• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

When did the 'great' West Indies team(s) stop being great?

Dazinho

School Boy/Girl Captain
Evening - and a fantastic Christmas to all of you.

I was watching highlights of the 'Gooch 154' test the other day and this question occurred to me as one worth exploring.

The fact is that the West Indies went unbeaten in overall Test series between 1980 (I should look it up but was that the infamous New Zealand series?) and 1995 when Australia decisively toppled them as the number one side in the world. Even as a teenager there was a mixed feeling of shock that it had actually happened and that it had been coming for at least a good couple of years. Australia had been one scoring shot from taking an unassailable 2-0 lead in the 1992-93 series and there was a sense that the West Indies weren't quite the 'almost unbeatable' force that they were - simultaneously there was a sense that the hard work of the Border years had laid a platform for Australia to take over as 'the team' at the top of international cricket.

In the broad sense there are two teams which make up the West Indies era of dominance, with players like Viv Richards and Gordon Greenidge transcending the two. The 1980s saw the likes of Andy Roberts, Michael Holding and Joel Garner retire but Ambrose, Walsh, Patterson etc emerge neatly to replace them. Viv Richards replaces Clive Lloyd as captain and the likes of Richie Richardson come into the void to continue the seamless transition. An often unsung hero of that era was Jeff Dujon, a great keeper to all that FAST bowling while also averaging more than 30 with the bat and concealing this team's one obvious weakness - a tendency towards bowlers who offered very little with the bat (Marshall excepted) and a long tail.

My recap of the 1991 series, which ended in a 2-2 draw against an England team in transition, made me realise that this was probably the first time it would have been apparent that this West Indies dominance was just starting to wobble slightly. They'd had a scare when England had toured in 1990, but from what I can remember and have seen there seems to have been an 'out of sorts' narrative attached to that lucky escape rather than a 'declining team' narrative - and they had ultimately pulled matches four and five out of the bag to sneak it 2-1. My reason for focusing on 1991 is probably part personal bias (the first series I can remember following really closely) and also the sense that West Indies weren't quite producing the players to field a frightening XI anymore (Phil Simmons and Gus Logie, while decent, weren't up to the level of those they replaced - and I remember the selection of Ian Allen for one of the test matches, who was clearly inferior to the great fast bowlers who'd preceded him, although Ian Bishop was probably a 'trick answer' to this question - arguably the great 'lost' West Indies fast bowler who could have made all the difference.

The years between 1991 and 1995 saw the emergence of Brian Lara (who'd been on that 1991 tour as a teenager) and the unbeaten record just about stayed intact despite a couple of serious wobbles (the 1992-93 series in Australia being the obvious one). The likes of Jimmy Adams, Keith Arthurton and the Benjamins came through, all good international players but carrying neither the elite levels of performance nor the fear factor that both the parts and sum of the parts had across the two great West Indian eras (starting in the second half of the 1970s and continuing until around 1991). They also developed a serious 'opening bat' problem once Gordon Greenidge retired and there was a sense that they could be got at. There was a similar problem in the department of wicketkeeper as Dujon proved to be an exceptional talent who was almost impossible to replace. Nothing 'wrong' with Junior Murray or David Williams but they just weren't on the same level.

Apologies to anyone who didn't find that interesting but I'd appreciate the thoughts of anyone who did. Many Thanks.
 

Fuller Pilch

Hall of Fame Member
Evening - and a fantastic Christmas to all of you.

I was watching highlights of the 'Gooch 154' test the other day and this question occurred to me as one worth exploring.

The fact is that the West Indies went unbeaten in overall Test series between 1980 (I should look it up but was that the infamous New Zealand series?) and 1995 when Australia decisively toppled them as the number one side in the world. Even as a teenager there was a mixed feeling of shock that it had actually happened and that it had been coming for at least a good couple of years. Australia had been one scoring shot from taking an unassailable 2-0 lead in the 1992-93 series and there was a sense that the West Indies weren't quite the 'almost unbeatable' force that they were - simultaneously there was a sense that the hard work of the Border years had laid a platform for Australia to take over as 'the team' at the top of international cricket.

In the broad sense there are two teams which make up the West Indies era of dominance, with players like Viv Richards and Gordon Greenidge transcending the two. The 1980s saw the likes of Andy Roberts, Michael Holding and Joel Garner retire but Ambrose, Walsh, Patterson etc emerge neatly to replace them. Viv Richards replaces Clive Lloyd as captain and the likes of Richie Richardson come into the void to continue the seamless transition. An often unsung hero of that era was Jeff Dujon, a great keeper to all that FAST bowling while also averaging more than 30 with the bat and concealing this team's one obvious weakness - a tendency towards bowlers who offered very little with the bat (Marshall excepted) and a long tail.

My recap of the 1991 series, which ended in a 2-2 draw against an England team in transition, made me realise that this was probably the first time it would have been apparent that this West Indies dominance was just starting to wobble slightly. They'd had a scare when England had toured in 1990, but from what I can remember and have seen there seems to have been an 'out of sorts' narrative attached to that lucky escape rather than a 'declining team' narrative - and they had ultimately pulled matches four and five out of the bag to sneak it 2-1. My reason for focusing on 1991 is probably part personal bias (the first series I can remember following really closely) and also the sense that West Indies weren't quite producing the players to field a frightening XI anymore (Phil Simmons and Gus Logie, while decent, weren't up to the level of those they replaced - and I remember the selection of Ian Allen for one of the test matches, who was clearly inferior to the great fast bowlers who'd preceded him, although Ian Bishop was probably a 'trick answer' to this question - arguably the great 'lost' West Indies fast bowler who could have made all the difference.

The years between 1991 and 1995 saw the emergence of Brian Lara (who'd been on that 1991 tour as a teenager) and the unbeaten record just about stayed intact despite a couple of serious wobbles (the 1992-93 series in Australia being the obvious one). The likes of Jimmy Adams, Keith Arthurton and the Benjamins came through, all good international players but carrying neither the elite levels of performance nor the fear factor that both the parts and sum of the parts had across the two great West Indian eras (starting in the second half of the 1970s and continuing until around 1991). They also developed a serious 'opening bat' problem once Gordon Greenidge retired and there was a sense that they could be got at. There was a similar problem in the department of wicketkeeper as Dujon proved to be an exceptional talent who was almost impossible to replace. Nothing 'wrong' with Junior Murray or David Williams but they just weren't on the same level.

Apologies to anyone who didn't find that interesting but I'd appreciate the thoughts of anyone who did. Many Thanks.
Australia won that 1995 series 2-1 (4 tests). I wouldn't call that "decisively toppled".

There were also times in the mid to late 80s when Pakistan and NZ were pushing them.
 

Dazinho

School Boy/Girl Captain
It is interesting that though that they stopped being a great ODI side much earlier - after winning in 1975 and 1979 and being upset in the final in 1983, the Windies have only ever made one CWC semifinal (1996).
how much of that is down to the absence of a genuine all-rounder in their midst? just target the fifth bowler and long tail...
 

Dazinho

School Boy/Girl Captain
Maybe it was. They often used Viv and then later Carl Hooper as the 5th bowler.
I remember Boycott tormenting Hooper's 'lollipop bowling' on television.

Interesting that in their glory years they never replicated Sobers, despite producing an avalanche of superb players in one discipline...
 

Slifer

International Captain
The 1997 series away to Pakistan when WI lost 3-0, 2 games by an innings and the third by 10 wkts was when I knew WI were officially done being a top team. Up til then, they were pretty competitive in all prior series in the 90s, only ever losing to Australia by one test. But in that 1997 for the first time since Australia 75-76 WI were completely destroyed and they had a near full strength team. Wi continued being hard to beat at home but yeah that's the point for me.
 

Migara

International Coach
It is interesting that though that they stopped being a great ODI side much earlier - after winning in 1975 and 1979 and being upset in the final in 1983, the Windies have only ever made one CWC semifinal (1996).
They had an obvious weakness against spin. In test matches with nice defence and tenacity, it would have been overcomed. But in ODIs with the pace of the game it was much difficult. Mid to late 80s pitches became slower, sub continent became more important in ODIs, and the emergence of the first great ODI spinner (Qadir) occured. Then with steady supply of great attacking limited over spin bowling there was not much of a chance for WI. If you get their 1975 team and put it against a sub continental (Pakistan or SL) team of mid to late 90s they would struggle big time with spin and reverse swing being alien to them.
 
Last edited:

Migara

International Coach
The 1997 series away to Pakistan when WI lost 3-0, 2 games by an innings and the third by 10 wkts was when I knew WI were officially done being a top team. Up til then, they were pretty competitive in all prior series in the 90s, only ever losing to Australia by one test. But in that 1997 for the first time since Australia 75-76 WI were completely destroyed and they had a near full strength team. Wi continued being hard to beat at home but yeah that's the point for me.
This was the time Pakistani bowling was at it's destructive best, elements using the characteristics that WI batsmen hated most. Pakistan had three or four very quick bowlers, who bowled up to the bat, swung it. Then they had two world class spin bowlers in Saqlain and Mushtaq. That is probably the best all round bowling attack that has been fielded with possible exception of Australia. So more than WI declining it is a team hitting them where they dislike the most.
 

thierry henry

International Coach
I started watching cricket in 1992 and at no time were the West Indies ever the top team in my recollection of watching cricket. Throughout the 90s there always seemed to be a number of iffy players in their XI. Might be that realistically by the early 90s they were no longer the best, but it took a few more years for them to be very decisively toppled.
 

Top