Australia (1995-2007) Vs. West Indies (1974-1986)?

[Howe_zat]

Jake if David Gower thought it was difficult to score against them then he wasn't too far off the mark.

Sure. I don't even disagree with him. I just think we should take his opinion here with a touch of healthy scepticism, given that almost every former player in the media will talk up the cricket from their own era.

 

[Ikki]

If you're going to compare the bowling stats on face value then at least be consistent and do the same for the batting stats. You'll find in terms of averages the Aussies are quite a way ahead. However, there is a bit more to it than that, and the same goes for the bowling. In the end, I'd say the WIndies bowling is a bit cheaper because Australia has Lee. The difference between SRs is pretty negligible really.

 

[smash84]

Actually comparing straight averages was not the point and after posting I realized that but the point was that the bowling attack of the WI is quite exceptional even for its own era as weell (and maybe for most other ones too but can't say that for sure)

Secondly I do agree that the Aussie bowling attack does suffer on account of Lee as well as somewhat on account of Dizzy as well (relatively speaking of course).

Also the WI pacers do SR about and over quicker than the Aussies which is not completely insignificant I should think but perhaps not quite as important

 

[stephen]

The problem is the question of whether we're pitting the players of the era against each other or the actual teams of the era against each other.

Because the best Australian players were:

Hayden
Langer
Ponting
Martyn
Waugh
Hussey
Gilchrist (wk)
Warne
Gillespie
Clark
McGrath

Though this team never actually played together.

Similarly the strongest bowling attack that the WIndies fielded were only ever together for one or two tests. Most of the time the "four pronged pace attack" had three top bowlers and one guy who looks a lot more like Bichel ability-wise than Marshall.

 

[BlazeDragon]

The problem is the question of whether we're pitting the players of the era against each other or the actual teams of the era against each other.

How about we do both?

Combined XI and both teams at their peak.

 

[BlazeDragon]

What I think ultimately it comes down to is the aura of invincibility that WI had (and is mentioned so often by cricketers of that generation) which Australia could not quite match. When WI became no.1 in 1979, they remained unbeaten for 15 years. That's unbelievable. During Australia's reign from 1995-2007, they still lost four series.

Didn't we already accomplish on Ikki's post that Australia faced tougher attacks?

With Australia, you felt that when faced with difficult conditions or sustained pressure, they could crack, particularly under Steve Waugh's captaincy.

Funny you would say that. A lot of people argue that Australia under Steve Waugh's captaincy was the best team of all time in cricket.

 

[smash84]

yes you may argue that under Steve Waugh the team may be argued to be best ever but so can under Clive Lloyd and under Viv. The WI never lost a series for 15 years. That is just plain outstanding while Australia did lose a few. On the flip side the WI didn't win as many as Aus did (I think)

 

[BlazeDragon]

Australia under Punter was the strongest side at their peak IMO but I was just throwing it out there that suggesting the Oz were looking like they would "crack under pressure" during Steve Waugh's captaincy is ridiculous.

 

[subshakerz]

Didn't we already accomplish on Ikki's post that Australia faced tougher attacks?

No, as I pointed out, Australia period of dominance coincided with the decline/retirement of the major fast bowlers in the last 90s, early 2000s. They attacks that Australia faced when they lost to India in 97/2001, Sri Lanka in 99 and England in 2005 were not tougher than the ones in the 80s.

Funny you would say that. A lot of people argue that Australia under Steve Waugh's captaincy was the best team of all time in cricket.

Waugh was quite the determined captain, but didn't seem to have any plan B when things went awry. Though to be fair, Lloyd was known for any tactical flair.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Australia as no.1 team in the world lost to India in 1997 and 2001, and lost to Sri Lanka in 99. They eventually won in 2004 and 2005. Also, nearly lost at home to New Zealand in 2000. When WI became no.1 in 1979, they beat India, Pakistan pretty easily at first try.

You're drawing a long bow there...yes, in the scorebook it looks like we nearly lost. But NZ were in bad shape in the first two matches before rain intervened.

I picked Australia for this, but it would depend on conditions and so on in my opinion. Could see it being a close series.

 

[subshakerz]

You're drawing a long bow there...yes, in the scorebook it looks like we nearly lost. But NZ were in bad shape in the first two matches before rain intervened.

I picked Australia for this, but it would depend on conditions and so on in my opinion. Could see it being a close series.

This was in response to a comment that Australia blasted everybody at home and didn't come close to losing. They came pretty close to losing against NZ even though they dominated the first two tests.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Out of curiosity, what were these great attacks the WI apparently faced in the 80s?

 

[smash84]

well from the top of my head.........Imran, Qadir, Sarfaraz/(noob)wasim.......kapil + nothing, Hadlee + something, Botham + ???, Lillee + Thommo (past his best)

 

[G.I.Joe]

That's my point, tbh. The 80's was generally filled with teams with one great bowler + a bunch of nobodies. As far as attacks go, the Australian team faced better ones, IMO. South Africa, India, Sri Lanka, Pakistan of Australia's time were better attacks than their counterparts in the 80s.

 

[smash84]

yes but the real aussie dominant era started from 99 onwards I think and that is where all the good bowling attacks had gone pretty much downhill. WI, Pak, Donald

 

[Ikki]

No, as I pointed out, Australia period of dominance coincided with the decline/retirement of the major fast bowlers in the last 90s, early 2000s. They attacks that Australia faced when they lost to India in 97/2001, Sri Lanka in 99 and England in 2005 were not tougher than the ones in the 80s.

The above is factually wrong. Stop repeating it.


1995 - Windies; Walsh, Ambrose and the Benjamins
1995 - Pakistan: Wasim, Waqar and Mushtaq
1996 - Windies: Walsh, Ambrose, Bishop and Benjamin
1997 - S.Africa: Donald, Pollock, Klusener and Kallis
1997 - S.Africa: Donald, Pollock, Klusener and Kallis
1998 - Pakistan: Wasim, Akhtar, Saqlain and Mushtaq

This was in response to a comment that Australia blasted everybody at home and didn't come close to losing. They came pretty close to losing against NZ even though they dominated the first two tests.

Who claimed that?

 

[Ikki]

yes but the real aussie dominant era started from 99 onwards I think and that is where all the good bowling attacks had gone pretty much downhill. WI, Pak, Donald

The 1995 series where we beat the WIndies is when most people consider it started.

 

[robelinda]

For sure.

 

[Outswinger@Pace]

Let's be clear that we are talking about the 80s only. Lillee and Thommo were never a world-beating pair in that period.

Botham + ???,

Willis, Dilley, Botham, Foster and Emburey. Pretty good attack, IMHO.

Lillee + Thommo (past his best)

Lillee + Hogg + Lawson (early 80s)

Hogg + Lawson + Rackemann (later McDermott, Hughes and Bruce Reid) of mid and late 80s


These attacks, although not even comparable with the West Indies, could pretty much hold their own otherwise. For a very short period, Kapil, C.Sharma, Maninder Singh et. al. was a semi-decent attack.

 

[smash84]

Let's be clear that we are talking about the 80s only. Lillee and Thommo were never a world-beating pair in that period.



Willis, Dilley, Botham, Foster and Emburey. Pretty good attack, IMHO.




Lillee + Hogg + Lawson (early 80s)

Hogg + Lawson + Rackemann (later McDermott, Hughes and Bruce Reid) of mid and late 80s


These attacks, although not even comparable with the West Indies, could pretty much hold their own otherwise. For a very short period, Kapil, C.Sharma, Maninder Singh et. al. was a semi-decent attack.

Yeah I had forgotten all those names. Some pretty decent names in there