Was WI ATG team overhyped?

[subshakerz]

Because it helps his argument

Think about their argument though.

No player has ever faced an ATG batting or bowling attack the quality of what we are hypothetically talking about. Does that we we ignore their entire career records or live performances to give us an indication how it would go if they played that quality of opposition?

 

[Socerer 01]

I think you're missing the point. Yes, the Indian batting lineup will be much better, but the attacks will be much better too than what India faced in 83, 2000 and 2004/5. But the principle of great pace attacks succeeding there still stands.

the margin of difference is far greater in India’s case compared to the attacks as @Sunil1z already mentioned

 

[Socerer 01]

Think about their argument though.

No player has ever faced an ATG batting or bowling attack the quality of what we are hypothetically talking about. Does that we we ignore their entire career records or live performances to give us an indication how it would go if they played that quality of opposition?

nobody’s doing that, this is gaslighting at this point

 

[Sunil1z]

@subshakerz
Don’t try to be too smart
You can’t say Sehwag is a walking wicket in ENG/SA in one thread and say that Amarnath was a good batsman in IND despite him averaging 30 .
Although I will support you in the assertion that IND had a good batting line up in 83 and WI bowlers deserve huge credit for that performance.

 

[kyear2]

But an all pace attack, imo would be more effective in more places than an all spin attack.

Marshall
Steyn
Hadlee
McGrath

Vs

Warne
Murali
O'Reilly
Ashwin

The pace attack would be more effective, imo everywhere with the exceptions of in India and SL. And all due respect to Warne and Murali in particular, they posed absolutely no threat to the best batsmen of their time, where as McGrath routinely routed them both. Admittedly, he did get pasted by them occasionally.

This is something that people conveniently forget.

I've also consistently asked, when it's mentioned that this is a bowler era, if it is or just poor batsmen trined in T20 cricket who don't know how to build innings.

 

[kyear2]

It's not. 3 series vs WI pace attacks '80, '86 and '90, PAK nor the WI ever posted a 400 run plus score. Both teams (WI and pak) bowled out for under 100 in 1986 on the back of pace. No spinner has a better record in Pakistan than Wasim, Imran, Marshall and Walsh. Remember, Pakistan do have there own share of pace bowlers that we can call upon.

So again, only in India and SL would a spin attack be more effective than a pace attack.

How is this difficult to understand.

 

[subshakerz]

Highly disagree

WI can’t field better pace attack than that
SA can field better pace attack by replacing Boje with Steyn but I don’t think Steyn would have outperformed Boje in that series ( Boje averaged 14 )
AUS can replace Kasprowich with other ATG pacer like Davidson

Whereas IND will field 3 bowlers ( Bumrah + Jadeja + Ashwin ) which are huge improvement over those attacks .

We are talking about the Indian ATG XI facing an attack better than they ever faced. Not sure why you are inserting them into past series.

And I am not even debating how ATG XI Indian bowlers will do against those batting lines up.

I am merely saying that the ATG XI pace attack will do well against Indian batting.

 

[Socerer 01]

This is something that people conveniently forget.

I've also consistently asked, when it's mentioned that this is a bowler era, if it is or just poor batsmen trined in T20 cricket who don't know how to build innings.

the whole “t20 cricket has ruined muh test players ability to build innings” is a meme at this point thats only used to fuel the usual CW nostalgia ship

 

[subshakerz]

@subshakerz
Don’t try to be too smart
You can’t say Sehwag is a walking wicket in ENG/SA in one thread and say that Amarnath was a good batsman in IND despite him averaging 30 .
Although I will support you in the assertion that IND had a good batting line up in 83 and WI bowlers deserve huge credit for that performance.

No I can concede on Amaranth not being as good as the others based on that home/away quirk if that was an accepted fact about him.

 

[Socerer 01]

We are talking about the Indian ATG XI facing an attack better than they ever faced. Not sure why you are inserting them into past series.

he didnt do that though? he gave the same concessions to other teams

 

[subshakerz]

nobody’s doing that, this is gaslighting at this point

All of us can and do use hypotheticals and live performances in an argument depending on the scenario, usually in a mix.

 

[Sunil1z]

This is something that people conveniently forget.

I've also consistently asked, when it's mentioned that this is a bowler era, if it is or just poor batsmen trined in T20 cricket who don't know how to build innings.

Ok I will make my point as clearly as possible

Will this Team dominate World Cricket

WI top 7 of 83 series
Ashwin
Warne
Murali
O’Reilly

If no , then which Teams between 80 to 94 can defeat it ?

 

[subshakerz]

he didnt do that though? he gave the same concessions to other teams

I am not debating Indian bowlers against other sides.

 

[subshakerz]

Ok I will make my point as clearly as possible

Will this Team dominate World Cricket

WI top 7 of 83 series
Ashwin
Warne
Murali
O’Reilly

If no , then which Teams between 80 to 94 can defeat it ?

They struggle to beat Australia of the early 80s. Fail in NZ.

 

[Socerer 01]

I am not debating Indian bowlers against other sides.

he’s still on point, he’s saying that the level of improvement from WI attack in 83 to atg WI attack isnt as big as from 83 India batting to atg India batting

 

[subshakerz]

he’s still on point, he’s saying that the level of improvement from WI attack in 83 to atg WI attack isnt as big as from 83 India batting to atg India batting

Just because Indian batting improved more doesn't mean they would succeed against the WI attack that flattened the 80s side. That's a fallacy.

Look, my point is fundamental: Indian home pitches themselves aren't sufficient to stop a foreign ATG pace attack from doing well against an Indian ATG batting lineup, and the series-winning success of the WI pace quartet, Donald/Pollock and McGrath/Gillespie, albeit against reasonably strong but weaker lineups than an ATG Indian one, point to this.

It is a separate matter how the ATG Indian bowling would do against the other batting lineups, and that we can differ on.

 

[Socerer 01]

Just because Indian batting improved more doesn't mean they would succeed against the WI attack that flattened the 80s side. That's a fallacy.

agree to disagree

 

[kyear2]

Why is every single ****ing thread either set up to, or ends up discussing how great India is in India?

Even if every thread is now about India and how historically great they are, why are the scenarios always in India. It's like morning else is important, no where else matters.

Come on....

The '83 batting lineup was not only not poor, it's better than most of the batting lineups today. Make it make sense.

 

[Silver Silva]

No, they were the best thing to happen to Test cricket. Fifteen years undefeated is justification of greatness, its just that like every era it had a beginning, a peak and a change for better or worse (In this case worse). The great West Indies is secure in its place in Test history.

 

[Socerer 01]

The '83 batting lineup was not only not poor, it's better than most of the batting lineups today. Make it make sense.

yes yes cricket and cricket talent peaked in the 80s and it has declined since then

as to the other part you questioned, its because of we all know who. good that finally someone else can also see it