Perth: Australia keep harping on the dot balls and maidens they are able to string together against India as a reason for their dominance in the ongoing Test series but statistics are not as conclusive as it would appear.
After the first Test in Melbourne, which India lost by 122 runs, the Indian trio of Zaheer Khan (10), Umesh Yadav (9) and Ishant Sharma (7) sent down 26 maiden overs together. Australians, on the other hand, managed only 22 maiden overs among James Pattinson (8), Peter Siddle (3) and Ben Hilfenhaus (11).
It's only In Sydney where Australians bowled a fair bit of more maiden overs than Indians did.
But then the Indians faced the most difficult bowling conditions of the match on the first morning. Indians bowled only eight maidens when the pitch had turned into a complete featherbed.
Australia, exploiting the lively conditions of the first day, bowled 20 maiden overs.
Thus, after three innings of the two Tests, Indians bowled 30 maiden overs to Australia's 42 run-less overs.
It's not an overwhelming difference of maidens and dot balls as the Australians would like the world to believe. It's the penetration of their fast bowlers which is causing the maximum damage.
But Hilfenhaus clearly is Australia's bowler of the moment. The busy swing bowler has not only claimed 15 wickets at 18.06 average, with two five-wicket hauls, he has also bowled as many as 28 maiden overs from the four Indian innings.
He presently is the bowler who has caused maximum damage in the Indian ranks.
(For updates you can share with your friends, follow IBNLive on Facebook, Twitter, Google+ and Pinterest)



India have been a cut above the rest: Aakash Chopra
Experts back India as favourites to lift Champions Trophy
The whole world is looking at the India-Pakistan tie: Anil Kumble
David Warner fined and suspended for bar brawl 











England test awaits 'chokers' South Africa in CT semi-final
India consolidate top position in ODI rankings
Ball-tampering allegations against England a concern: AB de Villiers
India v Sri Lanka? Oh no, not again




