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

[capt_Luffy]

Without McGrath. That was one of the worst aust attacks of all time tbh

I think aus 2004 batting line up would go okay. Probably bit better than wi batting given they have mastered Murali. Real advantage australia would have is two quality spinners and the current indian generation don't play spin as well as their predecessors

I brought the Kumble point and not their bowling for that reason, they were missing two frontline bowlers, but their batting line-up was at full gear. Yes, they did good in Sri Lanka, but I always it was more of them somewhat neutralising Murali and going after the others more than something like Lara did. Also, was that bowling line-up that bad? Sure they didn't have to Top 10 bowlers so they nowhere can be considered the same bowling unit, but independently, they still had Gillespie, MacGill, Stuart Clarke and Kasprowicz I believe.

 

[Socerer 01]

It's kinda true though. There've been many pacers who've done well in India without needing to necessarily rely on reverse. If you have a deadly reverse swing master like Steyn it definitely supercharges your chances because a bowler like that is likely to win a game basically on his own in one 6 over spell, but I wouldn't say it's mandatory for you to succeed.

there’s like 8 overseas pacers who average below 30 since 2013 in India and this has been the greatest era for pace bowlers in test history

 

[subshakerz]

The divide isn't between those of us arguing for close Aus/WI wins or close Ind win, the divide is between those of us arguing for close wins for Aus/WI/Ind and Ind dominating.

 

[capt_Luffy]

I think age of some of these posters are 20-25 . And IND haven’t lost a Test series at home since they have started watching cricket . So they really believe that IND can’t be beaten at home . 1or 2 series loss at home will be a rude awakening for them .

Yeah, I am 20.....

 

[capt_Luffy]

there’s like 8 overseas pacers who average below 30 since 2013 in India and this has been the greatest era for pace bowlers in test history

Are you being serious here? Because noway this era is better for pacers than the 70s, 80s and especially the 90s....

 

[Sunil1z]

Yeah, I am 20.....

Not all 20 years are delusional

 

[capt_Luffy]

The divide isn't between those of us arguing for close Aus/WI wins or close Ind win, the divide is between those of us arguing for close wins for Aus/WI/Ind and Ind dominating.

No, the divide is between people saying Aus/WI would win and those saying India are favourites here.

 

[Socerer 01]

I think age of some of these posters are 20-25 . And IND haven’t lost a Test series at home since they have started watching cricket . So they really believe that IND can’t be beaten at home . 1or 2 series loss at home will be a rude awakening for them .

i think age of some of these posters are 50-60 . And WI didn’t lose a test series for many years when they most passionately watched cricket . So they really believe that WI can’t be beaten . 1or 2 series loss will be a rude awakening for them .

see i can strawman too

 

[OverratedSanity]

Without McGrath. That was one of the worst aust attacks of all time tbh

That's always been a bit overstated imo. Still had two class bowlers in Gillespie and Macgill. Personally a fan of Bichel too. I'd say the attacks in 2012 or so when SA toured and Australia had siddle, hilfenhaus, baby Pattinson/Starc and some random trundlers like Hastings and co were significantly worse.

 

[subshakerz]

No, the divide is between people saying Aus/WI would win and those saying India are favourites here.

Saying India would win/lose in a close series is a completely reasonable opinion.

Saying India would thrash Aus and WI is not.

Nobody here is arguing Aus or WI are thrashing India in India.

 

[Slifer]

I genuinely doubt this

And I genuinely didn't ask you. Reverse swing begun in the early 80s thanks to Safraz and Imran but bowlers before and since have toured India without it, with varying degrees of success: Roberts, Donald, Walsh, McGrath, Holding, Pollock etc. And that too vs batting lineups either as good as the current or better.

And for the millionth time I already said India would win what exactly more do you and your cohorts want? Good grief!!

 

[Sunil1z]

i think age of some of these posters are 50-60 . And WI didn’t lose a test series for many years when they most passionately watched cricket . So they really believe that WI can’t be beaten . 1or 2 series loss will be a rude awakening for them .

see i can strawman too

Actually WI fans are admitting that their side will lose . It is you who believe in 3-0 or 3-1 scoreline which is highly unrealistic.

 

[Socerer 01]

Are you being serious here? Because noway this era is better for pacers than the 70s, 80s and especially the 90s....

outside of the top top names from those times how many pacers were good compared to now? even Bangladesh have a solid pacer now in Shoriful now

 

[Socerer 01]

Actually WI fans are admitting that their side will lose . It is you who believe in 3-0 or 3-1 scoreline which is highly unrealistic.

so a 2-1 is fine but India eeking out another win to make it 3-1 is highly unrealistic?

i cant even

 

[Slifer]

I think age of some of these posters are 20-25 . And IND haven’t lost a Test series at home since they have started watching cricket . So they really believe that IND can’t be beaten at home . 1or 2 series loss at home will be a rude awakening for them .

You know I never thought of this. Possibly.

 

[Slifer]

No, the divide is between people saying Aus/WI would win and those saying India are favourites here.

I'd like you to post the list of people who've said either WI or Australia would win in India with quotes...

 

[R!TTER]

IPL will mean McGrath/Gillespie are more not less of a threat.

It also means that these guys would play reverse sweeps/laps or other T20 shots which the other lot did not, you said Oz won because they dried up the runs - it can be countered through T20 shots especially on flattish Indian decks!

 

[OverratedSanity]

Are you being serious here? Because noway this era is better for pacers than the 70s, 80s and especially the 90s....

It's arguably better than 70s and 80s because that era had many great pacers concentrated in WI. This era depth and distribution of great bowlers across teams is better.

90s definitely a level above.

 

[Gob]

And I genuinely didn't ask you. Reverse swing begun in the early 80s thanks to Safraz and Imran but bowlers before and since have toured India without it, with varying degrees of success: Roberts, Donald, Walsh, McGrath, Holding, Pollock etc. And that too vs batting lineups either as good as the current or better.

And for the millionth time I already said India would win what exactly more do you and your cohorts want? Good grief!!

I think reverse swing is the only sustainable method to success for quick ballers in India. Love to know your take on this

 

[OverratedSanity]

I think reverse swing is the only sustainable method to success for quick ballers in India. Love to know your take on this

The likes of Mcgrath, Donald, Pollock, Walsh all made life hell for Indian batsmen without really hooping it with the old ball.