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

[Fuller Pilch]

When Walsh & Ambrose retired.

No, that's when they started being a very poor side. They weren't still great in 99/00 when NZ whitewashed them

 

[Prince EWS]

They weren't still great in 99/00 when NZ whitewashed them

Yes they were, that's why Mathew Sinclair's debut double ton against an ATG bowling lineup was the greatest innings of all time.

 

[bagapath]

when richards, greenidge, Marshall and dujon retired together they lost their greatness, in 1991

with haynes already gone, when richardson retired and bishop was weakened by injuries, they were not even a good team anymore 1996 onwards

 

[Salamuddin]

They stopped being a great team after 87 when garner and Gomes left and stopped being a very good one in 1991 when greenidge viv , Marshall and Dujon all left. Probably stopped being a good one and just became and ok to average side after 1996 when both Haynes and Richardson had gone and bishop had suffered another stress fracture.

and of course they became poor in 2001 once Ambrose and Walsh had gone.

 

[subshakerz]

WI peaked from 79 to 85. They slightly degraded by 1986 when Lloyd, Holding and Garner had retired.

The real reason for WI decline was more due to batting after that. Haynes, Greenidge and Viv retired and only Lara came as a world class batsman. Even though Marshall had a slight dip 89 onwards, Ambrose and Bishop emerged to ensure their pace engine was still running. Viv declined after 1988 and WI became more beatable.

 

[Slifer]

WI peaked from 79 to 85. They slightly degraded by 1986 when Lloyd, Holding and Garner had retired.

The real reason for WI decline was more due to batting after that. Haynes, Greenidge and Viv retired and only Lara came as a world class batsman. Even though Marshall had a slight dip 89 onwards, Ambrose and Bishop emerged to ensure their pace engine was still running. Viv declined after 1988 and WI became more beatable.

All very true. Up until Ambrose retired in 2000 or thereabouts, the bowling was still very good, great imo but the batting was woeful. Another thing often also overlooked was with the retirements of Viv and co, WI also lost worldclass FIELDERS. Such an overlooked skill in cricket but imagine if Dujon was keeping in 95 when Browne dropped that Dolly from Steve Waugh. We all know what Waugh went on to do.

 

[ankitj]

This is such a great thread to read.

 

[andruid]

WI peaked from 79 to 85. They slightly degraded by 1986 when Lloyd, Holding and Garner had retired.

The real reason for WI decline was more due to batting after that. Haynes, Greenidge and Viv retired and only Lara came as a world class batsman. Even though Marshall had a slight dip 89 onwards, Ambrose and Bishop emerged to ensure their pace engine was still running. Viv declined after 1988 and WI became more beatable.

Surely Shiv Chanderpaul was world class? Their batting did look not entirely finicky with the bat when him and Sarwan patrolled the middle overs.

They also had good showings from Chris Gayle periodically and Dwayne Bravo, and a couple false dawn (scores dazzling century early in career before going on to average under 30 with the bat) type batsmen. Their bowling especially from 2002ish to 2009 in tests was a joke.

I would say that they were still occasionally competent at this point. The rise of T20 and clowning around from the WICB on professionalising the game I believe has mortally wounded their test team

 

[subshakerz]

Surely Shiv Chanderpaul was world class? Their batting did look not entirely finicky with the bat when him and Sarwan patrolled the middle overs.

They also had good showings from Chris Gayle periodically and Dwayne Bravo, and a couple false dawn (scores dazzling century early in career before going on to average under 30 with the bat) type batsmen. Their bowling especially from 2002ish to 2009 in tests was a joke.

I would say that they were still occasionally competent at this point. The rise of T20 and clowning around from the WICB on professionalising the game I believe has mortally wounded their test team

Chanderpaul wasnt worldclass until a phase in the 2000s by which point Ambrose and Walsh had retired. WI still had the best pace attack in the world in the early 90s.

Just to emphasize on WI's batting being the cause of their decline, in the famous 95 series they lost at home to Aus, they failed to score 300 even once in the series.

 

[Slifer]

Chanderpaul wasnt worldclass until a phase in the 2000s by which point Ambrose and Walsh had retired. WI still had the best pace attack in the world in the early 90s.

Just to emphasize on WI's batting being the cause of their decline, in the famous 95 series they lost at home to Aus, they failed to score 300 even once in the series.

And when WI were absolutely mauled in RSA, for the most part, Ambrose and Walsh had very a good series and it's not as if RSA piled on the runs. But the batting...yikes !!

 

[subshakerz]

I think WI were legitimately still the no.1 test team in the world in the early 90s, having beaten Australia home and away and drawn away in Pakistan and beaten them at home conclusively. They still had a relatively good batting lineup of Lara, Haynes, Richie Richardson and Jimmy Adams (who was exceptional for his first 15 tests or so) and Ambrose, Walsh and peak Bishop.

Haynes retired in 94 and Richardson in 95. Jimmy Adams became mediocre and Lara entered his inconsistent phase from 96 onwards to 2001. Bishop was injured and didnt return as the same bowler. No wonder WI declined so rapidly 95 onwards.

 

[bagapath]

Shows what a great team sport cricket is. Even with an all time great batsman (in Lara) and two all time great bowlers (in Ambrose and Walsh and a very good Chanderpaul and Bishop being available, not to mention a perfectly serviceable Hooper) they were beaten left right and centre from the Pak whitewash onwards.

Puts the consistent success of the Lloyd-Richards and Waugh-Ponting teams in better perspective.

Makes it clear how important it was to have Gomes and Martyn and M Waugh and Richardson besides the obvious McGrath/ Richards/ Warne/ Marshall.

 

[Slifer]

Shows what a great team sport cricket is. Even with an all time great batsman (in Lara) and two all time great bowlers (in Ambrose and Walsh and a very good Chanderpaul and Bishop being available, not to mention a perfectly serviceable Hooper) they were beaten left right and centre from the Pak whitewash onwards.

Puts the consistent success of the Lloyd-Richards and Waugh-Ponting teams in better perspective.

Makes it clear how important it was to have Gomes and Martyn and M Waugh and Richardaon besides the obvious McGrath/ Richards/ Warne/ Marshall.

Imo the most critical player we lost was Ian Bishop. Prior to injury, he was at Pat Cummins level then afterwards he was not remotely close. Imagine the 95 series, 96-97 in oz, wi in rsa etc with a prime Bishop. Not saying we would've won all those series, but I doubt we'd have been destroyed in rsa and Pakistan like we were. Notice i said prime Bishop because he did play in the 97 rout in Pakistan but by then he was a shell of his former self.

 

[Bolo.]

I was also thinking Bishops injury marked the end of greatness. Which is a funny way to time it for someone who had so little impact on WI cricket as a whole. But with him playing they had an ATG pace attack even after Marshalls retirement... early 90s Bishop and Ambrose were practically an ATG pace attack by themselves, plus Walsh. Lara, Ambrose and Adams fell away (a bit or more) at basically the same time, and they had the 4 God tier players drop down in quality simultaneously, with mostly spuds coming through.

 

[subshakerz]

I was also thinking Bishops injury marked the end of greatness. Which is a funny way to time it for someone who had so little impact on WI cricket as a whole. But with him playing they had an ATG pace attack even after Marshalls retirement... early 90s Bishop and Ambrose were practically an ATG pace attack by themselves, plus Walsh. Lara, Ambrose and Adams fell away (a bit or more) at basically the same time, and they had the 4 God tier players drop down in quality simultaneously, with mostly spuds coming through.

Peak Bishop lasted until 93 and while WI were the no.1 team in the world they were no longer the ATG side they were before. Even when Bishop returned he was relatively speaking a very good 3rd pacer though not as lethal.

I think its useful to remember that around the mid-90s, WI, Aus and Pakistan were jostling for the no. 1 position, with WI having the clear edge by 93. By 95 though, Aus had dethroned WI and Australia quickly defeated SA and Pakistan who were the other contenders.

WI went from a no. 1 side to a mid/bottom tier team in just a few short years despite having two worldclass bowlers. It was mainly a batting failure.

 

[subshakerz]

Imo the most critical player we lost was Ian Bishop. Prior to injury, he was at Pat Cummins level then afterwards he was not remotely close. Imagine the 95 series, 96-97 in oz, wi in rsa etc with a prime Bishop. Not saying we would've won all those series, but I doubt we'd have been destroyed in rsa and Pakistan like we were. Notice i said prime Bishop because he did play in the 97 rout in Pakistan but by then he was a shell of his former self.

Honestly 1-2 more batsmen of Haynes/Richardson quality could have kept WI afloat in the late 90s and maybe in the top three. They totally depended on flashes of brilliance from Lara. They didnt give Ambrose and Walsh enough runs to play with.

 

[Slifer]

Honestly 1-2 more batsmen of Haynes/Richardson quality could have kept WI afloat in the late 90s and maybe in the top three. They totally depended on flashes of brilliance from Lara. They didnt give Ambrose and Walsh enough runs to play with.

Understatement if there ever was one...

 

[wpdavid]

They stopped being a great team after 87 when garner and Gomes left and stopped being a very good one in 1991 when greenidge viv , Marshall and Dujon all left.

I think this is pretty fair. Looking at this from an English pov, peak WI would not have struggled to see off the England side in 1990 and would have won the 1991 series in England, despite Gooch's heroics at Leeds. Apart from the personnel, guys like Richards and Greenidge were not quite what they had been when they were younger.

 

[bagapath]

Understatement if there ever was one...

Also... Playing Ambrose and Walsh alone would anyway be like having only McGrath and Warne... pure greatness, yes... but to turn that duo into a winning combination you need two out of Gillespie/ Lee/ Reiffel/ McGill/ Kasprowicz/ Fleming to round off an attack. Without such quality players for support, no opposition can be bowled by two greats alone regularly.

I am thinking Hadlee and Murali are not normal human beings. No way.

 

[wpdavid]

Also... Playing Ambrose and Walsh alone would anyway be like having only McGrath and Warne... pure greatness, yes... but to turn that duo into a winning combination you need two out of Gillespie/ Lee/ Reiffel/ McGill/ Kasprowicz/ Fleming to round off an attack. Without such quality players for support, no opposition can be bowled by two greats alone regularly.

The matches in 2000 at Lord's and, to a lesser extent Leeds, are classic cases of this. Give Ambrose and Walsh support at Lord's and WI go two up and the series result is probably reversed. Without checking, maybe the whitewash in SA too. I vaguely recall SA's lower order keeping them competitive after they had lost early wickets, presumably to Ambrose and Walsh