The other Steve Smith question - Who would you try and get him out ?

[Slifer]

Probably that time you said Anderson would have been the same as Hilfenhaus if he was Australian



Sorry missed the part where you said "in wi".

but you keep bringing up the 1 series Aus lost to England as if somehow proves anything, which it doesn't

Imo that English series proved that Australia were vulnerable to aggressive and relentless pace.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Lol Burgey’s 9/10 comment is obviously rubbish. Doesn’t even need to be challenged it’s that warped.

I don't think so tbh. Maybe 9/10 is a bit much but it's not crazy to claim that 00s Aus were a significantly better team than 80s WI. They did have quite a bit more going for them.

Imo that English series proved that Australia were vulnerable to aggressive and relentless pace.

From this comment I'm not sure that you even saw any of the series or know much about it

 

[Slifer]

I love how I don't even post for a page and yet get brought up as being completely biased. Perhaps this is for the time I "only" rated Tendulkar as a moderate upgrade on Mark Waugh as an ODI opener. Such bias.

Maybe it's because suggesting that Warne and Murali were very similar with perhaps Warne edging him when conditions were taken into account. Such controversy.

But I'm apparently super biased. At least I'm not as bad as Ikki.

Nobody is as bad as that Ikki character. Good grief !!!

 

[morgieb]

He's probably gotten worse since he stopped talking about cricket, too.

 

[srbhkshk]

Australia didn't win 9/10 even against the teams they did play against, WI were a fair bit superior to all those teams.

 

[Adders]

Lol @ stephen thinking he has balanced opinions and is not biased. Dude, you're the most one eyed poster here......just own it mate and wear that monocle with pride.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Australia didn't win 9/10 even against the teams they did play against, WI were a fair bit superior to all those teams.

heh very good point

no one really beats anyone 9/10 times with any regularity, except maybe the Ashes from 89-05 (not including genuine minnows)

 

[jimmy101]

As an Aussie I will be the first one to admit that Australian cricket fans are terribly biased. Most of them only watch cricket featuring the Australian side & for the most part ignore performances by opposition players.

Ftr, Indian fans are pretty damn biased as well. But I guess it's just an ebb to the match the flow of the discerning Australian cricket fans. Good times.

 

[Slifer]

I don't think so tbh. Maybe 9/10 is a bit much but it's not crazy to claim that 00s Aus were a significantly better team than 80s WI. They did have quite a bit more going for them.



From this comment I'm not sure that you even saw any of the series or know much about it

Significantly better?? Really ?? How so? Because of warne or because of Gilchrist? As far as my credentials are concerned, my cricket viewing goes back to the early 80s. I saw all of the 05 ashes and England were probably fortunate that McGrath got injured. But McGrath being injured had nothing to do with the fact that outside of langer, no oz batsman did much during the series (ie average over 40). I'll concede that Australia did some pretty unprecedented things in their time at the top ('95 til about '07.)Top amongst them were white washing literally every team. But especially white washing SL away and RSA in RSA. Oh and winning 16 tests in a row twice. WI did some pretty gnarly stuff as well: not losing a series for 15 years, losing one solitary test at home in the 80s. Winning 11 tests in a row. Going 27 tests undefeated etc.
Someone mentioned wi never faced a team as strong as 2000 Australia, likewise Australia never faced a team or pace attack like that from 80s WI. I shudder to think what would happen to 2000 Australia playing under 80s conditions without helmets or bouncer restrictions.

Let me just make it clear that dont think either team would dominate the other, unlike that Burgey character. Under 2000 conditions in oz, wi would probably lose. But under 80s conditions in the wi, oz would also lose. Neutral location; it really depends tbh.

 

[Chrish]

I reckon WI team would slaughter Aus in unlimited bouncer era where 90 overs a day rule wasn’t enforced.

Aus team would be favorite if they were to play right now as I don’t think Wi can operate with 4 men pace attack.

 

[Slifer]

As an Aussie I will be the first one to admit that Australian cricket fans are terribly biased. Most of them only watch cricket featuring the Australian side & for the most part ignore performances by opposition players.

Ftr, Indian fans are pretty damn biased as well. But I guess it's just an ebb to the match the flow of the discerning Australian cricket fans. Good times.

Tbh for the most part I've found oz supporters to be pretty reasonable. As far as wi are concerned, they seem to think very highly of us. Australia is by far the best cricket country on earth and have produced the uncontested greatest cricketers on earth, no arguments there. Let's not let a few 'bad' apples sway our opinion of oz fans.

 

[Slifer]

I reckon WI team would slaughter Aus in unlimited bouncer era where 90 overs a day rule wasn’t enforced.

Aus team would be favorite if they were to play right now as I don’t think Wi can operate with 4 men pace attack.

Fair comment

 

[TheJediBrah]

Significantly better?? Really ?? How so? Because of warne or because of Gilchrist? As far as my credentials are concerned, my cricket viewing goes back to the early 80s. I saw all of the 05 ashes and England were probably fortunate that McGrath got injured. But McGrath being injured had nothing to do with the fact that outside of langer, no oz batsman did much during the series (ie average over 40). I'll concede that Australia did some pretty unprecedented things in their time at the top ('95 til about '07.)Top amongst them were white washing literally every team. But especially white washing SL away and RSA in RSA. Oh and winning 16 tests in a row twice. WI did some pretty gnarly stuff as well: not losing a series for 15 years, losing one solitary test at home in the 80s. Winning 11 tests in a row. Going 27 tests undefeated etc.
Someone mentioned wi never faced a team as strong as 2000 Australia, likewise Australia never faced a team or pace attack like that from 80s WI. I shudder to think what would happen to 2000 Australia playing under 80s conditions without helmets or bouncer restrictions.

Let me just make it clear that dont think either team would dominate the other, unlike that Burgey character. Under 2000 conditions in oz, wi would probably lose. But under 80s conditions in the wi, oz would also lose. Neutral location; it really depends tbh.

I'm not saying that they are significantly better, just that it wouldn't be crazy to make that claim. Especially if you believe that standards of cricket improved a lot in those 20-30 years, which is not an unfair assumption given the increasing professionalism. WI certainly have a stronger pace attack but Aus having Gilchrist and Warne, who are lightyears ahead of their WI counterparts (when applicable) makes a big difference. Aus have stronger batting in general too.

I don't know why imagining Aus of the 00s playing under 80s conditions though is a relevant point though. You could just as easily say that 80s WI in 00s conditions would have been much less effective. Neither are particularly relevant.

 

[Slifer]

Huh?? I clearly stated at the end of my post that wi playing in 00s conditions would probably lose to Australia in Australia. I emphasize in Australia because I highly doubt either team would beat the other away from home. And bringing up the different playing conditions IS relevant because the op by that Burgey guy said oz would win anywhere in any era.....

 

[Chrish]

http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/cri...lia-1995-2007-vs-west-indies-1974-1986-a.html

 

[jimmy101]

Perhaps the best comparison might be between Australia 2000 & West Indies 1984. Both sides were undefeated during those respective years.

Another challenger could very well be the current Indian side, what with Pujara, Kohli, Ashwin & the rise of Bumrah really shaking things up.

A few other great teams you could throw into the mix would be Australia 1920, Australia 1948, England 1954 & South Africa 1970 imo.

 

[Slifer]

http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/cri...lia-1995-2007-vs-west-indies-1974-1986-a.html

Damn I'm old. Had a glimpse at my posts....

 

[Slifer]

Perhaps the best comparison might be between Australia 2000 & West Indies 1984. Both sides were undefeated during those respective years.

Another challenger could very well be the current Indian side, what with Pujara, Kohli, Ashwin & the rise of Bumrah really shaking things up.

A few other great teams you could throw into the mix would be Australia 1920, Australia 1948, England 1954 & South Africa 1970 imo.

This current india team is unbeatable at home imo. The real test comes down to how the teams would fare away. Imo Australia 00 >= WI 84 > india current...away

 

[Chrish]

Damn I'm old. Had a glimpse at my posts....

I do read old threads from time to time and yeah bro, you been around for a while

 

[Slifer]

I do read old threads from time to time and yeah bro, you been around for a while

Lmao. True