Best team since Waugh/ Ponting’s Australia?

[Kirkut]

South Africa would be the statistical winner here but they never could destroy sides at home like how India and England did.

England at their prime were scary and came closest to Steve Waugh's side in their intensity. But they lost to South Africa at home and got tough competition from a Pakistani side in transition phase.

India absolutely smashed everyone at home and have an impressive resume as well with overseas performances, but the batting is still memeworthy and can potentially fold against a decent spinner or a dibbly dobbly seam bowler.

 

[sunilz]

So far the tactics from Kohli team supporters in the thread:

- Hype up India's home record to the nth degree

- Suggest India's away record is almost as good as SA, when officially they have only won in three countries so far (Aus, WI, Sri Lanka)

- Pretend SA were weak at home despite only losing two series in their entire time in their reign and zero away

- Be hypercritical in dissecting SA's away record while ignoring India's own landslide defeats in NZ and England, and loss to SA

- Ignore any middle order issue for India while suggesting SA's batters benefitted from easy runs

- Ignore actual player-player comparisons of the the two teams in question

SA also drew many series at home but you won't write that because it won't serve your agenda.

SA couldn't beat IND (then no.1 for 18 months) both home and away. But you also won't mention that because it won't serve your agenda.

Ignore W/L ratio, no. Of days spent at no. 1 ranking but talk only about hypotheticals. Keep trying .

 

[subshakerz]

Contextless arguments don't make a very good point, and you've not made a point yet other than you think SA's away results are too good without adding any context for why.

I've mentioned before, 9 years undefeated with wins in Aus, Eng, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, WI and NZ.

 

[sunilz]

probs the teams they captained bud. my favourite kohli india is the one where the middle order can't bat but the fast bowling is pornographic and ashwin never plays. it's by far the most fun.

and lol it did not take you long to bring up nz. tom latham's nz should apologise to the nation on national television for this disgrace, and i don't really care about results from 2004 when discussing KW's nz funnily enough, unless the Indian Blow in Society (IBS) will permit me to drag back up players from that era like you'll probably do eventually if i keep fishing.

Didn't you first use the nationality card and now playing victim when I pointed out your pathetic attempt earlier to big up NZ in thread.

 

[subshakerz]

There is no hyping up of this ftr. It is the most insanely dominant run of results any team has had at home. By quite a long way. This has to count for something when were making comparisons of teams.

It is hyped up because the entirety of the argument for Kohli's team being better is essentially based on their terrific home record making up for an inferior away record. Not on the actual strength of the team.

 

[Flem274*]

Didn't you first use the nationality card and now playing victim when I pointed out your pathetic attempt earlier to big up NZ in thread.

i don't remember tbh because i don't care, but if i did all i can say is i learned from the best.

 

[subshakerz]

SA also drew many series at home but you won't write that because it won't serve your agenda.

SA couldn't beat IND (then no.1 for 18 months) both home and away. But you also won't mention that because it won't serve your agenda.

Ignore W/L ratio, no. Of days spent at no. 1 ranking but talk only about hypotheticals. Keep trying .

Since when is a draw a loss? I admit that SA werent able to close series at home, but that weakness alone doesnt make them a weaker team than India.

SA drawing twice in India, arguably the toughest place to tour at the time, is actually a good achievement.

Yeah, W/L ratio to me is irrelevant because I care about series results and player strengths, unlike you.

 

[subshakerz]

South Africa would be the statistical winner here but they never could destroy sides at home like how India and England did.

England at their prime were scary and came closest to Steve Waugh's side in their intensity. But they lost to South Africa at home and got tough competition from a Pakistani side in transition phase.

India absolutely smashed everyone at home and have an impressive resume as well with overseas performances, but the batting is still memeworthy and can potentially fold against a decent spinner or a dibbly dobbly seam bowler.

The mark of a better team is being tougher to beat in all conditions. That's a big reason why the WI, who didnt lose a series in 15 years, were the greatest of all-time.

 

[Xix2565]

I've mentioned before, 9 years undefeated with wins in Aus, Eng, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, WI and NZ.

That is not context, that is just stating facts. It's as much of an argument as only 2 home Tests lost in 6 years.

Yeah, W/L ratio to me is irrelevant because I care about series results and player strengths, unlike you.

Clearly not when you don't discuss it a lot here in detail.

 

[sunilz]

Since when is a draw a loss?

SA drawing twice in India, arguably the toughest place to tour at the time, is actually a good achievement.

Yeah, W/L ratio to me is irrelevant because I care about series results and player strengths, unlike you.

If draw isn't loss then neither it is victory.

If team A plays 10 series at home and wins all 10 and team B plays 10 series at home and wins 6 , draws 4 then both situations are not equal according to any sane person or ICC rankings.

 

[harsh.ag]

It is hyped up because the entirety of the argument for Kohli's team being better is essentially based on their terrific home record making up for an inferior away record. Not on the actual strength of the team.

The strength of the team at home has been, by any metric, phenomenal.

I agree with you that SA was the better team (not the better squad, mind you) but this is silly.

 

[sledger]

vaughan's england lol

 

[sunilz]

The mark of a better team is being tougher to beat in all conditions. That's a big reason why the WI, who didnt lose a series in 15 years, were the greatest of all-time.

WI team of 80s didn't lose 2 series at home . Infact they lost only 1 test at home in 80s not like SA who used to drop tests even against IND (10), WI (07) .or SL (2011)

 

[subshakerz]

The strength of the team at home has been, by any metric, phenomenal.

I agree with you that SA was the better team (not the better squad, mind you) but this is silly.

I am not downplaying their home record. They have been dominant to an unprecedented level. But suggesting that is enough to make up for an inferior away record is where I disagree.

 

[Xix2565]

I am not downplaying their home record. They have been dominant to an unprecedented level. But suggesting that is enough to make up for an inferior away record is where I disagree.

Why not? Why is half a team's record deemed as useless in conversations about greatness?

 

[subshakerz]

WI team of 80s didn't lose 2 series at home . Infact they lost only 1 test at home in 80s not like SA who used to drop tests even against IND (10), WI (07) .or SL (2011)

Dropping a test is different than losing a series. I do downgrade SA slightly for not being dominant at home, but IMO the emphasis should always be on away records unless you are actively losing series at home, like Pakistan in the 90s.

 

[subshakerz]

Why not? Why is half a team's record deemed as useless in conversations about greatness?

I didn't say it was useless. But away record is much more important if you are talking about greatness as every team is expected to perform better in their familiar conditions (albeit not to India's level of dominance). This is obvious to any objective cricket fan.

 

[Xix2565]

I didn't say it was useless. But away record is much more important if you are talking about greatness as every team is expected to perform better in their familiar conditions (albeit not to India's level of dominance). This is obvious to any objective cricket fan.

And SA arguably haven't performed well in home conditions, but they don't get marked down because?

 

[subshakerz]

To boil it down

SA's nine-year unbeaten away record > India's complete dominance at home from 2015-now

as far as a cricket achievement is concerned and as a gauge of the team quality.

You can choose to disagree, but IMO its a reasonable position.

 

[subshakerz]

And SA arguably haven't performed well in home conditions, but they don't get marked down because?

They do get marked down, but IMO India still have gaps in their away record, which is why SA is still ahead. But that can change if India win in SA and England this year.