Will current Aussie side beat 95-99 ( Till WI 99 series ) side ?

[Sunil1z]

I am listing both sides for avoiding confusion.

Aus 95-99 side
Taylor
Slater
Langer
Mark Waugh
Steve Waugh
Greg Blewett
Healy
Warne
Gillespie
Paul Reifell
McGrath

Current Aussie Side:
One playing against SA except Hazlewood for Boland

 

[subshakerz]

It should be Taylors side in the options.

And that side will win.

Taylor the smarter captain plus McGrath/Gillespie/Warne/MacGill combo.

 

[Sunil1z]

Yeah , realised late that Taylor should be captain .

 

[Slifer]

Taylor's side. Again, this better be a joke. Taylor's team beat South Africa, West Indies, and Pakistan teams whose bowling were on par with current Australia. Then this lineup would be at sea imo vs McGrath, particularly the left handers. And then there's Warne...

 

[Sunil1z]

Taylor's side. Again, this better be a joke.

Why ?
Smith , Labu, Cummins, Warner , Hazlewood , Starc (maybe) would comfortably make Taylor’s side .
What according to you this side should do to be atleast equal to Taylor’s side ?

 

[subshakerz]

Why ?
Smith , Labu, Cummins, Warner , Hazlewood , Starc (maybe) would comfortably make Taylor’s side .
What according to you this side should do to be atleast equal to Taylor’s side ?

Yeah it's a fair comparison. This Cummins team to me hasn't been properly tested yet as a unit. If they can do well in India and England then I think they may even edge this.

The Taylors team beat very strong sides away from home but they weren't the dominant side yet.

 

[honestbharani]

Steve Waugh's side coz they had Warne.

 

[Slifer]

Yeah it's a fair comparison. This Cummins team to me hasn't been properly tested yet as a unit. If they can do well in India and England then I think they may even edge this.

The Taylors team beat very strong sides away from home.

Australia drew in SL recently. And lost at home vs India's C team. I'm not impressed. A win in india which I admit is possible, would change my mind however.

 

[Slifer]

Why ?
Smith , Labu, Cummins, Warner , Hazlewood , Starc (maybe) would comfortably make Taylor’s side .
What according to you this side should do to be atleast equal to Taylor’s side ?

Smith and Cummins I'd agree with. Warner is too dependent on home conditions so no. Hazlewood and Starc are awash with Reifel and Gillespie. Labu too early for me. But man to man, all of the above would probably be in India's team as well yet India still beat them with most of their regular players missing.

They aren't on par imo with Taylor's team because their batting is notoriously unreliable outside of Australia especially on wickets with any juice in them. Imo, they'd get smoked in 90s South Africa vs Donald. And Taylor's team ain't losing at home vs any Indian team. Taylor's team also won in WI and Pakistan. This Australian team is unlikely to do the same vs those teams.

Playing in Australia, Taylor's team would probably win 2 or 3 games to one.

 

[subshakerz]

Australia drew in SL recently. And lost at home vs India's C team. I'm not impressed. A win in india which I admit is possible, would change my mind however.

Yeah and also beating a resurgent England would mean they are the real deal since Australia haven't won in England in over 20 years.

 

[Slifer]

The thing is, on paper Australia looks powerful and all and they are probably the best team at the current moment. But if we look at the bigger picture: they won a tough series in Pakistan, drew vs a weak SL, crushed a pathetic WI and are beating up a South Africa with a paltry batting lineup.

That doesn't change the fact that outside of Australia, the batting sucks and faced with challenging conditions it'll be exposed imo. And their bowling hasn't really come up against a decent batting unit but I will concede Cummins and co are world class.

Swap this team into the 90s and imo, they don't win in WI, RSA or Pakistan like Taylor did. They'd win at home or draw vs said teams and have much the same results as Taylor's vs everyone else.

 

[Spark]

Modern Indian sides aren't remotely comparable to 90s era Indian sides. The difference in mentality alone would see the 90s Indian sides get absolutely hammered against this Australian attack, let alone pull off what they did in 2021. Who is their Rishabh Pant?

This Aus side is very much unproven - we should check back on this in 12 months - but there's a serious dose of "everyone sucks because everyone sucks because everyone sucks" circular logic going on in this thread.

 

[honestbharani]

but there's a serious dose of "everyone sucks because everyone sucks because everyone sucks" circular logic going on in this thread.

I wonder why

 

[Xix2565]

And Taylor's team ain't losing at home vs any Indian team.

They've never played vs a very good Indian attack in Australia though? Like Spark said, India isn't as mediocre now as it used to be in the 90s.

 

[Spark]

I wonder why

Recency bias is annoying but nostalgia bias is just as annoying and much more pervasive on here

 

[Slifer]

They've never played vs a very good Indian attack in Australia though? Like Spark said, India isn't as mediocre now as it used to be in the 90s.

Taylor's team beat teams with better attacks in Australia. For example, Australia beat Pakistan that consistently had Wasim, Waqar, Saqlain and Mustaq. Ditto the WI who had Walsh, Bishop and Curtly. If those teams couldn't win in Australia vs Taylor, I doubt India's current team would.

That's the key here I'm talking about in Australia.

 

[subshakerz]

The thing is, on paper Australia looks powerful and all and they are probably the best team at the current moment. But if we look at the bigger picture: they won a tough series in Pakistan, drew vs a weak SL, crushed a pathetic WI and are beating up a South Africa with a paltry batting lineup.

That doesn't change the fact that outside of Australia, the batting sucks and faced with challenging conditions it'll be exposed imo. And their bowling hasn't really come up against a decent batting unit but I will concede Cummins and co are world class.

Swap this team into the 90s and imo, they don't win in WI, RSA or Pakistan like Taylor did. They'd win at home or draw vs said teams and have much the same results as Taylor's vs everyone else.

Batting sucks is an exaggeration.

Khwaja, Smith, Labu and Head are in reasonably good form. Batting depth is an issue but even the test they lost in SL was more of a bowling failure.

The team just wasn't faced very strong tests yet.

 

[Sunil1z]

Taylor's team beat teams with better attacks in Australia. For example, Australia beat Pakistan that consistently had Wasim, Waqar, Saqlain and Mustaq. Ditto the WI who had Walsh, Bishop and Curtly. If those teams couldn't win in Australia vs Taylor, I doubt India's current team would.

That's the key here I'm talking about in Australia.

So , basically you are giving no credit to Pujara, Pant for scoring those runs .

I will write something angrily which will make you even more angry . So I am just ending this topic here.

 

[Slifer]

Batting sucks is an exaggeration.

Khwaja, Smith, Labu and Head are in reasonably good form. Batting depth is an issue but even the test they lost in SL was more of a bowling failure.

The team just wasn't faced very strong tests yet.

True that so we'll just have to wait and see. But as of now only really Smith and Labu to some extent can be called reliable outside Australia.

 

[Xix2565]

Taylor's team beat teams with better attacks in Australia. For example, Australia beat Pakistan that consistently had Wasim, Waqar, Saqlain and Mustaq. Ditto the WI who had Walsh, Bishop and Curtly. If those teams couldn't win in Australia vs Taylor, I doubt India's current team would.

That's the key here I'm talking about in Australia.

Sounds a lot like nostalgia bias tbh. You can't just say these names are better because I said so and walk off.