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

[TheJediBrah]

Agree one of the dumber suggestions/arguments I've seen on here, but Slifer going on the aggressive at >9000 in retort makes it sufficiently entertaining

 

[Slifer]

Agree one of the dumber suggestions/arguments I've seen on here, but Slifer going on the aggressive at >9000 in retort makes it sufficiently entertaining

That's the effect Migara has on me sorry to say...

 

[quincywagstaff]

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.

Ian Chappell was out for 4 in that innings (Holding took the wicket) so if Holding was distracted by that than that seems weak to say the least.

I don't know if it was that specific incident but I've read during that series Holding had a public meltdown and refused to bowl when something went against him. Seems a situation where he hadn't matured yet to handle the challenges of such a tour.

 

[Line and Length]

And here are Bob Holland and the great Murray Bennett demolishing peak West Indies in 1985. If only we played them more often….

It wasn't the bowlers that beat WI ... it was a Sydney wicket specially prepared to take spin.

 

[TheJediBrah]

It wasn't the bowlers that beat WI ... it was a Sydney wicket specially prepared to take spin.

That's what Sydney wickets were like then, and were up until mid-2000s. Didn't need to be specially prepared

 

[Prince EWS]

That's what Sydney wickets were like then, and were up until mid-2000s. Didn't need to be specially prepared

#SCGSoSpinny

 

[subshakerz]

West Indies I believe lost 8 test matches in the 80s, of which 4 had a spinner's role. 3 of those test losses to spin were after Lloyd and Kalicharran had retired.

Two of those tests were against Australia in Sydney in 84 and 88. One was in 86 in Faislabad in which Qadir destroyed them, with assistance from Imran and Wasim. And the last was in Madras in 87 on an underprepared wicket in which Hirwani took 16 wickets on debut.

I think it is fair to say that between 86 and until Lara emerged, the WI batting was slightly suspect against spin but then the batting was weaker in general.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

They actually had 4 consecutive 1-1 drawn series from 86/87 to 87/88 vs Pakistan, NZ, India, and Pakistan again, but bounced back to beat England 4-0 after that and continued to be the team to beat until 1995.

 

[Line and Length]

That's what Sydney wickets were like then, and were up until mid-2000s. Didn't need to be specially prepared

In the mid '80s I believe the Sydney wicket was prepared for a NSW team that included the likes of Bennett, Holland and Matthews. The Australian Test side was then picked accordingly when playing at the SCG.

 

[pardus]

They actually had 4 consecutive 1-1 drawn series from 86/87 to 87/88 vs Pakistan, NZ, India, and Pakistan again, but bounced back to beat England 4-0 after that and continued to be the team to beat until 1995.

Pak drew with them again in 1990-91 (after their 4-0 against England).

In fact, 3 of the 5 Test series they played against Pak from 77 to 91 were drawn 1-1.
The other two WI won by a very slim margin of 1 Test [2-1 in 77, and 1-0 in 80].
They always struggled against Pak even throughout their dominant era.
At least as long as Imran played for Pak.

As I posted earlier, it was their batting which consistently struggled against Pak bowling.
I don't think it was necessarily spin though, they had a tough time against Waqar in 90-91.
Even in 85-86 series, Viv mentioned having difficulty in reading then-new Wasim Akram.

 

[Migara]

It wasn't the bowlers that beat WI ... it was a Sydney wicket specially prepared to take spin.

Playing on Mumbai and Chennai makes me cringe.

 

[Migara]

Pak drew with them again in 1990-91 (after their 4-0 against England).

In fact, 3 of the 5 Test series they played against Pak from 77 to 91 were drawn 1-1.
The other two WI won by a very slim margin of 1 Test [2-1 in 77, and 1-0 in 80].
They always struggled against Pak even throughout their dominant era.
At least as long as Imran played for Pak.

As I posted earlier, it was their batting which consistently struggled against Pak bowling.
I don't think it was necessarily spin though, they had a tough time against Waqar in 90-91.
Even in 85-86 series, Viv mentioned having difficulty in reading then-new Wasim Akram.

The argument was if Saqlain was part of any of those Pakistan sides, few of them would have ended as series wins for Pakistan.

 

[subshakerz]

The argument was if Saqlain was part of any of those Pakistan sides, few of them would have ended as series wins for Pakistan.

I mean, WI were playing against peak Imran and Qadir plus Wasim and then Waqar, its not like they werent tested against quality bowling. Obviously adding another quality bowler would increase their chances, no? It's like saying if Warne played with Hadlee, NZ would have won more series.

 

[Migara]

I mean, WI were playing against peak Imran and Qadir plus Wasim and then Waqar, its not like they werent tested against quality bowling. Obviously adding another quality bowler would increase their chances, no? It's like saying if Warne played with Hadlee, NZ would have won more series.

Yes and No. Imran, Wasim, Waqar and Hadlee represented the type of pace WI were least comfortable with. Swing, pace, up to the bat and in Hadlee's case, patient too. That is one reason Pakistan was so successful against WI. Adding Saqlain in to it would have increased their chances in 3 + 1 = 5 manner. Imran, Wasim and Waqar were never holding bowlers. So was Qadir. Saqlain fills up that requirement brilliantly.

 

[Migara]

Same applies for NZ with Vettori. All condition bowler who will hold up one end with spin while pacers can attack. On turning pitches the MO reverses, and NZ had a bunch of very good pacers who can hold up an end.

 

[trundler]

Dan Vettori will absolutely not be a factor against any competent batting line up, let alone 80s West Indies. Whilst we're on the subject of putting in too much stock in one incredible fluke from a part timer, I'm surprised no one mentioned Clarke's 6/9 against the best ever spin playing batting order as a counterpoint.

 

[Migara]

Dan Vettori will absolutely not be a factor against any competent batting line up, let alone 80s West Indies. Whilst we're on the subject of putting in too much stock in one incredible fluke from a part timer, I'm surprised no one mentioned Clarke's 6/9 against the best ever spin playing batting order as a counterpoint.

That would have been a counter point if it has happened only once to WI. Holland, Border, Hirwani, Qadir in space of 15 years, while for India it happened once in same time period of time (Saqlain of course, but we lump him with ATG spinners rather than part timers)

 

[TheJediBrah]

I'm going to be chuckling at the "80s WI would have been in trouble if they had to face Vettori" for a while

 

[OverratedSanity]

That would have been a counter point if it has happened only once to WI. Holland, Border, Hirwani, Qadir in space of 15 years, while for India it happened once in same time period of time (Saqlain of course, but we lump him with ATG spinners rather than part timers)

It definitely happened more than once. Mediocre spinners like Ashley Giles, Paul Adams, Nicky Boje to name a few took cheap 5fers against India.

I definitely don't think WI would've completely neutralized top tier spinners like Warne/Murali (in India) but those few occasions where a meh bowler has a big haul happen for every team. The Border 11 fer is the one that really stands out though as something that shouldnt happen to a team with supposedly good players of spin.

 

[Migara]

It definitely happened more than once. Mediocre spinners like Ashley Giles, Paul Adams, Nicky Boje to name a few took cheap 5fers against India.

I definitely don't think WI would've completely neutralized top tier spinners like Warne/Murali (in India) but those few occasions where a meh bowler has a big haul happen for every team. The Border 11 fer is the one that really stands out though as something that shouldnt happen to a team with supposedly good players of spin.

Cheap fifers and collapsing against spin in to defeat are two things.