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

[TheJediBrah]

they were still pretty good around 2000 ish

They were very bad in 2000

 

[OverratedSanity]

Somewhat true but to say some of the greatest batsmen would have been beaten repeatedly just isn't true. WIs were a great all condition team...obviously helped by some favourable home umpiring. Having said that, they had to face outright criminal umpiring in places like NZ (the 80 tour was the worst), Eng and Aus. The fact that they kept winning just showed how great they were.

The other side of it is that by all accounts Pakistan got robbed by the umpires just as bad in the 88 series in WI.

I also dont think it's acknowledged enough how atrocious their behaviour was in that NZ tour was too. You cant go assaulting the umpire because you think he sucks. Even now, the narrative of that series is still about how incompetent Goodall was as an umpire instead of the west indies players acting like complete maniacs.

 

[jayjay]

They were very bad in 2000

They still had Lara and Walsh/Ambrose for part of that period. Remember I said 2000ish, so a bit before, a bit after. or maybe I'm viewing it from the lens of just how bad the side would become..either way they were better than they would be for a long time after.

Interesting question, what would be the best period of WI cricket post 2000?

 

[jayjay]

The other side of it is that by all accounts Pakistan got robbed by the umpires just as bad in the 88 series in WI.

I also dont think it's acknowledged enough how atrocious their behaviour was in that NZ tour was too. You cant go assaulting the umpire because you think he sucks. Even now, the narrative of that series is still about how incompetent Goodall was as an umpire instead of the west indies players acting like complete maniacs.

Pakistan were robbed blind, I'm not defending some of the home umpiring in the WI either but nowhere near as bad as NZ, Eng and Aus.

Plus, which umpire was assaulted? I don't think thats true but happy to be corrected, I haven't read about the series in a long time.

I do however remember an interview with Goodall where he discussed the series and tried to excuse his cheating by claiming it wasn't his fault, he was an amateur umpire who's day job was being a school teacher.

Did the WI act childish throughout the series? Yes but it started with a horrible first test with some of the worst umpiring decisions committed to film..not just the blatant missed catches by the umpires but also some horrible LBW decisions for Hadlee.

 

[jayjay]

The Windies players of that era such as Holding always have a dig at umpires when it comes to series they lost or drew. He had a sook about decisions he said he copped in 75/76. They got dicked 5-1 ffs. He’s a bit of a petulant child about it tbh

In the 80s they couldn’t complain about the reception they got - they had Aus 2000s levels of 50:50s going their way.

Na, In NZ 1980 the decisions were terrible. BLatant edged and the umpires couldn't see them, LBWs where the WI batsmen looked like they were several feet removed from the crease given to Hadlee

Thank God that era is over for umpires.

 

[wpdavid]

They were very bad in 2000

They were really. Having said elsewhere that England's 2004 win in the Caribbean is one of their more under-rated performances, I would suggest that the opposite is true of the win in 2000. Basically that's what reasonable teams did to the WI on their travels by that stage, and England needed a borderline miracle at Lord's not to lose that series. Perhaps 'very bad' is stretching it for a side including Lara, Ambrose and Walsh, but perhaps it isn't. Shades of current England with Root, Stokes and Branderson.

 

[wpdavid]

Pakistan were robbed blind, I'm not defending some of the home umpiring in the WI either but nowhere near as bad as NZ, Eng and Aus.

Plus, which umpire was assaulted? I don't think thats true but happy to be corrected, I haven't read about the series in a long time.

Croft deliberately barged Goodall when running in to bowl one delivery.

Going back to the English umpires, I don't want to be over-defensive about my boys, but what's the WI gripe there? I remember Kanhai reacting to a not-out in 1973, but that's the only one I can remember.

 

[Migara]

Somewhat true but to say some of the greatest batsmen would have been beaten repeatedly just isn't true. WIs were a great all condition team...obviously helped by some favourable home umpiring. Having said that, they had to face outright criminal umpiring in places like NZ (the 80 tour was the worst), Eng and Aus. The fact that they kept winning just showed how great they were.

To answer the OP, I think the WIs stopped being a great team around 90/91, but were still the best test side on the planet. They slowly declined, the famous 95 series of course and they were still pretty good around 2000 ish but by the mid 00s they were heading towards becoming one of the lower ranked sides.

Greatest batsmen would not. But the rest will get annihilated sooner or later. And ATG bats cannot single handedly win matches all the time. This is the very thing happened to WI and SAF when they faced Warne. They have not seen anything remotely close to that quality in their careers. Even famed prolific players of Spin as Gatting were reduced to rubble by Kumble, Wane and Murali. People don't realize how ****ing awesome was the spin bowling in 1994 - 2009 time, and we might not see such prolific spin bowling stocks in our life time or the next. Of course there will be always that Lara, Hooper, Cronje, Cullinan and Lloyd who will play spin well. However even they struggled at times. Lara and Hooper did well against Murali and Warne, but they were some times groping against Kumble and Saqlain. Cullinan played all spinners well except Warne. Lloyd was not properly tested.

 

[Burgey]

Croft deliberately barged Goodall when running in to bowl one delivery.

Going back to the English umpires, I don't want to be over-defensive about my boys, but what's the WI gripe there? I remember Kanhai reacting to a not-out in 1973, but that's the only one I can remember.

Come on, Colin always went so close to the stumps, you couldn’t possibly suggest that was deliberate…

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Croft should've been banned for a few matches as should Holding for kicking over the stumps, and Lloyd for going off the field and not controlling his players. They underestimated NZ, were missing Viv (injured) from that tour, and lost the plot.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Come on, Colin always went so close to the stumps, you couldn’t possibly suggest that was deliberate…

Of course it was. That is assault on an umpire.

 

[Migara]

Croft should've been banned for a few matches as should Holding for kicking over the stumps, and Lloyd for going off the field and not controlling his players. They underestimated NZ, were missing Viv (injured) from that tour, and lost the plot.

And Hadlee worked them out.

 

[Burgey]

Of course it was. That is assault on an umpire.

Omg really?

 

[TheJediBrah]

Am I reading this thread right and a guy from Pakistan is complaining about biased home umpiring

 

[Xix2565]

Am I reading this thread right and a guy from Pakistan is complaining about biased home umpiring

Oh it's been fun.

 

[subshakerz]

The other side of it is that by all accounts Pakistan got robbed by the umpires just as bad in the 88 series in WI.

I also dont think it's acknowledged enough how atrocious their behaviour was in that NZ tour was too. You cant go assaulting the umpire because you think he sucks. Even now, the narrative of that series is still about how incompetent Goodall was as an umpire instead of the west indies players acting like complete maniacs.

Pakistan also lost their series in 2000 due to Billy Doctrove's umpiring. But then they had Shakoor Rana so perhaps its karma.

 

[Starfighter]

Am I reading this thread right and a guy from Pakistan is complaining about biased home umpiring

Yeah. It explains why he keeps harping on about the umpiring in England supposedly being bad. Pakistan were the only country to have more than the odd niggle with the English umpires, because they appealed for absolutely everything and got really pissy when the English umpires didn't stand for their bull****.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Yeah. It explains why he keeps harping on about the umpiring in England supposedly being bad. Pakistan were the only country to have more than the odd niggle with the English umpires, because they appealed for absolutely everything and got really pissy when the English umpires didn't stand for their bull****.

Probably so used to everything going their way with their home officials that impartial umpiring felt unfair

 

[Migara]

Probably so used to everything going their way with their home officials that impartial umpiring felt unfair

Very rich when you had Ross Emerson.

 

[jayjay]

Greatest batsmen would not. But the rest will get annihilated sooner or later. And ATG bats cannot single handedly win matches all the time. This is the very thing happened to WI and SAF when they faced Warne. They have not seen anything remotely close to that quality in their careers. Even famed prolific players of Spin as Gatting were reduced to rubble by Kumble, Wane and Murali. People don't realize how ****ing awesome was the spin bowling in 1994 - 2009 time, and we might not see such prolific spin bowling stocks in our life time or the next. Of course there will be always that Lara, Hooper, Cronje, Cullinan and Lloyd who will play spin well. However even they struggled at times. Lara and Hooper did well against Murali and Warne, but they were some times groping against Kumble and Saqlain. Cullinan played all spinners well except Warne. Lloyd was not properly tested.

But factor in the best batsmen the WI had, the runs they could get and how many batsmen ,say from SL peak era could play Holding, Garner, Marshall and consistently outscore the WI in test matches? So the point being it wouldn't be a foregone conclusion like you are stating.