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

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

And again I say, you’re fine including The Invincibles even though its just one series? Each team can only play the opposition put in front of them - and South Africa beat the top two nations besides themselves at the time, and were clearly ranked by everyone as the #1 team in the world by 1970.

The Invincibles is often used in discussions like this as annoying shorthand for the Austalian team of 1946-52 which was ridiculously dominant.

31 tests for 24 wins, 2 losses, and 5 draws.

 

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

Also The Invincibles probably missed their absolute peak due to War. Australia 1942 would have arguably been stronger than any team ever fielded.

 

[Coronis]

The Invincibles is often used in discussions like this as annoying shorthand for the Austalian team of 1946-52 which was ridiculously dominant.

31 tests for 24 wins, 2 losses, and 5 draws.

I’ve never heard it used to describe anything bar the 48 tour, personally.

Also The Invincibles probably missed their absolute peak due to War. Australia 1942 would have arguably been stronger than any team ever fielded.

Idk.. Lindwall only debuted in 41/42, would still be very raw. What would the rest of the team look like for you?

 

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

I’ve never heard it used to describe anything bar the 48 tour, personally.

That was a great team without Bradman. A player of Bradman’s stature and in his last series is ofc meant to take all the spotlight but that team wasn’t just one series thing, it was dominant for far longer.

 

[capt_Luffy]

And again I say, you’re fine including The Invincibles even though its just one series? Each team can only play the opposition put in front of them - and South Africa beat the top two nations besides themselves at the time, and were clearly ranked by everyone as the #1 team in the world by 1970.

As others already said (including me, refer to the post above); they won consecutive 7 series after the War till '52 before drawing one with South Africa. They were simply the best when they toured England, but it wasn't a one of team. I can't see by any metrics that West Indies would had been anything but a challenge for them in '65. They lost the home series in '64 to England and won one game in '65 to win the series. They only won 2 more in home vs an Australian side you won't necessarily call the strongest either. Not saying they couldn't had been a great team, just that 3 series; in which they never toured to Australia, won on the follow up tour to England after a home loss and played against West Indies which untill '66-'67 were still stronger than the Australian side; is really enough matches for me to call them a Top 5 Test side of all time. On the quality of players, sure you could do that. On results, nope.

 

[Coronis]

Barnes
Brown
Bradman
McCabe
Hassett
Gregory
Miller
Tallon
Lindwall
Johnston
O’Reilly

Which Gregory and Johnston are you referring to? Bill Johnston didn’t play FC until 45-46 (though the war intervened on Australian FC, Johnston would’ve been just 20 then) , Jack Gregory retired from FC in 1928 and Ross Gregory was already dead (due to the war though), although he had not done much of note in FC so far.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Which Gregory and Johnston are you referring to? Bill Johnston didn’t play FC until 45-46 (though the war intervened on Australian FC, Johnston would’ve been just 20 then) , Jack Gregory retired from FC in 1928 and Ross Gregory was already dead (due to the war though), although he had not done much of note in FC so far.

Morris
Barnes
Bradman
McCabe
Hassett
Brown
Miller
Lindwall
Tallon
Toshack
O'Reilly

This team is as good as they come; and could actually be bet to be able to beat 80s WI or 2000s Australia.

 

[Coronis]

As others already said (including me, refer to the post above); they won consecutive 7 series after the War till '52 before drawing one with South Africa. They were simply the best when they toured England, but it wasn't a one of team. I can't see by any metrics that West Indies would had been anything but a challenge for them in '65. They lost the home series in '64 to England and won one game in '65 to win the series. They only won 2 more in home vs an Australian side you won't necessarily call the strongest either. Not saying they couldn't had been a great team, just that 3 series; in which they never toured to Australia, won on the follow up tour to England after a home loss and played against West Indies which untill '66-'67 were still stronger than the Australian side; is really enough matches for me to call them a Top 5 Test side of all time. On the quality of players, sure you could do that. On results, nope.

You’re being disingenuous. In the second half of the 60’s Aus/Eng/SA were clearly the best 3 teams. The whole original point was that you claimed Windies pre-ban were dominant, which they clearly weren’t. Am finished re: this discussion.

 

[capt_Luffy]

You’re being disingenuous. In the second half of the 60’s Aus/Eng/SA were clearly the best 3 teams. The whole original point was that you claimed Windies pre-ban were dominant, which they clearly weren’t. Am finished re: this discussion.

Am I? West Indies defeated England in England as late as '67; and before losing to England in a single Test in '68, they won 6 consecutive series. According to you,the South African domination began with their sole win in England in '65. For a five year peak, that overlap is of half it's length.....

 

[Sunil1z]

From Jan 1964 to Dec 1968 , WI were ranked no.1 ( Historical ICC rankings)

 

[Coronis]

Am I? West Indies defeated England in England as late as '67; and before losing to England in a single Test in '68, they won 6 consecutive series. According to you,the South African domination began with their sole win in England in '65. For a five year peak, that overlap is of half it's length.....

Which teams here look most dominant?

Team records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

You can’t call a team that loses as often as it wins over a 5 year period dominant in that 5 year period.

 

[Sunil1z]

1968 ICC RATINGS

 

[Coronis]

1968 ICC RATINGS View attachment 39399

So? In the last 12 months New Zealand and South Africa have both played 6 tests. New Zealand has won 5 and lost 1. South Africa has won 3 and lost 3. This includes New Zealand winning 2-0 against South Africa.

South Africa’s current rating is 106. New Zealand’s current rating is 95.

I don’t hold too much sway with the ICC rankings, personally, whether its player or team based. They’re both inherently flawed imo.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Which teams here look most dominant?

Team records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

You can’t call a team that loses as often as it wins over a 5 year period dominant in that 5 year period.

That's heavily skewed by 4 bad series at the end of the 60s, post 68..... As Sunilz pointed out, Windies were ranked no 1 till the very end of 1968. Not to mention that Australia also lost almost as many as they won..... By that logic only England counts; and in there last 2 series, each won once.

 

[Coronis]

That's heavily skewed by 4 bad series at the end of the 60s, post 68..... As Sunilz pointed out, Windies were ranked no 1 till the very end of 1968. Not to mention that Australia also lost almost as many as they won..... By that logic only England counts; and in there last 2 series, each won once.

Well no **** thats why I’m saying they weren’t dominant immediately preceeding the ban

 

[capt_Luffy]

Well no **** thats why I’m saying they weren’t dominant immediately preceeding the ban

Yeah no **** if you only look at the last SA series, then they weren't..... But the period you are classifying as SA's peak, they were dominant for the first half of it.

 

[Nintendo]

2nd test, In India, VS AUS:

IND XI:
1.Rohit
2.KL
3.PUjara
4.Kohli
5.Rahane
6.Pant
7.Jadeja
8.Ashwin
9.Kuldeep
10.Bumrah
11.Shami

AUS XI:
1.Hayden
2.Langer
3.Ponting
4.Mark Waugh
5.Steve Waugh
6.Clarke
7.Gilchrist
8.Warne
9.Mcgill
10Gillepsie
11.Mcgrath

Spinners Pitch, Australia win the toss and bat:

Lunch day 1: 97/6 S Waugh 21 Jadeja 3-26 Bumrah 2-13

Australia 116 All out: Bumrah 5-24, Jadeja 4-34

Tea day 1: 38/0 Rohit 22* Rahul 15*

End of day 1: 143/1 Rahul 55* Pujara 51* Warne 1-37

Lunch day 2: 239/4 Rahul 63 Pujara 60 Warne 2-70 Clarke 1-12

Tea day 2: 352/5 Kohli 87*

End of day 2: 444/6 Kohli 134*

India 492 All out: Kohli 134(272) 18 x 4, Rahul 63(165) 5 x 4 1 x 6, Jadeja 63(114) 6 x 4, Ashwin 62* (97) 11 X 4, Pujara 60(78) 11 x 4, Warne 5-161

Lunch day 3: 44/0 Langer 23* Hayden 19*

Tea day 3: 124/4 Langer 27 M Waugh 26 Shami 2-32

Australia 189 ALL OUT, INDIA WIN BY AN INNINGS AND 187 RUNS:

Gilchrist 35(65) 6 x 4, Jadeja 3-16, Shami 3-41. Jadeja MOTM

Scorecards:

 

[Nintendo]

3rd test In India, VS AUS:

IND XI:
1.Rohit
2.KL
3.PUjara
4.Kohli
5.Rahane
6.Pant
7.Jadeja
8.Ashwin
9.Kuldeep
10.Bumrah
11.Shami

AUS XI:
1.Hayden
2.Langer
3.Ponting
4.Mark Waugh
5.Steve Waugh
6.Clarke
7.Gilchrist
8.Warne
9.Mcgill
10Gillepsie
11.Mcgrath

Flat Pitch, Asutralia win the toss and bat:

Lunch day 1: 121/2 Langer 48 Hayden 44 Kohli 2-16

Tea day 1: 260/4 M Waugh 80* Ponting 73

End of day 1: 387/8 M Waugh 127 Kohli 2-27 Bumrah 2-74

Australia 389 All out: M Waugh 124(128) 20 x 4 1 x 6, Ponting 73(106) 10 x 4 1 x 6, Bumrah 3-74 Shami 2-48

Lunch day 2: 84/0 Rohit 45* Rahul 37*

Tea day 2: 193/3 Rohit 93* Mcgrath 2-33

End of day 2: 305/5 Rohit 95 Pant 53* Mcgrath 3-75

India 370 All out: Rohit 95(166) 10 x 4, Pant 63(116) 8 x 4, Mgrath 91-5 Gillespie 3-92

Lunch day 3: 23/0 Hayden 18*

Tea day 3: 108/2 Ponting 41* Hayden 36 Yadav 1-22 Ashwin 1-24

End of day 3: 238/4 M Waugh 81 Ponting 71 Ashwin 2-34

Lunch day 4: 347/8 S Waugh 95* ASHWIN 4-59 Shami 2-55

Tea day 4: Australia 409 All out: S wAUGH 132(213) 24 x 4, M waugh 81(164) 9 x 4, Ponting 71(119) 10 x 4, Ashwin 4-84

End of day 4: 113/4 Kohli 35* Rohit 24 Warne 2-31 Mcgill 1-7

Lunch day 5: 234/5 Kohli 74* Pant 46 Warne 3-86

Tea day 5: 336/5 Kohli 123* Jadeja 93*

End of day 5: 387/9 Match DRAWN: Kohli 128(259) 15 x 4 1 x 6, Jadeja 108(179) 15 X 4, Warne 5-143

M Waugh MOTM

Notable efforts: Shami and ashwin batted out nearly 20 overs to get the draw after india lost 4 quick wickets at the end of day 5.

Scorecards:

 

[capt_Luffy]

This sim is the antithesis of Subs; it loves Jadeja!! Also, it gave Virat his first couple of Test wickets!

 

[howitzer]

Kohli trolling out both Aussie openers is gold.