Most comprehensive defeats of Australia in their own backyard

[Victor Ian]

I can remember the West Indies humiliating Australia twice in the early 80s. Then a wanker inspired NZ not long after. I don't recall any other instance as bad as this pummelling by India. What others am I forgetting? Let's demote this Indian win somewhat down the ladder to take the gloss off their first ever series win here.

 

[ankitj]

Didn't England beat Australia 3-1 in Ashes around 2012?

Edit: it was 2010-11.

 

[Victor Ian]

Too right. And we had a better team then. India now down to 5th.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Those two tests against SA last year were pretty terrible Hobart especially , regardless of the consolation win in the dead rubber.

 

[srbhkshk]

Yeah, SA and England wins are both more impressive in a direct comparison - but this is an SC country winning in Australia, so it has a different significance.

 

[Victor Ian]

Definitely significant. This series just seemed impossible for Australia to trouble the batsmen and have a chance. England and SA, less so.

 

[aussie tragic]

England won 5-1 against Australia in 1978-9 (AB debut series)

 

[NotMcKenzie]

England did 4-1 in 28-29 and 32-33

 

[Senile Sentry]

Meh pre war series should be discounted as cricket was a bilateral sport then.

 

[Starfighter]

Meh pre war series should be discounted as cricket was a bilateral sport then.

No. This stupid contention doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

 

[morgieb]

England did 4-1 in 28-29 and 32-33

A lot of those Tests went 6/7 days, in modern parlance the result would not look anywhere near as lopsided (as a lot of the Tests would've been draws)

 

[cnerd123]

Meh pre war series should be discounted as cricket was a bilateral sport then.

I wonder if cricket of this era will be discounted in the year 3000 because 'back then it was a single planet sport'

 

[burr]

This still isn't as bad as 10-11. That was the equivalent of ripping living skin off the flesh with no painkillers.

 

[NotMcKenzie]

A lot of those Tests went 6/7 days, in modern parlance the result would not look anywhere near as lopsided (as a lot of the Tests would've been draws)

Not sure that's all that justified.

Besides, grinding Australia through 1329 overs in four tests has its own sort of comprehesivity about it.

Admittedly, nothing in the series came close again to the 675 run margin of the first test.

 

[jimmy101]

I'd say it'd be a toss up between...
1911-12 vs England
1928-29 vs England
1978-79 vs England
1984-85 vs WI
or this current series vs India.

 

[Starfighter]

Yeah, I think the opposite of morgieb. There's something about completely and utterly annihilating the opposition that is so compelling about the bigger timeless test victories.

Aside from the days in Australia being five hours rather than the modern six to six and a half that argument could be applied to almost any match before the 54/55 Ashes.

 

[jimmy101]

I wonder if cricket of this era will be discounted in the year 3000 because 'back then it was a single planet sport'

Think you'd find there would be a lot of adjusted averages, based on how strong the gravitational pull is from planet to planet.

 

[vcs]

Think you'd find there would be a lot of adjusted averages, based on how strong the gravitational pull is from planet to planet.

Imagine having to face the Martian spinners on a dustbowl...

 

[Bijed]

Also, the early T20 bowlers who used to use the moonball quite a lot would be viewed as being hundreds of years ahead of their time

 

[cnerd123]

We'll be sending teams off to tour via ship just like the old days. Maybe this was we'll get 5 test match series again, with a ton of FC games Vs domestic sides.