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

[kyear2]

Now this is trolling...

Yeah.

I think some here think cricket started a decade ago.

And why are we only focusing on at home. In NFL discussions on hypothetical matchups we always talk about on a neutral field.

 

[Socerer 01]

Yeah.

I think some here think cricket started a decade ago.

And why are we only focusing on at home. In NFL discussions on hypothetical matchups we always talk about on a neutral field.

some here also think cricket is the only sport thats devolved backwards in terms of skill and fitness but i dont see anyone pointing that out

 

[Xix2565]

And why are we only focusing on at home. In NFL discussions on hypothetical matchups we always talk about on a neutral field.

When in the history of the game has cricket ever been on a neutral field? The pitch is part of the game in a way that is unique to outdoor sports.

 

[kyear2]

When in the history of the game has cricket ever been on a neutral field? The pitch is part of the game in a way that is unique to outdoor sports.

My point is that the great teams don't rely on such home field advantages and were equally good home and away.

But 1. I've asked this before, but seem to be varying squads per person, but which squad / year are you referring?

And 2. how do you think said team would perform away to either the Windies or Aussies?

 

[kyear2]

some here also think cricket is the only sport thats devolved backwards in terms of skill and fitness but i dont see anyone pointing that out

I find this question particularly amusing.

Because on one thread I have guys insisting that Grace and Barnes are just as good as modern players and here I have you treating Marshall and Richards like they were the ones playing in 1894.

 

[Socerer 01]

I find this question particularly amusing.

Because on one thread I have guys insisting that Grace and Barnes are just as good as modern players and here I have you treating Marshall and Richards like they were the ones playing in 1894.

another strawman, great

@OverratedSanity was right with his posts

 

[CricAddict]

My point is that the great teams don't rely on such home field advantages and were equally good home and away.

But 1. I've asked this before, but seem to be varying squads per person, but which squad / year are you referring?

And 2. how do you think said team would perform away to either the Windies or Aussies?

This Indian team stands no chance and will get smashed away to both Windies and Aussies. Can't win with just Bumrah alone. But the OP was specifically asking of Indian conditions where the current Indian team is virtually unbeatable with multiple cheat codes.

 

[OverratedSanity]

And why are we only focusing on at home.

Lol what. Because that's what the thread topic is?

 

[Xix2565]

My point is that the great teams don't rely on such home field advantages and were equally good home and away.

But 1. I've asked this before, but seem to be varying squads per person, but which squad / year are you referring?

And 2. how do you think said team would perform away to either the Windies or Aussies?

Again, how are you so sure? Pitches have changed so much over time to say this so confidently about home advantage not being relied upon for older teams.

Seems to be post Kohli era, so I guess 2015-now?

Ah, the strawmen coming in clutch to avoid coping. Better than what you seem to believe I guess, unless you decide that these teams don't need home advantage and should prepare the sort of pitches that India have gotten in the WI recently or how Australia used to have spinning tracks in the past. Then it's 10-0 clean sweep McGrath style.

 

[kyear2]

another strawman, great

@OverratedSanity was right with his posts

You posed a question and it was answered. You were the one proposing strawman positions.

 

[Socerer 01]

Lol what. Because that's what the thread topic is?

no the thread topic is use whatever strawman is convenient to diss on India’s record

 

[Socerer 01]

You posed a question and it was answered. You were the one proposing strawman positions.

okay find where i said Marshall and Viv were from 1894, i’ll be here when you do

 

[kyear2]

Again, how are you so sure? Pitches have changed so much over time to say this so confidently about home advantage not being relied upon for older teams.

Seems to be post Kohli era, so I guess 2015-now?

Ah, the strawmen coming in clutch to avoid coping. Better than what you seem to believe I guess, unless you decide that these teams don't need home advantage and should prepare the sort of pitches that India have gotten in the WI recently or how Australia used to have spinning tracks in the past. Then it's 10-0 clean sweep McGrath style.

2015 till now is almost a decade, if we're arguing something it needs to be a bit more specific.

What the actual hell are you even trying to say here?

Back in the '80's we had a variety of tracks, some quick, a couple slow and one renowned for being quite flat. There wasn't a need to doctor pitches.

And besides Sydney, what pitches we spinning during Warne's time?

Genuinely don't understand what you're trying to say here.

 

[kyear2]

no the thread topic is use whatever strawman is convenient to diss on India’s record

No one's trying to diss on anyone's record. That's where you're just wrong and taking this **** way too personal.

But you are to dominate when you've catered the conditions to your preference.

The only one dissing anyone here are you guys pretending that the two teams referenced aren't quite literally the two greatest teams of all time and would lie down and play dead.

As I said a few posts above, I have literally no idea who would win and it would depend on which iteration of the Indian team you're selecting.

 

[subshakerz]

Asking 80s windies or 2000s Aussies to win against current India is like asking a fish to climb a tree. They don't have the goods to win on these spinning pitches.

May be Australia with Warne have a much better chance though he has failed earlier. But windies with 4 pacers in the tests in India will get smashed 4-0 with Viv or the other great batsmen salvaging a draw.

Again, useless hyperbole. I like how current Eng and Aus with rookie spinners somehow can win a test today yet the strongest side in cricket history somehow will go winless.

Please stay on planet Earth in these discussions.

 

[subshakerz]

I find this question particularly amusing.

Because on one thread I have guys insisting that Grace and Barnes are just as good as modern players and here I have you treating Marshall and Richards like they were the ones playing in 1894.

Kyear, certain posters simply lack the ability of objective analysis. Look at the posts in this thread after England won the 1st test and now when they lost the series. Current results so easily mess with their ability to see things neutrally.

 

[Socerer 01]

No one's trying to diss on anyone's record. That's where you're just wrong and taking this **** way too personal.

But you are to dominate when you've catered the conditions to your preference.

The only one dissing anyone here are you guys pretending that the two teams referenced aren't quite literally the two greatest teams of all time and would lie down and play dead.

As I said a few posts above, I have literally no idea who would win and it would depend on which iteration of the Indian team you're selecting.

all of what you’ve said has been said by Indian fans after subs went on his usual **** of strawmanning wherever possible, i thought @OverratedSanity made that clear with his blatant trolling but you’re still missing it

 

[Socerer 01]

Again, useless hyperbole. I like how current Eng and Aus with rookie spinners somehow can win a test today yet the strongest side in cricket history somehow will go winless.

Please stay on planet Earth in these discussions.

@kyear2 exhibit 101

 

[Xix2565]

2015 till now is almost a decade, if we're arguing something it needs to be a bit more specific.

What the actual hell are you even trying to say here?

Back in the '80's we had a variety of tracks, some quick, a couple slow and one renowned for being quite flat. There wasn't a need to doctor pitches.

And besides Sydney, what pitches we spinning during Warne's time?

Genuinely don't understand what you're trying to say here.

The scope for the teams is pretty big though. Shouldn't be a big deal.

That home advantage matters, regardless of pitch preparation and intentions behind them? Are you an idiot who doesn't like to read and understand what I'm saying? I didn't bring up doctored wickets or whatever whinge you like about Indian pitches, so I've got no clue why you decided to go there.

Isn't it pretty clear? 'Better than you believe' isn't impossible to understand lol. And the rest was a McGrath meme.

 

[capt_Luffy]

I find this question particularly amusing.

Because on one thread I have guys insisting that Grace and Barnes are just as good as modern players and here I have you treating Marshall and Richards like they were the ones playing in 1894.

Okay, so as the first part is geared towards me, I would just say it's definitely a position (i.e., I would be somewhat surprised otherwise) that the game has changed enough over the last 4 decades that WI from back then will face trouble teleported directly to present day. The game didn't changed overnight at the beginning of the 20th century, I described the methodology previously as a more balanced version, but you can't have your cake and eat it too.....