• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

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

B

Bolo.

International Captain
subshakerz said:
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.
Click to expand...
You have plenty of people in this thread to debate bowling with. I'm more interested in the batting, cos I think the home advantage from batting is comparatively overlooked. I've not discussed bowling at all.

Batting and bowling are equally valuable.

It strikes me as disingenuous that when I raise points about the batting that you can't respond to, you revert to 'what about the bowling'?
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
Bolo. said:
You have plenty of people in this thread to debate bowling with. I'm more interested in the batting, cos I think the home advantage from batting is comparatively overlooked. I've not discussed bowling at all.

Batting and bowling are equally valuable.

It strikes me as disingenuous that when I raise points about the batting that you can't respond to, you revert to 'what about the bowling'?
Click to expand...
Its not disingenuous because you only asked me about India's 2000s batting relevant to an earlier post of of how good Australia McGrath/Gillepsie were in India.

The thread isnt 2000s India vs 2010s India but 2000s Australia vs 2010s India.
 
capt_Luffy

capt_Luffy

Cricketer Of The Year
subshakerz said:
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.
Click to expand...
Okay, let's evaluate. Sachin was fit in neither of the two games he played in.

Australia lost two matches. As I said I could had written one if they had won the last Test, they didn't. And that miracle won't happened had McWarne were able to get VVS/Rahul out for cheaper or if Australians just batted better.

Ashwin/Jadeja aren't any special threat is just pure bullshit. Yes, Lyon and O'Keefe did well, as did Tahir and Harmer; and they did even better and India won the series. Viv and Harper haven't done anything anywhere to suggest they could bowl better than the Indian duo at any pitch. You're making **** up by now.

You have mentioned the Test yesterday's more than a few times; in which no batsman except Rohit making into Indian team played in. And this Test wasn't even a rank turner; atleast not one "impossible" to bat on. Sehwag ain't no Sachin and in 2017 you haven't addressed all the innings of Pujara, Rahul, Saha and even Jadeja; who collectively outplayed Aussies. As it stands, India has lost a place here and there, but they haven't lost a series.
 
B

Bolo.

International Captain
subshakerz said:
Its not disingenuous because you only asked me about India's 2000s batting relevant to an earlier post of of how good Australia McGrath/Gillepsie were in India.

The thread isnt 2000s India vs 2010s India but 2000s Australia vs 2010s India.
Click to expand...
Leave India in the 2000s alone then. You are the one that keeps bringing it up.

World bowling averages were lower at the end of the 2010s than we have seen in about 100 years. At a time India were posting obscene home batting averages. Probably higher than any team in modern cricket has ever managed, with the possible exception of AUS on their featherbed drop in pitches at a time when bowling stocks were much lower. Explain how they did this on the 'burners' they were producing please.

Form is obviously part of this answer. But it is not one that is at all meaningful to the question you posed in the OP. We are only looking at the team in that form.
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
capt_Luffy said:
Okay, let's evaluate. Sachin was fit in neither of the two games he played in.

Australia lost two matches. As I said I could had written one if they had won the last Test, they didn't. And that miracle won't happened had McWarne were able to get VVS/Rahul out for cheaper or if Australians just batted better.

Ashwin/Jadeja aren't any special threat is just pure bull****. Yes, Lyon and O'Keefe did well, as did Tahir and Harmer; and they did even better and India won the series. Viv and Harper haven't done anything anywhere to suggest they could bowl better than the Indian duo at any pitch. You're making **** up by now.

You have mentioned the Test yesterday's more than a few times; in which no batsman except Rohit making into Indian team played in. And this Test wasn't even a rank turner; atleast not one "impossible" to bat on. Sehwag ain't no Sachin and in 2017 you haven't addressed all the innings of Pujara, Rahul, Saha and even Jadeja; who collectively outplayed Aussies. As it stands, India has lost a place here and there, but they haven't lost a series.
Click to expand...
We can differ on whether India didnt have a good enough batting lineup without fit Tendulkar in 2004 versus Australia without McGrath in 2005. It's not a fundamentally big point to the main discussion.

I agree, I don't think Viv/Harper would generally bowl better than Ashwin/Jadeja throughout a series, Warne/MacGill maybe could match them, I am just saying that the odds for a random one-off match-changing fifer or so to come from one of them in the series in relatively high given the precedent and that WI had strong enough batting to take advantage of it. Surely that isn't controversial? Obviously most of the heavy lifting will be done by the pacers.
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
Bolo. said:
Leave India in the 2000s alone then. You are the one that keeps bringing it up.

World bowling averages were lower at the end of the 2010s than we have seen in about 100 years. At a time India were posting obscene home batting averages. Probably higher than any team in modern cricket has ever managed, with the possible exception of AUS on their featherbed drop in pitches at a time when bowling stocks were much lower. Explain how they did this on the 'burners' they were producing please.

Form is obviously part of this answer. But it is not one that is at all meaningful to the question you posed in the OP. We are only looking at the team in that form.
Click to expand...
I think Kohli is legend at home and yes Pujara, Rahane were all a significant home batting unit during those few years. No doubt. And yes, in between the spicy pitches, this side piled on the runs on the slower or traditional turning tracks too. I don't think they faced a sustained high standard of bowling though generally which is my caveat on them.

The only points I differ on are that they are superior than Aus/WI batting in these conditions. I think it is close but I think the ATG batting lineups are superior.
 
capt_Luffy

capt_Luffy

Cricketer Of The Year
subshakerz said:
We can differ on whether India didnt have a good enough batting lineup without fit Tendulkar in 2004 versus Australia without McGrath in 2005. It's not a fundamentally big point to the main discussion.

I agree, I don't think Viv/Harper would generally bowl better than Ashwin/Jadeja throughout a series, Warne/MacGill maybe could match them, I am just saying that the odds for a random one-off match-changing fifer or so to come from one of them in the series in relatively high given the precedent and that WI had strong enough batting to take advantage of it. Surely that isn't controversial? Obviously most of the heavy lifting will be done by the pacers.
Click to expand...
I am not saying Viv and Harper can't win a match; just that it's quite unlikely.
 
S

subshakerz

Hall of Fame Member
capt_Luffy said:
I am not saying Viv and Harper can't win a match; just that it's quite unlikely.
Click to expand...
I think in a 4 match series with mostly rank turners one such match-turning spell is likely to happen. Even Tahir/Harmer bowled such spells but SA's batting wasn't up to taking advantage of it. but WI's batting certainly can.

If Indian curators just had normal turners, then no, Harper/Viv are out of the equation.

Anyways, at least you get my point.
 
capt_Luffy

capt_Luffy

Cricketer Of The Year
subshakerz said:
I think in a 4 match series with mostly rank turners one such match-turning spell is likely to happen. Even Tahir/Harmer bowled such spells but SA's batting wasn't up to taking advantage of it. but WI's batting certainly can.

If Indian curators just had normal turners, then no, Harper/Viv are out of the equation.

Anyways, at least you get my point.
Click to expand...
I got that point from the start. And I don't expect more than one rank turner; in which I don't expect them to take advantage. That's all.

And as far as batting goes, I genuinely think WI is better in India, but Australia ain't. There best batsman and x factor both struggled in India; and while 4 batsmen batted well, I don't think they would bat better than 4-5 Indian ones. But x factor India is the long tail, with Ashwin at 9.
 
H

HouHsiaoHsien

International Debutant
subshakerz said:
I think Kohli is legend at home and yes Pujara, Rahane were all a significant home batting unit during those few years. No doubt. And yes, in between the spicy pitches, this side piled on the runs on the slower or traditional turning tracks too. I don't think they faced a sustained high standard of bowling though generally which is my caveat on them.

The only points I differ on are that they are superior than Aus/WI batting in these conditions. I think it is close but I think the ATG batting lineups are superior.
Click to expand...
Let’s agree to disagree here
 
honestbharani

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Daemon said:
The stamina subshakerz has for these discussions is truly ATG level stuff
Click to expand...
nah.. it just seems that way coz the rest of you shits debating are even worse. He is great at debating in friendly conditions with the mod prepared debates, and not upto scratch when debating overseas in trying conditions like reddit. Not even top 10 compared to greats of yesteryear like Ikki and Richard.
 
kyear2

kyear2

International Coach
Genuine question. How do we feel about specifically preparing such pitches in the first place such that this is even a talking point.

Australia didn't do it, there's variety, same in the Caribbean. England has always been a mixed bag, and that's taking other conditions into account. It seems to be India and SL that does / has done this. Well SA, but that was very much a double edged sword that impacted their batsmen, so evened out to some extent
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top