How would 80s WI and 2000s Australia fare in unbeatable current India?

[HouHsiaoHsien]

No, you're wrong. The lineups they destroyed had most if not all of the main Indian bats. Stop making excuses because it is painfully obvious you don't need to be a high grade spinner to get wickets and win games against India on most of their sporting pitches.

Not in the peak form we are talking about. And O Keefe didn’t play vs Pant or Rohit

 

[subshakerz]

Same for Shami and Ishant with respect to Aus

No. For one, that wasnt their MO. Shami was taking a lot of reverse swing wickets with the old ball for example, not stiffling with the new ball. As for Ishant, then guy was taking 1-2 wickets a game in most series he was playing in India around that time. He has virtually no home performance of note. Why do you even bring him up?

 

[subshakerz]

Not in the peak form we are talking about

2017 was peak form when O'Keefe destroyed India.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Viv and Harper will bowl them to victory at least once in a series on a rank turner, like Hartly and Root did yesterday. This is where India's policy of pitches will backfire.

Don't know if I would bet on Viv and Harper to bowl and win a Test match. Sure, there is a chance but backing on them over Ash and Jaddu

2017 was peak form when O'Keefe destroyed India.

O'Keefe and Lyon were only successful against Kohli among Indian batsmen we are talking here. Pujara and Rahul averaged close to Smith, Rahane was his usual self and Saha and Jadeja also pilled up valuable runs. As I said earlier, from that 2017 batting line-up the only batsman who totally failed and is in the AT team is Kohli.

 

[subshakerz]

Don't know if I would bet on Viv and Harper to bowl and win a Test match. Sure, there is a chance but backing on them over Ash and Jaddu

Nobody would bet on Hartley, O'Keefe, Kuhenmann either. Point is when you have a rank turner in India you don't need any high quality spinner to win you a game against this Indian lineup. It becomes a toss-up especially given the batting strength India is facing. So I would back the odd WI spinners to win a game in a 4 match series, and I would definitely back Warne/MacGill to win at least one game in a series.

O'Keefe and Lyon were only successful against Kohli among Indian batsmen we are talking here. Pujara and Rahul averaged close to Smith, Rahane was his usual self and Saha and Jadeja also pilled up valuable runs. As I said earlier, from that 2017 batting line-up the only batsman who totally failed and is in the AT team is Kohli.

O'Keefe and Lyon were still capable of winning games for their teams on these pitches. It's a low bar.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

I wouldn’t back Mcgrath/Gillespie to choke a very strong Ind batting lineup at home on slow low turning flat wickets(Pant, Aggarwal, Rohit, Kohli average 60+ at home, in an era besotted with raging turners here).

 

[subshakerz]

I wouldn’t back Mcgrath/Gillespie to choke a very strong Ind batting lineup at home on slow low turning flat wickets(Pant, Aggarwal, Rohit, Kohli average 60+ at home, in an era besotted with raging turners here).

They literally did that in 2004/5 against a superior batting lineup on somewhat flatter wickets in the two tests they won. McGrath also did that in the 1st test they won in 2001. So they have a good track record of this approach and expect at least one test match lost by Kohli's team thanks to it, along with another by Warne/MacGill on a more turning track.

 

[Bolo.]

They literally did that in 2004/5 against a superior batting lineup on somewhat flatter wickets in the two tests they won. McrGrath also did that in the 1st test they won in 2001.

Why is it a superior home batting lineup in relation to one that averages 100+ runs higher on spicier home decks in an era of superior bowlers?

Ya, the 2000s bats had inarguably better careers overall, and are superior. But the run scoring suggests that peak India was a tougher team to bowl to at home.

 

[capt_Luffy]

They literally did that in 2004/5 against a superior batting lineup on somewhat flatter wickets in the two tests they won. McGrath also did that in the 1st test they won in 2001. So they have a good track record of this approach and expect at least one test match lost by Kohli's team thanks to it, along with another by Warne/MacGill on a more turning track.

In 2004/5 Sachin Tendulkar was unfit. That was a major blow. But in all honesty, I also except India to lose atleast one game to Australia, but as I said; India has a better chance to win the series. I just don't see India losing 2 matches in the same 4 match series. 5 matches, I would bet 3-2 for India.

Nobody would bet on Hartley, O'Keefe, Kuhenmann either. Point is when you have a rank turner in India you don't need any high quality spinner to win you a game against this Indian lineup. It becomes a toss-up especially given the batting strength India is facing. So I would back the odd WI spinners to win a game in a 4 match series, and I would definitely back Warne/MacGill to win at least one game in a series.


O'Keefe and Lyon were still capable of winning games for their teams on these pitches. It's a low bar.

Australia did drew a series with India at home in the 2000s and lost an Ashes and one away in India. Given everything, I would say India actually has quite a good record against the 2000s Australia. Also, yeah it's a toss up in a rank turner; but that toss has a much heavier chance on landing on India's favour. Viv and Harper are capable of a victory, but in all honesty Lyon and O'Keefe are definitely superior bowlers; and the recent match didn't had atleast 5 Batsmen you would put in India's AT 2010s team; and among the ones present, Jadeja was excellent in the 1st innings and Ashwin did just fine (for some time atleast). My point is, if we are giving an almost pass to Australia for losing in Kolkata 2003 (even considering they lost one more game that series) for VVS-Rahul magic; the last Ollie Pope innings was also very incredible and probably more unexpected.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

They literally did that in 2004/5 against a superior batting lineup on somewhat flatter wickets in the two tests they won. McGrath also did that in the 1st test they won in 2001. So they have a good track record of this approach and expect at least one test match lost by Kohli's team thanks to it, along with another by Warne/MacGill on a more turning track.

Nah at home Kohli’s lineup is clearly superior to the 2004 lineup with injured Tendulkar anyways

 

[subshakerz]

Why is it a superior home batting lineup in relation to one that averages 100+ runs higher on spicier home decks in an era of superior bowlers?

Ya, the 2000s bats had inarguably better careers overall, and are superior. But the run scoring suggests that peak India was a tougher team to bowl to at home.

Kohli's team didn't face superior bowlers at all to what the 2000s team faced. We can debate who was a better home batting team but its a secondary point, I think the point stands that McGrath/Gillespie proven themselves well in India in the 2000s against strong lineups and would be a significant threat to Kohli's side. If you don't want to accept that then you really are overrating this side.

 

[Bolo.]

Kohli's team didn't face superior bowlers at all to what the 2000s team faced. We can debate who was a better home batting team but its a secondary point, I think the point stands that McGrath/Gillespie proven themselves well in India in the 2000s and would be a significant threat to Kohli's side. If you don't want to accept that then you really are overrating this side.

Sure, AUS had a strong attack then. But the home records we are talking about were not just formed against AUS. Do you think bowling was typically stronger in 2005ish or 2019ish across the world?

 

[subshakerz]

In 2004/5 Sachin Tendulkar was unfit. That was a major blow. But in all honesty, I also except India to lose atleast one game to Australia, but as I said; India has a better chance to win the series. I just don't see India losing 2 matches in the same 4 match series. 5 matches, I would bet 3-2 for India.

Tendulkar aside, you still had peak Sehwag and Dravid, plus Laxman.

And my point stands, I expect McGrath/Gillespie to provoke at least one victory in the four games due to their past record in 2001 and 2004/5, and Warne/MacGill to do so as well given the pitches and their quality. Ashwin/Jadeja will win at least one game, but the only way they can win two is if Indian curator put rank turners the whole series, which could equally mean Australia have as much chance to win.

Australia did drew a series with India at home in the 2000s and lost an Ashes and one away in India. Given everything, I would say India actually has quite a good record against the 2000s Australia. Also, yeah it's a toss up in a rank turner; but that toss has a much heavier chance on landing on India's favour. Viv and Harper are capable of a victory, but in all honesty Lyon and O'Keefe are definitely superior bowlers; and the recent match didn't had atleast 5 Batsmen you would put in India's AT 2010s team; and among the ones present, Jadeja was excellent in the 1st innings and Ashwin did just fine (for some time atleast). My point is, if we are giving an almost pass to Australia for losing in Kolkata 2003 (even considering they lost one more game that series) for VVS-Rahul magic; the last Ollie Pope innings was also very incredible and probably more unexpected.

This bolded statement is an oxymoron. That is not what a toss up is. It is literally a 50/50 result possibility.

The other series you mention are all red herrings, McGrath was absent in the lost Ashes and drawn home series.

You miss the point on Viv and Harper, they have virtually as much cred as these spinners that came from nowhere to outdo this Indian lineup on rank turners.

And yes, I do give a sort of pass for Australia in 2001, since it took perhaps the greatest innings of all-time and the greatest series bowling performance of all-time to barely beat them. And then Australia clinched it better the next time around.

Whereas India's loss in this England test is not the issue, it is how debutant spinners can come to Indian and suddenly look worldclass on rank turners, which means stronger batting teams teams like WI and Aus are in with much more of chance.

 

[capt_Luffy]

[So QUOTE="subshakerz, post: 5157257, member: 13161"]
Tendulkar aside, you still had peak Sehwag and Dravid, plus Laxman.

And my point stands, I expect McGrath/Gillespie to provoke at least one victory in the four games due to their past record in 2001 and 2004/5, and Warne/MacGill to do so as well given the pitches and their quality. Ashwin/Jadeja will win at least one game, but the only way they can win two is if Indian curator put rank turners the whole series, which could equally mean Australia have as much chance to win.


This bolded statement is an oxymoron. That is not what a toss up is. It is literally a 50/50 result possibility.

The other series you mention are all red herrings, McGrath was absent in the lost Ashes and drawn home series.

You miss the point on Viv and Harper, they have virtually as much cred as these spinners that came from nowhere to outdo this Indian lineup on rank turners.

And yes, I do give a sort of pass for Australia in 2001, since it took perhaps the greatest innings of all-time and the greatest series bowling performance of all-time to barely beat them. And then Australia clinched it better the next time around.

Whereas India's loss in this England test is not the issue, it is how debutant spinners can come to Indian and suddenly look worldclass on rank turners, which means stronger batting teams teams like WI and Aus are in with much more of chance.
[/QUOTE]
So Sachin absent no big deal, but McGrath absent and Aussies lose their ****? Harbhajan looked World Class in 2001 and that wasn't just how well he bowled. I would had given Aussies a hard pass in 2001 had they only lost one game; they didn't. They lost one more. And no, a toss up isn't always a perfect 50/50. Like in the aforementioned case, Ash and Jaddu definitely have an advantage over Viv and Harper. Yes, no name spinners have done well in India; but India still came back each time and won the series.

 

[subshakerz]

Sure, AUS had a strong attack then. But the home records we are talking about were not just formed against AUS. Do you think bowling was typically stronger in 2005ish or 2019ish across the world?

That Indian lineups home record was formed facing guys like McGrath, Warne, Murali, Donald, Pollock, Steyn, Shoaib. They also faced Wasim, Waqar, Saqlain late nineties. They were simply more tested.

Again, this is a secondary point, the main issue is will Australian attack put Kohli's team in threat. Absolutely yes.

 

[subshakerz]

So Sachin absent no big deal, but McGrath absent and Aussies lose their ****? Harbhajan looked World Class in 2001 and that wasn't just how well he bowled. I would had given Aussies a hard pass in 2001 had they only lost one game; they didn't. They lost one more. And no, a toss up isn't always a perfect 50/50. Like in the aforementioned case, Ash and Jaddu definitely have an advantage over Viv and Harper. Yes, no name spinners have done well in India; but India still came back each time and won the series.

Sachin wasn't really absent in 2004, he played the last two tests, and he couldnt stop India from losing the series.

I don't see the point for demeriting Australia in 2001 given that they came back in 2004/5 and beat India comprehensively when there were no miracle performances to bail India.

My point is that it is perfectly expectable that even outside the WI pace quartet, they can bring their odd spinners to play to do such what England have done twice and Australia twice. They only need to do it once in a series and let their pacers try to win the rest of the time. On a rank turner, it is clear quality of bowling doesnt matter as much. Hence it is a toss-up.

 

[Bolo.]

That Indian lineups home record was formed facing guys like McGrath, Warne, Murali, Donald, Pollock, Steyn, Shoaib. They also faced Wasim, Waqar, Saqlain late nineties. They were simply more tested.

Again, this is a secondary point, the main issue is will Australian attack put Kohli's team in threat. Absolutely yes.

Fair point WRT the 90s guys in particular. India's golden batting generation weren't just facing mid 2000s trash over their careers.

But India still had notably higher batting averages at home in the 2010s than the 2000s. And world bowling averages we're lower at the end of the 2010s than we have seen in about 100 years. At a time India we're Posting obscene home Batting averages.

 

[subshakerz]

Fair point WRT the 90s guys in particular. India's golden batting generation weren't just facing mid 2000s trash over their careers.

But India still had notably higher batting averages at home in the 2010s than the 2000s. And world bowling averages we're lower at the end of the 2010s than we have seen in about 100 years. At a time India we're Posting obscene home Batting averages.

Like I said, we can debate who was the batter home batting unit, but we can't debate that McGrath/Gillespie proved themselves in India in the 2000s and would be a match-losing threat to Kohli's team. Trying to downplay this strikes as being disingenuous.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Sachin wasn't really absent in 2004, he played the last two tests, and he couldnt stop India from losing the series.

I don't see the point for demeriting Australia in 2001 given that they came back in 2004/5 and beat India comprehensively when there were no miracle performances to bail India.

My point is that it is perfectly expectable that even outside the WI pace quartet, they can bring their odd spinners to play to do such what England have done twice and Australia twice. They only need to do it once in a series and let their pacers try to win the rest of the time. On a rank turner, it is clear quality of bowling doesnt matter as much. Hence it is a toss-up.

McGrath played 3 Tests against England in Ashes 2005.

Australia played two series in India at their peak, won one and lost the other. It's a simple as that.

They definitely can bring grade 2 spinners, but I highly doubt that strategy will work always. Narendra Hirwani, Bob Massie, Jasu Patel, Lance Klusner..... All of them and more had some freak spells which won their team practically lost matches, many of those in India. I don't think you expect that to be the norm; do you?? And India lost the matches they lost without their prime batsmen more often than not (like lacking Kohli, Pujara, Rahane, Pant, etc for this one. I expect you don't think Gill, Iyer and Bharat has filled their shoes??)

I think my main point is, you are giving Australia a pass for not having McGrath and losing; but aren't doing the same for India for not having Virat and Sachin.

 

[subshakerz]

McGrath played 3 Tests against England in Ashes 2005.

Australia played two series in India at their peak, won one and lost the other. It's a simple as that.

They definitely can bring grade 2 spinners, but I highly doubt that strategy will work always. Narendra Hirwani, Bob Massie, Jasu Patel, Lance Klusner..... All of them and more had some freak spells which won their team practically lost matches, many of those in India. I don't think you expect that to be the norm; do you?? And India lost the matches they lost without their prime batsmen more often than not (like lacking Kohli, Pujara, Rahane, Pant, etc for this one. I expect you don't think Gill, Iyer and Bharat has filled their shoes??)

I think my main point is, you are giving Australia a pass for not having McGrath and losing; but aren't doing the same for India for not having Virat and Sachin.

McGrath was only really fully fit the first test in 2005, which Australia won.

Yes. Australia lost once and won once. So lets evaluate why they won and lost and see if that is relevant for Kohli's side. Oh wait, they lost due to miracle performances. I guess it's not something we can expect.

WI will bank mainly on their pacers to do the job. But the point is virtually any test standard spinner WI brings is also going to be a threat to Indian bats on rank turners, Ashwin/Jadeja won't be a special threat. Harmer/Tahir were even taking plenty of wickets against India in 2015. Rank turner game result will be 50/50 up in the air in such scenarios, and you have brought no evidence that India possess some significant advantage in such games.

Virat and Sachin were present and India still lost in the relevant games I mentioned.