Best team since Waugh/ Ponting’s Australia?

[sunilz]

Because India has excelled at home bullying. Nobody is arguing that they are a superior side at home. That doesnt make them a stronger team.

So a batsman that averages 60 at home and 45 overseas is inferior to a player who averages 45 at home and 55 overseas. ?

 

[ma1978]

Because India has excelled at home bullying. Nobody is arguing that they are a superior side at home. That doesnt make them a stronger team.

they have won more abroad in more diverse conditions than smith”s team as well

 

[Spark]

So a batsman that averages 60 at home and 45 overseas is inferior to a player who averages 45 at home and 55 overseas. ?

This is a genuinely interesting question when posed unironically

 

[Xix2565]

It doesn't just look weaker, it is weaker. You think being a stronger team at home makes India a better side, and in your heart of hearts, you know that it is not.

It does? WI and Australia wouldn't be greats just because they were away track bullies (and of which only really WI were considering Australia only won one series in India during Waugh/Ponting era against a weakened Indian side), their home records are exceptional as well.

Because India has excelled at home bullying. Nobody is arguing that they are a superior side at home. That doesnt make them a stronger team.

Home bullying is something to take pride in no? Why is it discredited so heavily?

 

[subshakerz]

they have won more abroad in more diverse conditions than smith”s team as well

They lost more and were more beatable.

 

[sunilz]

Joel Garner is better bowler than Imran Khan because Imran used to bully at home. Joel Garner was also well rounded.

 

[centurymaker]

It doesn't just look weaker, it is weaker. You think being a stronger team at home makes India a better side, and in your heart of hearts, you know that it is not.

if you win away but then lose at home, then it means nothing. You are back to zero. You are no way a dominant or stronger side.

If you win at home and draw away, that is still success!

 

[Spark]

and of which only really WI were considering Australia only won one series in India during Waugh/Ponting era against a weakened Indian side

Okay so like. "How did you do in India" is not in fact the sum total of what makes a Test team a good away side. Especially with strong SL, SA and at times WI sides going around at the time.

 

[subshakerz]

It does? WI and Australia wouldn't be greats just because they were away track bullies (and of which only really WI were considering Australia only won one series in India during Waugh/Ponting era against a weakened Indian side), their home records are exceptional as well.

Home bullying is something to take pride in no? Why is it discredited so heavily?

India in the 90s had an exceptional home record and nobody cares.

 

[sunilz]

They lost more and were more beatable.

So you can have higher W/L ratio by losing more . ?

 

[sunilz]

For God's sake don't discuss AUS/WI side here. They were clearly superior. ?

 

[ma1978]

The fundamental point is that Kohli’s team wins more abroad too

in every set of conditions

 

[centurymaker]

So a batsman that averages 60 at home and 45 overseas is inferior to a player who averages 45 at home and 55 overseas. ?

That batsman is South Africa,
averaging 45 at home and 50 away.

India is 60 home and 45 away
might reach 50 away soon

 

[sunilz]

The fundamental point is that Kohli’s team wins more abroad too

in every set of conditions

Nah , they were clearly better overseas.
But they were also clearly inferior at home.
So it all depends on which parameter you give more weightage.

 

[anil1405]

The fundamental point is that Kohli’s team wins more abroad too

in every set of conditions

But lost a series in RSA, Eng and NZ too unlike Smith's side which doesn't have a series defeat for a good ten years wherever they travelled.

 

[Xix2565]

Okay so like. "How did you do in India" is not in fact the sum total of what makes a Test team a good away side. Especially with strong SL, SA and at times WI sides going around at the time.

The point is that away success isn't necessarily the edge it is for Smith's SA when they had their share of failures as well home and away. So discrediting home records is baffling when most games are played at home anyway. Home success isn't guaranteed for every side either.

India in the 90s had an exceptional home record and nobody cares.

And they lost abroad as well. Still not relevant to my point that home record is important as well when it comes to judging great sides.

 

[ma1978]

But a lot more series wins

to be fair the story on Kohli’s team has yet to be fully written as they kicked it up a new gear with BG 2018/2019 so let’s see

 

[subshakerz]

Please look at the sides below. Are you honestly trying to tell me that you would pick India as a better all-round side?

SA (2012 - 2014)
Graeme Smith
Dean Elgar
Hashim Amla
ABD
Kallis
Du Plessis
Duminy
Philander
Steyn
Morkel
Tahir or Harris

India (2019 - Current)
KL Rahul
Rohit Sharma
Kohli
Pujara
Rahane
Pant
Ashwin
Jadeja/Siraj
Bumrah
Shami
Ishant

 

[Spark]

I was joking re: the 2 match series thing before but it does really have to be considered when you start quibbling between series wins vs draws.

 

[Slifer]

Also are people listening to themselves? Kohli has barely scored a run in ages, everyone wants Pujara and Rahane dropped, and the same people are saying that this side would knock over Waugh's Australia or the peak WI sides? Hello?

Sides were competitive here in Aus at times in those eras by putting on a healthy first innings score and having something substantial to defend. Something this Indian side has not done consistently since 2018/19.

Whoever said that is high. What makes it worst, is that they're suggesting this current Indian side could win away to both teams. Hell to the no !!