Which team was better? Windies of Early 80s or the current Aussie Team?

[aussie_beater]

In test cricket its hard to say, but I think the Waugh's Untouchables are better. Waughs men registered 43 wins of 51 games, Lloyds registered 43 wins of 76, Borders 43 of 92.

But seriously one thing people forget is that back in the Windies era there was no South Africa, no Sri Lanka, Australia were a bunch of disjointed men going thru their worst era, India and Pakistan were not serious in test cricket. That left only England as a strong opposition.

Are you serious ? England were the team that suffered the worst at the hands of the Windies in the 80s... 5-0 whitewashes were reserved only for them.... no other team suffered so badly at the hands of the Windies. As I said earlier, the quality of opposition in my opinion was much better in the 80s then what the Aussies of the 90s faced. The WI team that Aus plays now or for the better part of the 90s is not a patch on the Aus team that WI had to face for most of the 80s except for a period of 3-4 years.

Furthermore I think judgjing Lloyds men by their performance in the England domestic is not accurate. Take Sami, who just bagged 6 wickets there a few days ago, or Mushtaq Ahmed whose bin the leading wicket taker there, or even folks like Devon Malcolm and Gough who rocked there.

Who is judging the Windies team by the performance of the team members in county cricket ?

 

[badgerhair]

I saw Viv Richards get 291 at The Oval in 1976, and I've been to see every other WI team that's arrived in England, as well as the Australians.

Lloyd's WI would not have been able to operate their four-prong pace attack today. Not only are there limits on bouncers, but the over-rate restrictions would severely hamper them: it was deliberate policy to bowl 12 overs an hour, not only to kep the bowlers fresh but top make sure that what scoring there was was slow, thus demoralising the batsmen further. Such tactics are not allowed today.

I think the 1984 team was a bit better than the 1980 team, although all the evidence suggest they actually peaked in about 1982.

I don't know how much better the Australians got after 2001, but they're not as good now (at least until we see how McGrath goes).

The 2001 Australians just shade it for me over the 1984 Windies. If nothing else, Warne added a dimension that WI simply didn't have. Sure, their fourth seamer was better than Brett Lee (who isn't?). but Warne more than makes up for that. And they're better fielders than WI were.

Cheers,

Mike

 

[Swervy]

yeah..many think WI were at the peak in 84 vs England but England were shot at as a team then, they never really had a chance (despite Lamb hitting 3 100's), remember England had lost a number of players like Gooch and Emburey to the SA tour.So yeah, West Indies peak was 1980 to 82.

It would appear that those who saw the WI at their peak on this forum consider the Aussies to be slightly stronger.

 

[bennyr]

Like most people, I reckon it's slightly in favour of the Aussies, but if the fictional match were to take place, the result may be determined by the era in which it was played (pitch conditions, over rates etc).

That said, I still think the Aussies have it slightly in terms of domination of their era.

One thing the Aussie side has lacked (in ODI terms) is a twelfth man of the calibre of Roger Harper. You really knew the West Indies were in decline when he started making the eleven.

 

[age_master]

Warne the best spinner and McGrath the most accurate quick in history and the WI side certainly didn't have a gilchrist...

 

[PY]

Warne the best spinner and McGrath the most accurate quick in history and the WI side certainly didn't have a gilchrist...

Lovely unbiased opinion there Age.

And West Indies did have a Gilchrist at one point.

 

[Bapu Rao Swami]

Are you serious ? England were the team that suffered the worst at the hands of the Windies in the 80s... 5-0 whitewashes were reserved only for them.... no other team suffered so badly at the hands of the Windies. As I said earlier, the quality of opposition in my opinion was much better in the 80s then what the Aussies of the 90s faced. The WI team that Aus plays now or for the better part of the 90s is not a patch on the Aus team that WI had to face for most of the 80s except for a period of 3-4 years.



Who is judging the Windies team by the performance of the team members in county cricket ?

Is just very hard to convince anyone that West Indies of that era were better than Waugh's untouchables.

Like I mentioned in my post earlier, fatigue plays a very important role. Have a look at total games WI played and the tests they played per year...that was way less than todays schedules.

 

[Bapu Rao Swami]

Richardson came in around the same time as Logie... he started off on that India tour of 1983. He and Logie swapped places in the team(not in the batting order..Richardson came in at three and Logie would be the number six), and later on when Lloyd retired, he and Logie both became part of the team although I fully agree that Richardson was way better then Logie as a batsman....no comparison there.

On that comparison chart, I would put my winners as -

Hayden Greenidge (almost equal....my opinion - WI)
Langer Haynes (WI)
Ponting Richards (WI)
M Waugh Gomes (Aus)
S Waugh Lloyd (Aus)
Martyn Logie (Aus)
Gilchrist Dujon (Aus)
Warne Holding (WI)
Lee marshall (WI)
Gillespie Roberts (WI)
McGrath Garner (Equal)

That's 6-4 in favour of WI for me.

I'm not Australian fan but that list is wrong...its simply wrong.

Hayden pips Greenidge (no doubt about it) have a look at PWC.
Langer and Haynes (Haynes pips him)
Richards beats Ponting
Waugh beats Gomes
Waugh beats Lloyd
Gilly beats Dujon
Warne beats Holding hands down any day.
Marshall beats Lee
Roberts pips Gillespie
Glenn Mcgrath is way better than Garner although Garner was awesome too (infact if you ask me and PWC MCgrath is better than Akram, Ambrose, Walsh Younis, Donald and Pollock...every single one of them)


ands that 6-4 for Australia.

IF you think teh Windies were better, you sure are within a minority.

 

[PY]

Warne beats Holding hands down any day

Not in my book he doesn't.

Warne just edges it because he is a spinner and a good slipper (not the foot variety ) but it surely cannot be as easy as you say it is? A case of slight exaggeration?

 

[tooextracool]

Are you serious ? England were the team that suffered the worst at the hands of the Windies in the 80s... 5-0 whitewashes were reserved only for them.... no other team suffered so badly at the hands of the Windies. As I said earlier, the quality of opposition in my opinion was much better in the 80s then what the Aussies of the 90s faced. The WI team that Aus plays now or for the better part of the 90s is not a patch on the Aus team that WI had to face for most of the 80s except for a period of 3-4 years.

for the first time i might actually be agreeing with you here. the quality of opposition was better in the 80s. the fast bowling now is only a shade as good as it was in the 80s and i think the quality of the other teams in 2000(when australia were at their peak) wasnt very good either. we had india and SL struggling outside of home...SA were on their decline....england and NZ were still building a decent unit...pakistan was pakistan...and lara..uhh WI

 

[tooextracool]

I'm not Australian fan but that list is wrong...its simply wrong.

Hayden pips Greenidge (no doubt about it) have a look at PWC.
Langer and Haynes (Haynes pips him)
Richards beats Ponting
Waugh beats Gomes
Waugh beats Lloyd
Gilly beats Dujon
Warne beats Holding hands down any day.
Marshall beats Lee
Roberts pips Gillespie
Glenn Mcgrath is way better than Garner although Garner was awesome too (infact if you ask me and PWC MCgrath is better than Akram, Ambrose, Walsh Younis, Donald and Pollock...every single one of them)


ands that 6-4 for Australia.

IF you think teh Windies were better, you sure are within a minority.

i dont think that the the ppl who think the WI were better are within a "minority". i dont see how anyone can compare 2 teams just by comparing players in the same position. im sorry but richards was better than anyone in that australian batting side and if you were to give points for each batsman(which certainly seems to be a lot fairer than this system) richards would have 95/100 while ponting would have 80/100. marshall too better than all those fast bowlers in the australian side including mcgrath.
and just because pwc says so hayden isnt better than greenidge.

 

[Dasa]

^I agree.

Can't believe it, I actually agree.

 

[luckyeddie]

^I agree.

Can't believe it, I actually agree.

Credit where credit's due - so do I.

 

[tooextracool]

The 2001 Australians just shade it for me over the 1984 Windies. If nothing else, Warne added a dimension that WI simply didn't have. Sure, their fourth seamer was better than Brett Lee (who isn't?). but Warne more than makes up for that. And they're better fielders than WI were.

you dont actually believe that gillespie=holding or marshall now do you?
australia has 1 great fast bowler(and i would rate marshall above him), the best leg spin bowler,1 world class bowler and 1 who just simply sucked.
on the other hand WI had 4 quality pacemen.
on the fielding aspect i dont think you can compare fielders from different eras. fielding has evolved in this era of ALL teams(bar west indies) and if they had the same training system then as they do now then they too would have been exceptional fielders. the WI fielding btw was the best of that era.
the WI batsmen batted without helmets while the modern players play with helmets...so does that make their batting better??
its very difficult to compare teams from different eras and the only way in which you can do that is by comparing them based on their performance against other teams in the same era.

 

[a massive zebra]

I'm not Australian fan but that list is wrong...its simply wrong.

Hayden pips Greenidge (no doubt about it) have a look at PWC.
Langer and Haynes (Haynes pips him)
Richards beats Ponting
Waugh beats Gomes
Waugh beats Lloyd
Gilly beats Dujon
Warne beats Holding hands down any day.
Marshall beats Lee
Roberts pips Gillespie
Glenn Mcgrath is way better than Garner although Garner was awesome too (infact if you ask me and PWC MCgrath is better than Akram, Ambrose, Walsh Younis, Donald and Pollock...every single one of them)


ands that 6-4 for Australia.

IF you think teh Windies were better, you sure are within a minority.

Yeah Hayden beats Greenidge by miles without any doubt whatsoever. Im shocked to see so many people picking Greenidge over Hayden. No comparison - just have a look at their respective records or the PWC Ratings.

You might pick Warne over Holding because of the variety provided by a spinner, but purely on the quality of their bowling im tempted to say Holding edges it. On the other hand Warne has been successful for longer than Holding was, it cannot be said that 'Warne beats Holding hands down any day.'

My combined West Indies 80s/Australia 2000

Hayden
Greenidge
Richards (cpt)
Ponting
S.Waugh
Lloyd
Gilchrist (wk)
Marshall
Warne
Holding
McGrath

Thats 6-5 to Australia but I would still back West Indies if the two sides played eachother. Close though.

 

[tooextracool]

My combined West Indies 80s/Australia 2000

Hayden
Greenidge
Richards (cpt)
Ponting
S.Waugh
Lloyd
Gilchrist (wk)
Marshall
Warne
Holding
McGrath

what ?no b.lee???this is a conspiracy i tell you!!

 

[Sanz]

You have got to be kidding. This Australian ODI side (since Ponting being ODI captain in 2002) is the best ever in the history of ODI's.

This side completely dominated the 2003 World Cup & were undefeated.

The West Indies in the 80's were a good ODI side and yes they did win the World Series Cricket tornaments (VB Series) here in Australia five times in the 80's. Though they never did manage to win the 1983 or 1987 World Cups.

The Australian ODI side set a new World Record for most consecutive ODI victories.

Without a doubt, this Australian side is the best ever to play ODI's.

First of all ODIs have changed a lot in last 15 years and all of you are talking about how Good Australia has become WI of that Era would be no match now, while doing that you are assuming that If that WI team had played today they would still be playing theri 80's brand of ODI. NO, in that case take this Aussie team back in time to 80s and then compare. Waugh of late 90s may better than Lloyd, but Waugh of 80s and early 90s is clearly not better than Lloyd. Ponting may be a force in Tests, but he is no where near Richards when it comes to ODIs. Just look at their scores. Hayden is at his peak and you are saying he is better than Greenidge, Well Not really. I have seen Greenidge bat and he was definately better than Hayden.

As far as being unbeateable is concerned - WI were unbeatable in first 2 world Cups and in 1983 they lost only to India the champs.

 

[aussie_beater]

I'm not Australian fan but that list is wrong...its simply wrong.

Hayden pips Greenidge (no doubt about it) have a look at PWC.
Langer and Haynes (Haynes pips him)
Richards beats Ponting
Waugh beats Gomes
Waugh beats Lloyd
Gilly beats Dujon
Warne beats Holding hands down any day.
Marshall beats Lee
Roberts pips Gillespie
Glenn Mcgrath is way better than Garner although Garner was awesome too (infact if you ask me and PWC MCgrath is better than Akram, Ambrose, Walsh Younis, Donald and Pollock...every single one of them)


ands that 6-4 for Australia.

IF you think teh Windies were better, you sure are within a minority.

Warne beats Holding hands down any day.....eh? anyone who has seen Holding bowl won't be able to decide that confidently... it can be close and the comparison is a little difficult given that one is a leggie and the other one is a fast bowler, and in my opinion it tilts towards Holding. Warne is great but he has mostly feasted on opposition who are not very adept at playing leg spin.

And I don't think I am in a minority.... it may seem so in a forum full of Aus supporters, though

 

[aussie_beater]

for the first time i might actually be agreeing with you here.

Well, that's a start....

 

[Bapu Rao Swami]

Not in my book he doesn't.

Warne just edges it because he is a spinner and a good slipper (not the foot variety ) but it surely cannot be as easy as you say it is? A case of slight exaggeration?

Comeon man at least lets agree on soething, you don't think Warne is better than Holding, I certainly do. After all that Warne has done like in WC 99...the way I see it Warne is amongst the bets in crunch games and the majority of his wkts are top quality wickets.