15:31 GMT

    To even speculate about the downfall of the Aussies seems childish.People talked a lot about 2007 World Cup being an open one.But what happened eventually?As an Indian, I am really very happy about the Indian drubbing of the Aussies.But I am always carefull in judging teams especially teams like Australia.They need just one criticism about their bad performance to kindle their spirits.They don't get discouraged by criticisms.You can take the World Cup 2007 as the best example.So as Indians, Please don't even utter a word against Aussies for they will come really hard at you and you'll regret all the talk!!!!!!

  • POSTED BY Daiya on | October 25, 2008, 12:38 GMT

    There is absolutely no doubt that Australia is a good side. It was just one bad game so far, after years of dominance. This may just be an illusion. The mark of a great side is rising up from the dust to compete. We saw Aussie lose the Ashes, people were pointing fingers at Ponting, out of form players were dropped, and yet after that series Australia still dominated until now. I would not be suprised if they come hard and strong in the next game, just like India did in the second test against Sri Lanka (after being out played in the first). There is no doubt that the team from down under will miss the brilliance of Gilly, or the magic of Warne. However, it gives younger players the opportunity to make a name for themselves. Perhaps they may not be as good as Warne but you never know. For ex; Mendis has just come in and he is making Murali seem impotent at the moment anyway. Sure the younger players have a lot to learn, but Aussie still have the resources to defeat anyone on any day.

  • POSTED BY Sprewell on | October 25, 2008, 3:01 GMT

    I'd put my money on Australia being on top of the ICC test rankings without hesitation. India might play well against Australia, but they are pretty average against others - as shown in Sri Lanka series. It will be interesting to see how England fair against India, Sth Africa against Australia, all good series. Indians have lots of close to retirement players, maybe 1 or 2 years behind the Australian retirees. Enjoy the Indian performance (if it lasts longer than 1 series) whilst you can. Marsh, Pomersbach, Ronchi, Hilfenhaus, Tait are all waiting...

  • POSTED BY Superbat on | October 25, 2008, 1:35 GMT

    No Doubt Australia Is Still A Very Good Side. The Loss To India Is Hugh Blow To Them. They May Lose Their No: 1 Slot, But They Can Maintain Their Stance In The Top 3 For Some Time. The Biggest Problem For The Aussies Is They Don't Have A Good Spinner Now In The Class Of Shane Warne. They Will Win Matches At Home, Because Of Their Pace Attack, But In The Asian Region They Will Continue To Perform Poorly, Unless They Find A Good Spinner To Some Standard. Australia Should 've Played A Extra Spinner Long Side Warne. Then By Now He Would Have Got The Experience. Sri Lanka Is A Very Good Example, They Have Found Ajantha Mendis While Muriali Is Playing. Also Their Batsman Don't Use Their Feet To The Spinners. Very Soon India Pakistan & Sri Lanka Will Be Top Teams In World Cricket. Good Luck To The Poor Aussies!

  • POSTED BY nikku_h on | October 24, 2008, 22:06 GMT

    I feel that once Symmo comes back and rookie Marsh hits his stride the Aussies will be head and shoulders above everyone else once more. Did anyone see how their A team handled india's A team before the tour started? Australia has very capable back ups and in a short while they will find their place in the line up.

  • POSTED BY ARKrishnan on | October 24, 2008, 10:37 GMT

    I totally agree with Mr.Bedi. One doesn't stay on top of other teams just by fluke. They have a very strong system in place and more importantly the self-belief about whatever they carry out doing. They maybe challenged on more occasions but that does not bring down their level. The onus is now on India to sustain their momentum and be more consistent in different conditions. For that to happen, we need to prepare better pitches in India to assist the fast bowlers that we have at our disposal now. Australia will definitely have a rethink on its strategies with regard to bowling and field placements for the third test.

  • POSTED BY SachinIsTheGreatest on | October 24, 2008, 10:07 GMT

    I do agree that it will take 2-3 years (or more) for Australia to be "back to the pack".

    But and thats a very big but for Australia to be considered weakened teams like South Africa and Sri Lanka have to beat them and till date we have seen only a lot of talking from the others when it comes to playing Australia.

    My whole point has been that India stands above the rest because of their ability to raise the game against Australia as compared to what the so-called "teams better than India" have managed.

  • POSTED BY bobagorof on | October 24, 2008, 4:41 GMT

    I find it interesting that the definition of who is the best team seems to be circling around India's performances against Australia - holding Australia to a draw or getting the occasional win. To me, that doesn't sound like the best team in the world, it sounds like a team trying to convince other people. India (or any other team, for that matter) will be regarded as the best team when they regularly beat opposition from all over the globe, home and away, on a regular basis. Considering how they lost to Sri Lanka (being thumped in their 2 lossses), an impressive showing in this series isn't yet enough to dislodge Australia in my opinion. Australia certainly don't have the dominance they are used to over the last 10-15 years, and they are quickly coming back to the pack. But I believe it will take another 2-3 series losses before Australia's position is seriously challenged. The challenge for India is to maintain their standard when their current stars retire over the next year.

  • POSTED BY ashwin_547 on | October 24, 2008, 3:55 GMT

    You're not just Australia for nothing, they're champions and will stay, they're just down but never out, watch them bounce back as they have previously done. It is inevitable. Australia shall dominate once again, it is sad but true. Hopefully India can change things and maybe this time make it permanent, say seal the deal with a kiss?

  • POSTED BY Maestro_bats on | October 24, 2008, 3:05 GMT

    The current Australian team is definitely vulnerable at least in India. Having said that they are still a very aggressive team. Thanks to Sachin and Sourav for bailing out India from a demoralizing position at Mohali. What Indians achieved after finishing 1st innings was definitely special.

    Indian team has been doing well when it comes bowling for a long time now. However, they were never got a strong support from the batting line-up. Mohali stats (there were only 2 hundreds scored - Gambhir and Ganguly) clearly shows that Indians won because of contribution from every individual in the team. There was no big score from a single player.

    Australians have achieved this consistently since last 10yrs or even more I guess. They have always played as a team and thus their success rate is not surprising. If Indians focus on achieving a team performance (Rather than focusing on a single outstanding victory at Mohali) as they did in Mohali, they won't be far from becoming a champion either.

  • POSTED BY Ozcricketwriter on | October 24, 2008, 0:11 GMT

    When West Indies lost their dominance, it started with Australia beating them in Australia, and then, finally, following that up with a victory in the West Indies. After that, other teams beat West Indies regularly, and, while West Indies does still occasionally win at home, they rarely win abroad anymore. If and when a team beats Australia in Australia over the course of a series, then perhaps similar cracks will start to appear.

  • POSTED BY Srinath on | October 23, 2008, 19:35 GMT

    Yes, Australian dominance is finally over. If you see, the current crop is coming out of the retirement of their most experienced bowlers (Mcgrath and warne) and we must accept that the likes of Lee, Clark, Johnson have done a splendid job. But, Australia have more problems to face in the near future. Their batting card is also very old with hayden, Ponting and Hussey all in their mid and late 30 s. Having said that, we would see australia winning games and series for sure. But we would never see the kind of domination that they showed (2 times 16 unbeaten tests). Every now and then they are going to be challanged and they are now going to be mortals. They wont be feared from now on and more teams will believe that they wuld be able to beat the Aussies. England will be eager to challenge them during Ashes and also the likes of Murali and mendis will be waiting to show their mettle. Its going to be a interesting few years to come.

  • POSTED BY poetryinmotion on | October 23, 2008, 17:20 GMT

    I am a litte surprised by the comments I am reading here. It would make me believe that India has only won one test match against australia in the last 12 years since the institution of the Border-Gavaskar trophy in 1996. The actual stats look like this - 24 played, 9 won, 10 lost, and 5 drawn.

    I would like someone to show similar or better stats for any other team against australia in the same time. We held australia to a 1-1 draw in australia in 2003-04, nobody else managed the same result at that time. Before we have ppl jumping abt the the lack of key players, India have also played different series against australia without key players and won.

    I am not going to say India is the best team in the world or anything like that but certainly we are watching a great rivalry come to an end here and that is no hot air albion1. This is very much like the WI vs Aus rivalry of the 70s and 80s. And finally Mohali was no dustbowl. Australia was beaten and well beaten.

  • POSTED BY Snyper.Doc on | October 23, 2008, 15:34 GMT

    India have done extremely well in the second test. On a pitch that wasnt a dust bowl and not a mine field or demons on the fifth day either. Regardless of the state of the pitch, if the pressure gets on you, you can crumble and that is what happened to the Aussies. Neither are the Aussies going to finish matches by tea on the fourth day in future. You can surely expect a closely fought Ashes even with the return of Roy. Having said all this and media jumping up and down about the Mohali game, Indians are going to face the same heat with the exit of FAB FOUR sooner than later. Though players like Yuvi, Kaif, Raina, Rohith Sharma are good, am not sure if they have the patiencce to play long innings on testing pitches. There surely is going to be a big void in the Indian middle order once they are gone. Indian selectors and the think tank need to chalk out a plan than to keep going on and on about the win. Indoan ODI and T20 teams to me look as competitive as any though. Next, Kotla!

  • POSTED BY vineetklkrn on | October 23, 2008, 15:15 GMT

    OZ is down but not out. They are still those who set the standards for the game may be in fielding, bowling or batting departments. They have a strong domestic infrastructure and definitely a good bench strength. India is in the form of a lifetime and instead of saying oz is bad, why not say india is too good!! what this will mean is a wake up call for the OZs, it is a good thing to happen for a game like cricket which is played only by half a dozen of countries. Remember the crowed which gathered for T20 at MCG against india! Just because india had beaten them in world cup semifinal! And we saw how OZs thrashed us in that match. Am trying to make a point here, this loss will do a lot good for oz cricket. People will be more interested than ever, which will be the inspirations for the down OZs and make them bounce back well in the remaining tests, atlast the inspiration for any player playing for his country is the interest of the game in his own people.

  • POSTED BY NumberXI on | October 23, 2008, 13:47 GMT

    It is way too early to contend that Australia's dominance of world cricket is at end. For that, India will need to beat Australia again this series or win this series. And even that will mean nothing if Australia then start beating other teams home and away in which case this series, if India wins it (and they have not yet done so), will be an aberration like 2001. However, this test is probably a timely warning to Australian cricket and those who run it, that the stable of talent in their domestic cricket may not be as rich as they thought it was. But then, it could be a one-off.....oh well, you get the drift.

  • POSTED BY SachinIsTheGreatest on | October 23, 2008, 13:41 GMT

    albion1, see home and away records given by cricinfo a few months ago and you will see India has the best away record second only to Australia since 2003 I think. You fluke a 5-match rubber when the bowler who destroyed England at Lord's steps on a ball 30 minutes before the start of the second test. Was it a 'B' team or the under-15 team that played in Australia later on to be beaten 5-0? And I am saying cricket is NOT competitive again. Its just that only India finds a way to beat Australia everytime. Mohali 2008, Perth 2007, Chennai 2004(drawn with the last day washed out), Adelaide 2003, Kolkata and Chennai(2001)...so how many such tests have other countries played against Australia series after series?

  • POSTED BY albion1 on | October 23, 2008, 11:34 GMT

    SachinIsTheGreatest - get that chip off your shoulder pal. India have done well at home in the past in conditions that suit their players. Some of their success was due to an ability against spin i.e. Warne - who was the nemesis of SA and Eng. How you 'fluke' a 5 match rubber is beyond me - England had beaten all comers home and away for 2 years prior, in the return leg they were missing a number of key players (though not suggesting they would have won). Currently South Africa are better than India, so are Sri Lanka.

    Australia have lost 1 test. Of course they are weaker than 2 years ago but they are still a good side. Journos have articles to write. Let's just enjoy the fact that Test cricket is competitive again.

  • POSTED BY SachinIsTheGreatest on | October 23, 2008, 8:56 GMT

    India beating Australia is the only time Australia get pushed(and beaten) so this cannot be used as a yardstick.

    When Australia play South Africa there is more excitement off the field with Smith shooting his mouth off than any real contest on it. England pulled off a fluke with the 2005 Ashes and were promptly put in their place in the next edition.

    Since 2001 India has been the only team by a long long way to maintain consistently world class performances when playing Australia. Its a tribute to the Indian team that they have made Australia look ordinary.

    Other teams "fancying" their chances is a lot of air with nothing to back it up.

  • POSTED BY Ryanbrew on | October 23, 2008, 8:31 GMT

    I think the key here is not whether Aus' domninance is over. I think we have witnessed over the last year that their invincibility has faded. They have got depth at home, but they still will never replace the calibre players that they have just lost, and with Hayden's retirement imminent, they will be losing even more. The key loss for me is Gilchrist, will we ever see a gloveman who bats like he does. Haddin is a decent batsman, but will NEVER dominate like Gilchrist did. Not having him walk in at no: 7 means that the top order now do not have the same amount of confidence they may have had previously and cannot play with the same level of freedom as before!

    We all know that they have no spinner. And only have one "great" bowler at present - Brett Lee. Stuart Clark is excellent - but getting old, and Mitchell Johnson is decent, but far from Great, I cannot see him playing in too many other bowling attacks around the world like SA or England.

    The lustre is fading not dominance!

  • POSTED BY humps_alot on | October 23, 2008, 8:22 GMT

    Kim Hughes has made a very pertinent comment with regards to India's position in the pecking order and in cautioning about the imminent exit of the top players due to retirement in the near future. We Indians have a tendency to go over the top with an odd win here and there and start making lofty claims with respect to our advancements. To be the top country, any team will have to keep winning over and over for a considerably longer time than what India have done before they start making such claims. Just like in Tennis, you get high points for beating a top-ranked player, but that doesn't automatically make you the number one, in Cricket beating Australia or any other top country once or twice won't make you the number one. Moreover, the Aussie dominance may have waned a little, but it is too early to make such claims right now. Let them fail over and over, and get beaten by sides such as India on a regular basis over the next year before we can start doubting their undisputed status.

  • POSTED BY Ozcricketwriter on | October 23, 2008, 7:09 GMT

    I am finding this incredible to read. Australia lost one test. One. Does one test suddenly make Australia weak? Let's be realistic here: barring 1 test series, Australia have always lost in India, because the pitches don't suit. Furthermore, no Australian spinner has ever done well in India, and Australia were stupid to pick a spinner for both matches. Brad Haddin is a decent batsman but a poor choice as wicket keeper (Queensland's Hartley is easily the superior keeper). Why they are leaving out fast bowler Bracken (who they seem to think is a one day specialist) is beyond me. In short, had Australia picked their best team, they would have done a lot better. In saying that, batting second on that pitch was never going to be easy either. This doesn't make Australia bad at all, nor does it make Australia vulnerable. When India can win home AND away against Australia, then they can genuinely say that they are better. For the moment, Australia is still the best.

  • POSTED BY Rusty_1 on | October 23, 2008, 7:02 GMT

    I think you only have to look at the current players & ask the question - Which of them are top class performers & will be around in 3-5 years? Ricky, Clarke, Hussey, Roy, Lee & Clark. That's a pretty good number of current players. Plus you have Jacques, Johnson, Tait, Katich & Haddin - all good performers that will only get better with time & experience (with the exception of Katich who is almost there, just needs to cement his spot). Also, coming through the ranks are DJ Hussey, Marsh, White and a host of other quality players from the domestic comp. Only thing lacking is a quality spinner. I personally believe that they need to choose one spinner now & persist with him for a year. Someone with the right temperament to get smacked around like Warne did at the start of his career. Will Australia dominate like they used to? No,probably not for another couple of years, but I am sure that they will retain their number 1 ranking comfortably.Test cricket will just become more interesting!

  • POSTED BY Wideleg.Byes on | October 23, 2008, 6:58 GMT

    It is foolish to think that this Australian team is over and done with. If you need any proof, then wait for the next two tests, where India will be brought back to earth and perhaps be buried as well.

  • POSTED BY guptavipulv on | October 23, 2008, 6:45 GMT

    I would say that the era of one sided matches , series concerning Australia is over now. Even if they are not able to retain the pole position as they had retained in the past , they would still be one of the top contenders. Whatever happens I feel that we will witness more closely fought matches and that will always be good for the game.

  • POSTED BY rohanbala on | October 23, 2008, 6:28 GMT

    The media seems to have got "worked up" after India defeated Australia in the Mohali Test.. "One Swallow does not make a Summer".. Just because India won the recent Test by a big margin, there has been a chorus of voices all over saying that the Australian team is not longer invincible.. Will such voices be raised against the Indian team, if the Bangladesh team wins two Test matches in a row against India? Its plain silly stuff to say this.. I am sure, the Australians will give a fitting reply very soon.

  • POSTED BY adamkelly_1790 on | October 23, 2008, 5:37 GMT

    I'm a New Zealander and love nothing more than an Aussie defeat. But I fear that we are jumping to conclusions, Australia are a far better team than this and they will soon start adapting to their complete restructure. The sub-continental conditions are tricky to get used to (just look at us!) and this was perhaps just one of those games. What does worry me, however, is that lack of fighting spirit in the final innings which is synonymous with Australia...doesn't that provide something more to ponder? I've never supported Australia but right them off at your peril, if anyone will come back strong it will be them. Congratulations India, but your next attempt must have 0% complacency

  • POSTED BY Brendanvio on | October 23, 2008, 5:34 GMT

    It's naive to assume that after one loss its all over. This India side is strong, but they are also on the verge of losing five of their players to retirement.

    Australia is a weaker side, that is granted. But one sparrow doesn't make a summer. Australia has only beaten India in a series once in India since the 1969-70 series and that was in 2004. No one expected them to win with a transitional lineup.

    What Australia has in place now is good depth that will allow them to remain near the top, if not at the tip, of the tree. With the exception of a spinner of course.

  • POSTED BY pragmatist on | October 23, 2008, 5:33 GMT

    I agree with Gatt - replacing such a strong core of exceptional players will be difficult and certainly doesn't happen overnight. There are certainly some good ones on the way up - certainly on the batting side of things - but the lack of a quality spinner is the real hole. Ashes 2009 could be interesting.

  • POSTED BY Shanks83 on | October 23, 2008, 5:33 GMT

    Australia has always struggled in India. It took a Champion side for them to win last time they toured India. And key members from that side have retired. Even then, they played really well in the first test this tour. They just happened to have a really bad game and got beaten fair and square. To tell Australia has lost it's supremacy is naive. They have a very good system within and they will help them build up. I'll hold my cards; till they are dominated by other countries and we'll get to see it pretty soon as the Australian Summer is not far away. But right now it's too early to call.

  • POSTED BY Sajish on | October 23, 2008, 5:26 GMT

    It is ridiculous to say that Australia's dominance is over. India has challenged them in the past and the last test at Mohali and that doesnot mean Australia down and out. Australia's cricket system is superb, they have world class players waiting in the wings. Look at Shaun Marsh, he is an attacking batsman yet to play a Test Match, Injured Jacques is having almost 1000 runs in his 11 tests he has played so far. I wonder why he has not selected ahead of Katich. Simon Katich is a good player like Michael Bevan can play long innings and have very good first class average, but in India this season it is difficult for any overseas player to adjust quickly. IPL played under lights not during day time. The heat and the atmosphere herein India makes someone like Australians to take some more time to acclimatise. There are two more test matches and I am sure they will come back against India strongly. I expect a strong reply from Hayden, Ponting, Clarke, Hussey, Lee and Mitchell Johnson.

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • POSTED BY Sajish on | October 23, 2008, 5:26 GMT

    It is ridiculous to say that Australia's dominance is over. India has challenged them in the past and the last test at Mohali and that doesnot mean Australia down and out. Australia's cricket system is superb, they have world class players waiting in the wings. Look at Shaun Marsh, he is an attacking batsman yet to play a Test Match, Injured Jacques is having almost 1000 runs in his 11 tests he has played so far. I wonder why he has not selected ahead of Katich. Simon Katich is a good player like Michael Bevan can play long innings and have very good first class average, but in India this season it is difficult for any overseas player to adjust quickly. IPL played under lights not during day time. The heat and the atmosphere herein India makes someone like Australians to take some more time to acclimatise. There are two more test matches and I am sure they will come back against India strongly. I expect a strong reply from Hayden, Ponting, Clarke, Hussey, Lee and Mitchell Johnson.

  • POSTED BY Shanks83 on | October 23, 2008, 5:33 GMT

    Australia has always struggled in India. It took a Champion side for them to win last time they toured India. And key members from that side have retired. Even then, they played really well in the first test this tour. They just happened to have a really bad game and got beaten fair and square. To tell Australia has lost it's supremacy is naive. They have a very good system within and they will help them build up. I'll hold my cards; till they are dominated by other countries and we'll get to see it pretty soon as the Australian Summer is not far away. But right now it's too early to call.

  • POSTED BY pragmatist on | October 23, 2008, 5:33 GMT

    I agree with Gatt - replacing such a strong core of exceptional players will be difficult and certainly doesn't happen overnight. There are certainly some good ones on the way up - certainly on the batting side of things - but the lack of a quality spinner is the real hole. Ashes 2009 could be interesting.

  • POSTED BY Brendanvio on | October 23, 2008, 5:34 GMT

    It's naive to assume that after one loss its all over. This India side is strong, but they are also on the verge of losing five of their players to retirement.

    Australia is a weaker side, that is granted. But one sparrow doesn't make a summer. Australia has only beaten India in a series once in India since the 1969-70 series and that was in 2004. No one expected them to win with a transitional lineup.

    What Australia has in place now is good depth that will allow them to remain near the top, if not at the tip, of the tree. With the exception of a spinner of course.

  • POSTED BY adamkelly_1790 on | October 23, 2008, 5:37 GMT

    I'm a New Zealander and love nothing more than an Aussie defeat. But I fear that we are jumping to conclusions, Australia are a far better team than this and they will soon start adapting to their complete restructure. The sub-continental conditions are tricky to get used to (just look at us!) and this was perhaps just one of those games. What does worry me, however, is that lack of fighting spirit in the final innings which is synonymous with Australia...doesn't that provide something more to ponder? I've never supported Australia but right them off at your peril, if anyone will come back strong it will be them. Congratulations India, but your next attempt must have 0% complacency

  • POSTED BY rohanbala on | October 23, 2008, 6:28 GMT

    The media seems to have got "worked up" after India defeated Australia in the Mohali Test.. "One Swallow does not make a Summer".. Just because India won the recent Test by a big margin, there has been a chorus of voices all over saying that the Australian team is not longer invincible.. Will such voices be raised against the Indian team, if the Bangladesh team wins two Test matches in a row against India? Its plain silly stuff to say this.. I am sure, the Australians will give a fitting reply very soon.

  • POSTED BY guptavipulv on | October 23, 2008, 6:45 GMT

    I would say that the era of one sided matches , series concerning Australia is over now. Even if they are not able to retain the pole position as they had retained in the past , they would still be one of the top contenders. Whatever happens I feel that we will witness more closely fought matches and that will always be good for the game.

  • POSTED BY Wideleg.Byes on | October 23, 2008, 6:58 GMT

    It is foolish to think that this Australian team is over and done with. If you need any proof, then wait for the next two tests, where India will be brought back to earth and perhaps be buried as well.

  • POSTED BY Rusty_1 on | October 23, 2008, 7:02 GMT

    I think you only have to look at the current players & ask the question - Which of them are top class performers & will be around in 3-5 years? Ricky, Clarke, Hussey, Roy, Lee & Clark. That's a pretty good number of current players. Plus you have Jacques, Johnson, Tait, Katich & Haddin - all good performers that will only get better with time & experience (with the exception of Katich who is almost there, just needs to cement his spot). Also, coming through the ranks are DJ Hussey, Marsh, White and a host of other quality players from the domestic comp. Only thing lacking is a quality spinner. I personally believe that they need to choose one spinner now & persist with him for a year. Someone with the right temperament to get smacked around like Warne did at the start of his career. Will Australia dominate like they used to? No,probably not for another couple of years, but I am sure that they will retain their number 1 ranking comfortably.Test cricket will just become more interesting!

  • POSTED BY Ozcricketwriter on | October 23, 2008, 7:09 GMT

    I am finding this incredible to read. Australia lost one test. One. Does one test suddenly make Australia weak? Let's be realistic here: barring 1 test series, Australia have always lost in India, because the pitches don't suit. Furthermore, no Australian spinner has ever done well in India, and Australia were stupid to pick a spinner for both matches. Brad Haddin is a decent batsman but a poor choice as wicket keeper (Queensland's Hartley is easily the superior keeper). Why they are leaving out fast bowler Bracken (who they seem to think is a one day specialist) is beyond me. In short, had Australia picked their best team, they would have done a lot better. In saying that, batting second on that pitch was never going to be easy either. This doesn't make Australia bad at all, nor does it make Australia vulnerable. When India can win home AND away against Australia, then they can genuinely say that they are better. For the moment, Australia is still the best.