Best team since Waugh/ Ponting’s Australia?

[sunilz]

Sometimes I think the regular Indian posters can be excessively one-eyed even by CW standards but then you see a thread like this and realise they are actually nowhere near as bad as they could be

Yeah no one can be one eyed as regular Aussie posters.
Claim that IND faced only Brad Williams in 2003/04 but forget that Australia faced Tendulkar as the 2nd best bowler in 2001 series and still lost.

 

[GotSpin]

The

Yeah no one can be one eyed as regular Aussie posters.
Claim that IND faced only Brad Williams in 2003/04 but forget that Australia faced Tendulkar as the 2nd best bowler in 2001 series and still lost.

The second best bowler in that series was the umpiring actually

 

[sunilz]

The second best bowler in that series was the umpiring actually

Is that why AUS has lost 6 test series at home since DRS was introduced?

 

[Test fan]

The answer is clearly South Africa in terms of an all-round team for all conditions. 9 years unbeaten away from home is too impressive a record to ignore, far more than India's home record.

Once Philander joined their team, they were much stronger at home as well until Kallis retired and Australia beat them in 2014.

India's batting lineup was far too collapse prone in swinging conditions. The batting core of Smith, Amla, Kallis and ABD were superb in all virtually all countries.

Losing series at home is worse than away lose .how many home series were Smith team lost to England and Australia and how many they drawn at home ?? Oh wait they don't even win a series at home vs Australia and England. They were somehow managed to escaped a drawn series vs India in 2010 .

 

[TheJediBrah]

The answer is clearly South Africa in terms of an all-round team for all conditions. 9 years unbeaten away from home is too impressive a record to ignore, far more than India's home record.

Impressive for sure but they also lost at home a lot more than they should have. Weird statistical quirk

 

[subshakerz]

Looking solely at the results rather than judging the individuals involved, Kohli’s India team is undoubtedly the most statistically successful team over a five year period apart from the great Windies teams (who did for three five year periods) and Aussie team (who did it for two five year periods).

I don’t think that’s particularly disputable although the gap between the top two and third is wide.

I also think the context supports the statistics - historically dominant at home and able to win meaningfully wherever the play. Beating a very strong Aussie side this year says a lotS

Therefore, to conclude the Smith RSA team is better is to believe cricketing standards have fallen off precipitously. Which I don’t.

I also think the talk of the India middle order belies the ATG great performance of the bowling attack collectively over the past few years. This is pretty unprecedented statistically - only the best West Indies teams have come close.

that’s why the team is a clear number three statistically with a huge gap between the top two.

I say statistically because there are teams who are better when you compare players head to head (Smith’s RSA, Pakistani in the 1990s) but the only thing that matters is results and here the Indian team is clearly ahead of the competitors

The quality of sides that Kohli's India have faced pales in comparison to the ones SA faced, except for in SA in 2018 which they lost.

South Africa had to vie against Australian, Indian and England sides that were all no.1 teams at the time.

 

[sunilz]

The quality of sides that Kohli's India have faced pales in comparison to the ones SA faced, except for in SA in 2018 which they lost.

South Africa had to vie against Australian, Indian and England sides that were all no.1 teams at the time.

So why couldn't SA win even 1 Test series against Indian side ?

 

[Kilowatt]

Where would New Zealand fit in this debate.

Especially after their upcoming home series loss to Bangladesh. Surely that cancels their 'WTC finals' win.

 

[honestbharani]

South Africa had to vie against Australian, Indian and England sides that were all no.1 teams at the time.

By that logic, the Aussie of the noughties were useless coz they beat no one else who was #1 at that time.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Some SENA fan's cricketing IQ are lower than my maid .it's wired how they compare team based on at own rather than reality .

Somehow being completely incomprehensible makes this guy's twisted view even funnier

 

[subshakerz]

Losing series at home is worse than away lose .how many home series were Smith team lost to England and Australia and how many they drawn at home ?? Oh wait they don't even win a series a home vs Australia and England. They were somehow managed to escaped a drawn series vs India in 2010 .

During SA's peak under Smith from 2008 to 2014 they only lost at home twice to Australia and the second one was when Kallis had just retired. Both of those series had Mitchell Johnson in God-mode but having watched them, SA still seemed the better side.

So yeah, to me if evaluating if a team is a greater all-round side, I am willing to look past a couple of home losses if the away record is so good for so long.

 

[Salamuddin]

The quality of sides that Kohli's India have faced pales in comparison to the ones SA faced, except for in SA in 2018 which they lost.

South Africa had to vie against Australian, Indian and England sides that were all no.1 teams at the time.

SA faced an ageing India side in 2010 and were unable to beat them over a home and away series.

and the Australian sides they lost to in 2009 and could only only draw to in 2011 at home were a clear step down from the great Aussie side of the 2000s.

 

[sunilz]

So we are being told on CW that

1-1 draw overseas, 2-1 win at home is better than 1-2 loss overseas and 3-0 win at home.

 

[Test fan]

Reminder for SENA fan's -
Smith has 1.83 w/l and Kohli 2.93

 

[subshakerz]

It also hinges on how good India’s next gen seamers are e.g avesh, prasidh

SA faced an ageing India side in 2010 and were unable to beat them over a home and away series.

and the Australian sides they lost to in 2009 and could only only draw to in 2011 at home were a clear step down from the great Aussie side of the 2000s.

That 2010 Indian side wasnt aging yet, they were still at their peak and golden phase. They only really began to degrade after the 2011 World Cup.

The Australian sides were still strong.

And that Strauss side in 2012 they beat was strong as well.

My general point stands, SA had much more competition for the no.1 spot in terms of quality sides than India.

 

[Test fan]

During SA's peak under Smith from 2008 to 2014 they only lost at home twice to Australia and the second one was when Kallis had just retired. Both of those series had Mitchell Johnson in God-mode but having watched them, SA still seemed the better side.

So yeah, to me if evaluating if a team is a greater all-round side, I am willing to look past a couple of home losses if the away record is so good for so long.

You just can't pick & chose as per as your wish .here we are talking about Smith test team vs Virat test team .

 

[subshakerz]

So we are being told on CW that

1-1 draw overseas, 2-1 win at home is better than 1-2 loss overseas and 3-0 win at home.

Depends who you play against obviously.

 

[honestbharani]

They only really began to degrade after the 2011 World Cup

I am sure the entire line up (including the ones who were no part of the WC like Dravid and Laxman) aged immensely in those 3 months between these series.

 

[subshakerz]

You just can't pick & chose as per as your wish .here we are talking about Smith test team vs Virat test team .

I specifically am saying Smith's team from 2008 to 2014 which is after Australia's peak and until Smith's retirement.

 

[TheJediBrah]

During SA's peak under Smith from 2008 to 2014 they only lost at home twice to Australia and the second one was when Kallis had just retired. Both of those series had Mitchell Johnson in God-mode but having watched them, SA still seemed the better side.

Aus were definitely the better side in 2014, and played the better cricket. A lot of Mitchell Johnson in that though tbf. 2009 was on the back of a freak debut series by Phil Hughes which probably made a lot of the difference, not unfair to say the SA team should have won on paper.