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

[jayjay]

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.

Hardly assault...but as I said, and as even Goodall has alluded to, there were terrible decision from the start of the first test which just soured the WIs experience. Should they have behaved this way? No. Is it understandable? For sure.

 

[Migara]

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.

SL is a bad example to have. Yes, even with that crap side in 80s, with Murali in it, would have once in a blue moon would have sent great WI packing because of brilliance of Murali, but those will be odd cases (add to that de Silva hit a purple patch in around 88 - 89, would have loved short fast bowling of West indies).

Better scenario would be to consider what Pakistan would have done with Imran, Wasim, Qadir and Saqlain, or NZ had done with Hadlee and Vettori or India would have done with Kapil and Kumble. I would expect Pakistan to be as great as WI just by addition of Saqlain (at least head to head). WI reign on Indian soil would have been very short lived if Kumble played. Even an Aussie side as good as them or even better, struggled fair and square against him in India. NZ would have been much more dangerous on slower wickets with Vettori in.

 

[jayjay]

SL is a bad example to have. Yes, even with that crap side in 80s, with Murali in it, would have once in a blue moon would have sent great WI packing because of brilliance of Murali, but those will be odd cases (add to that de Silva hit a purple patch in around 88 - 89, would have loved short fast bowling of West indies).

Better scenario would be to consider what Pakistan would have done with Imran, Wasim, Qadir and Saqlain, or NZ had done with Hadlee and Vettori or India would have done with Kapil and Kumble. I would expect Pakistan to be as great as WI just by addition of Saqlain (at least head to head). WI reign on Indian soil would have been very short lived if Kumble played. Even an Aussie side as good as them or even better, struggled fair and square against him in India. NZ would have been much more dangerous on slower wickets with Vettori in.

I could see that...maybe WI undefeated streak would not have lasted as long as it did.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Everything went south for us after that Dwayne Smith century in South Africa…

 

[slippy888]

When the fearsome bowlers like Franklyn Rose and Nixon McLean and Riyon King never produced the goods at international level it set west indies back 10 years

 

[quincywagstaff]

They were very bad in 2000

You need to split the West Indies between their home and away form.

Away from home they haven't been a good side since the mid-90s. I'm pretty sure that apart from Bangladesh & Zimbabwe the last away Test series win they had was against New Zealand in 1994/95 or thereabouts.

But they were still winning multiple Tests in England and Australia in 1995 & 1996/97 respectively. A turning point for them becoming hopeless away from home was their 1997 tour of Pakistan when they were embarrassed in all 3 matches. They then had 5 Test wipeouts of SA & Oz over the next few of years and they haven't really recovered.

As a home side though, even after the 1995 Australia defeat they were still very tough to beat. I think every other Test side toured there post-95 and failed to beat them. SA beat them in 2001 and after that they began to lose home series fairly regularly.

 

[quincywagstaff]

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.

I remember a newspaper interview Holding did when he was in Australia as a commentator on the 2000/01 series and he was complaining about biased umpiring towards Australia; said something like Australia had 10 to 1 contentious decisions go their way.

I mean I watched that series in detail (and written about it) and if the umpires had given 50 contentious decisions favouring the West Indies that series they still would've been thrashed.

 

[honestbharani]

I remember a newspaper interview Holding did when he was in Australia as a commentator on the 2000/01 series and he was complaining about biased umpiring towards Australia; said something like Australia had 10 to 1 contentious decisions go their way.

I mean I watched that series in detail (and written about it) and if the umpires had given 50 contentious decisions favouring the West Indies that series they still would've been thrashed.

True but it doesn't mean Mikey was wrong though.

 

[Flem274*]

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.

It does though. He was an amatuer. People are quick to label incompetence as cheating in that era imo. In school kid sport you see terrible reffing all the time and parents who get jeery are rightly viewed as scum and often ejected.

This isn't much different. There's no excuses to assault an umpire in the professional era. Assaulting one who is there as an unpaid volunteer because he loves the game is even lower.

professionalization was great for cricket. umpires got better, bottle caps had to be hidden and this behaviour became unacceptable.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

It was always the narrative that English umpires were gentleman making honest mistakes and all others were biased. English umpires tended to be the best at Test level because of the amount of officiating they did. Dickie Bird made fewer mistakes but wasn't flawless when it came to howlers. Constant and Shepherd would have been humiliated by DRS.
Goddall was a poor umpire, but also rubbed players up the wrong way with his pompous manner.

 

[jayjay]

It does though. He was an amatuer. People are quick to label incompetence as cheating in that era imo. In school kid sport you see terrible reffing all the time and parents who get jeery are rightly viewed as scum and often ejected.

This isn't much different. There's no excuses to assault an umpire in the professional era. Assaulting one who is there as an unpaid volunteer because he loves the game is even lower.

professionalization was great for cricket. umpires got better, bottle caps had to be hidden and this behaviour became unacceptable.

Bumping into someone is not an assault. You're clearly biased if you think even an amateur can't see blatant edge 20 yards down.

 

[pardus]

For 2 decades, West Indies was a "factory" - producing great and very hostile fast bowlers of great pace. When this "factory" went down, starting from early 90s, so did the team. The psychological fear, those West Indian fast bowlers created - particularly in the 80s - had to be experienced to be believed. Whenever my country (India) played Test cricket with them in the 80s and even in early 90s, I would just pray - whatever the series result - let all our players return back in one piece - no broken jaws, broken noses, broken skulls etc.
Even the dominant Australian team of late 90s and 2000s just didn't create that level of intimidation factor.

For me, West Indies team that went to Australia in Dec 1988 was the last great West Indies team. Irreversible decline started after that.
By the start of 2000s, they were firmly a mediocre team.

Despite the decline starting in 1989 they, particularly their fast bowlers, had a huge psychological hold on all opposing teams (except Pakistan) for several years after that. That Aussie victory in1995, a landmark win, was by no means easy. Steve Waugh's contribution in that series cannot be understated. Waugh's toughness in that series was a "moment that changed cricket forever" as they say.
McGrath (highest wicket taker for the Aussies in that series) also played a huge role, but he hadn't made his name yet.

 

[TheJediBrah]

True but it doesn't mean Mikey was wrong though.

He was though

 

[Lillian Thomson]

That 75/76 series was not always heading for a thrashing. Australia were leading 2-1 and the Windies were on top half way through the 4th. Ian Chappell was given not out after edging Holding and even though he was out not long after Holding reckoned it distracted him for the rest of the innings. Greg Chappell made a big hundred after being dropped on about 10 or 11and Australia ended up with a small first innings and bowled the Windies out cheaply. The Windies capitulated after that, but up until just past half way in the 4th Test it looked like being 2-2. How bad the umpiring actually was is hard to say as we saw little of it in England at the time and there seems to be next to nothing in the archives.

 

[honestbharani]

He was though

Your face is though.... and your posts.

 

[Starfighter]

That little discussion reminded me of why I never liked Holding's commentary. Always talking about himself rather than the game at hand.

 

[TheJediBrah]

That little discussion reminded me of why I never liked Holding's commentary. Always talking about himself rather than the game at hand.

Whingiest commentator I've ever heard

 

[Immenso]

Incredible that Clive Lloyd ended up becoming a match referee.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Incredible that Clive Lloyd ended up becoming a match referee.

He's just right. Chris Broad refused to leave the crease when given out in Pakistan (admittedly it was a ridiculous decision) and smashed the stumps with his bat when he got out in the Bi-centenary Test. To see him dishing out fines was quite comical as well as Lloyd.

 

[NotMcKenzie]

Bumping into someone is not an assault.

Hmmmmmmmmmm....