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

[capt_Luffy]

So you think the Eden result wasn't tight based on margin. Fair enough.

No point bringing up the 2007 tour. That was a totally different Aus side again.

You agree Tendulkar had a slump but that him being in the side would have brought them confidence? Why didn't it bring them confidence in the 3rd test when they lost the series? The point is whether his runs would have made a difference in the result and I don't think you believe so.

2004/5 was a pretty clear indication of an Aus side who had done their homework gaining an unambiguous victory.

I will go down the OS route, your posts are like your face!

 

[capt_Luffy]

In Subz mind Aus won the 2021 BGT because their win was bigger than Indiia’s wins and they had the better team on paper

the reality is the record is the record and the GOAT Aus team went either 3-3 or 4-5 in India depending on how you define the timeframe. As a result they were equal to or worse than the India team of that era in India. This is the only indisputable fact.

Let's follow his logic and ignore the 98 series because it wasn't in the 2000s as the title says. So, given the 2008 series was, that means India has a record of 5-3 over Australia at home in the 2000s.

 

[subshakerz]

Let's follow his logic and ignore the 98 series because it wasn't in the 2000s as the title says. So, given the 2008 series was, that means India has a record of 5-3 over Australia at home in the 2000s.

You are missing the point on purpose then

 

[subshakerz]

I will go down the OS route, your posts are like your face!

Sad you are usually above such things.

 

[capt_Luffy]

You are missing the point on purpose then

I ain't. You are making a non existent point.

Sad you are usually above such things.

I also can take only so much bullshit. My patience also have a breaking point.

 

[subshakerz]

I ain't. You are making a non existent point.

I also can take only so much bullshit. My patience also have a breaking point.

I mean, perhaps you need to cool down a bit.

 

[honestbharani]

With over 200 runs to go, that’s definitely more like 50-50.

If anyone who actually watched the game was asked, it definitely was not.

 

[Xix2565]

They played a lot of quality spinners for sure.

Doubtful given the pitches.

 

[subshakerz]

Doubtful given the pitches.

I mean, they played Murali, Saqlain and Kumble each at home. They aren't the WI of the 80s when it comes to facing spin.

 

[Xix2565]

I mean, they played Murali, Saqlain and Kumble each at home. They aren't the WI of the 80s when it comes to facing spin.

This is dumb as **** tbh. 3 bowlers do not even remotely suggest that teams were consistently facing quality spinners. 3 bowlers don't even make up a single team's bowling attack. Do you even know how Test bowling works?

 

[Daemon]

Subz has been rock hard for about 48 hours now and you guys are feeding what he needs to maintain it

 

[subshakerz]

This is dumb as **** tbh. 3 bowlers do not even remotely suggest that teams were consistently facing quality spinners. 3 bowlers don't even make up a single team's bowling attack. Do you even know how Test bowling works?

Define consistently and did Kohlis team consistently face better spinners.

 

[Burgey]

Tendulkar injured doesn't count

McGrath injured in 98 for Aus. That one doesn't count either.

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Subz has been rock hard for about 48 hours now and you guys are feeding what he needs to maintain it

Pu$$y?

 

[Xix2565]

Define consistently and did Kohlis team consistently face better spinners.

Consistently means looking at the records of all the spin bowlers who played and then using that to determine quality by the usual methods people use (averages relative to peers/conditions).

I would say they were a lot more capable than most of the mediocrity in the 90s/00s. And they've gotten a lot more pitches that suit their type of bowling as well as changes in the methods of bowling spin due to advances elsewhere making even people like Santner/O'Keefe more threatening.

 

[sayon basak]

I will go down the OS route, your posts are like your face!

The only post that actually matters in this whole thread.

 

[honestbharani]

Subz has been rock hard for about 48 hours

If you mean the brain, I would bet its a lot more than 48 hours tbh.

 

[subshakerz]

I would say they were a lot more capable than most of the mediocrity in the 90s/00s. And they've gotten a lot more pitches that suit their type of bowling as well as changes in the methods of bowling spin due to advances elsewhere making even people like Santner/O'Keefe more threatening.

Would you agree that Ashwin/Jadeja have been made more threatening than they really are due to pitches?

Strange how I made this same point yet got such outcry.

Anyways, your raw average approach I have always found a poor measure to determine actual relative quality.

 

[Xix2565]

Would you agree that Ashwin/Jadeja have been made more threatening than they really are due to pitches?

Strange how I made this same point yet got such outcry.

Anyways, your raw average approach I have always found a poor measure to determine actual relative quality.

They are simply better spinners overall regardless. That you seem to not acknowledge this fact is beyond idiotic. If this is about pitches, then do you really want to sit here and lie to me that pitches don't benefit every single bowler to have ever bowled? Which is it, do you want to lie or do you want to be stupid again?

You didn't make a point, you bitch like you always do when I pointed out you behave like this all the time.

Considering your methods of evaluation, I think my approach is far superior. It avoids dumb pitfalls or general misunderstandings of the game.

 

[subshakerz]

They are simply better spinners overall regardless. That you seem to not acknowledge this fact is beyond idiotic. If this is about pitches, then do you really want to sit here and lie to me that pitches don't benefit every single bowler to have ever bowled? Which is it, do you want to lie or do you want to be stupid again?

You didn't make a point, you bitch like you always do when I pointed out you behave like this all the time.

Considering your methods of evaluation, I think my approach is far superior. It avoids dumb pitfalls or general misunderstandings of the game.

What a hissy fit. All for me just pointing out that you were making the same point I get critiques for.

And now you are walking back your own statement on pitches that you brought up.