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

[shankar]

This Australian ODI side can play a very attacking brand of ODI cricket because they have the allround talent to do so. Richards is the only West Indian who can match this Australian side for Strike Rate, the other West Indies ODI players never scored as quick as this Australian side.

But could they have got away with playing their brand of cricket against the WI attack?

 

[Swervy]

Test Stats

Hayden - 53 matches, 4771 runs@ 57.48, SR: 63.43
Greenidge - 108 Matches, 7558 runs@ 44.72

Langer - 74 Matches, 5278 runs@ 44.72, SR: 52.68
Haynes - 116 Matches, 7487 runs@ 42.29

Ponting - 78 Matches, 6019 runs@ 54.71, SR: 57.94
Richards - 121 Matches, 8540 runs@ 50.23

M Waugh - 128 Matches, 8029 runs@ 41.81, SR: 52.27
Gomes - 60 Matches, 3171 runs@ 39.63

S Waugh - 168 Matches, 10927 runs@ 51.06, SR: 48.64
Lloyd - 110 Matches, 7515 runs@ 46.67

Martyn - 42 Matches, 2672 runs@ 46.87, SR: 50.55
Logie - 52 Matches, 2470 runs@ 35.79

Gilchrist - 54 Matches, 3370 runs@ 54.35, SR: 82.35, Ct: 206, St: 22
Dujon - 81 matches, 3322 runs@ 31.94, Ct: 267, St: 5

Warne - 110 Matches, 517 wickets@ 25.42, SR: 59.7, Econ: 2.55
Holding - 60 matches, 249 wickets@ 23.68, SR: 50.9, Econ: 2.79

Lee - 37 Matches, 139 Wickets@ 31.66, SR: 53.0, Econ: 3.57
Marshall - 81 matches, 376 wickets@ 20.94, SR: 46.7, Econ: 2.68

Gillespie - 52 Matches, 199 wickets@ 25.56, SR: 53.5, Econ: 2.86
Roberts - 47 Matches, 202 wickets@ 25.61, SR: 55.1, Econ: 2.78

McGrath - 95 Matches, 430 wickets@ 21.71, SR: 52.0, Econ: 2.50
Garner - 58 Matches, 259 wickets@ 20.97, SR: 50.8, Econ: 2.47

Just some stats to ponder over.

interesting..but i dont know whether it proves anything. Batting dominates these days..and i reckon bumps up a batters average by maybe 3 or 5 runs these days.Taking that into account, the Aussies would probably have had slightly lower batting aves,but also slightly lower bowling aves.

But you cant really employ career stats to say if a player was good/great/poor at a particular time. We are saying Australia around 1999/2000/2001 and the WI's around 81/82/83ish times...we need to look at the averages for those times.Richards average dropped to 50, when you consider he averaged well in the 60's for a big chunk of his career, you will see that he wasnt the batsman in the 80's that he was in the 70's...and to be honest Ponting is now outperforming Richards bulk of career

 

[Swervy]

But could they have got away with playing their brand of cricket against the WI attack?

on todays pitches, yes...on 80's type pitches,a bit trickier, but i still think they would have done well...

 

[marc71178]

Just some stats to ponder over.

Those stats did actually confirm something to me, runs are now easier to come by in International Cricket as the playing conditions are being changed to help the batsmen more and more.

 

[marc71178]

Richards is the only West Indian who can match this Australian side for Strike Rate, the other West Indies ODI players never scored as quick as this Australian side.

Yes, but how much of that is due to the playing conditions?

When the West Indian side played ODI's there was nowhere near as many rules such as the 15 overs one.

For Viv to be striking that highly back then makes one wonder what his S/R would be now in the bat dominated ODI?

 

[aussie_beater]

yeah but Australia werent brilliant for the first 3 or 4 years of the 90's.

In the last 10 years Australia have won 63%

Yes, but you have to realise that the number of matches that produce a result these days have increased dramatically over what it used to be in the 80s.

 

[tooextracool]

Test Stats

Hayden - 53 matches, 4771 runs@ 57.48, SR: 63.43
Greenidge - 108 Matches, 7558 runs@ 44.72

Langer - 74 Matches, 5278 runs@ 44.72, SR: 52.68
Haynes - 116 Matches, 7487 runs@ 42.29

Ponting - 78 Matches, 6019 runs@ 54.71, SR: 57.94
Richards - 121 Matches, 8540 runs@ 50.23

M Waugh - 128 Matches, 8029 runs@ 41.81, SR: 52.27
Gomes - 60 Matches, 3171 runs@ 39.63

S Waugh - 168 Matches, 10927 runs@ 51.06, SR: 48.64
Lloyd - 110 Matches, 7515 runs@ 46.67

Martyn - 42 Matches, 2672 runs@ 46.87, SR: 50.55
Logie - 52 Matches, 2470 runs@ 35.79

Gilchrist - 54 Matches, 3370 runs@ 54.35, SR: 82.35, Ct: 206, St: 22
Dujon - 81 matches, 3322 runs@ 31.94, Ct: 267, St: 5

Warne - 110 Matches, 517 wickets@ 25.42, SR: 59.7, Econ: 2.55
Holding - 60 matches, 249 wickets@ 23.68, SR: 50.9, Econ: 2.79

Lee - 37 Matches, 139 Wickets@ 31.66, SR: 53.0, Econ: 3.57
Marshall - 81 matches, 376 wickets@ 20.94, SR: 46.7, Econ: 2.68

Gillespie - 52 Matches, 199 wickets@ 25.56, SR: 53.5, Econ: 2.86
Roberts - 47 Matches, 202 wickets@ 25.61, SR: 55.1, Econ: 2.78

McGrath - 95 Matches, 430 wickets@ 21.71, SR: 52.0, Econ: 2.50
Garner - 58 Matches, 259 wickets@ 20.97, SR: 50.8, Econ: 2.47

Just some stats to ponder over.

these stats dont really prove anything. the fact that viv richards averaged only 50 while pointing,hayden and gilchrist are ahead of him by a mile gives you an idea of how flat wickets are these days and perhaps how poor the bowling is too.further if we were to judge the other WI batsmens averages comparing them to richards they dont look that bad at all.
however the argument could also be used the other way around,in that bowlers like mcgrath and gillespie have similar averages to marshall and roberts despite having to bowl on those flat wickets. i dont think this or any other comparison is going to work...its all about personal opinion.

 

[Ford_GTHO351]

But could they have got away with playing their brand of cricket against the WI attack?

This Australian ODI side is full of talent & IMO I reckon they could of still succeded in the 80's against the WI.

 

[Ford_GTHO351]

Yes, but how much of that is due to the playing conditions?

When the West Indian side played ODI's there was nowhere near as many rules such as the 15 overs one.

For Viv to be striking that highly back then makes one wonder what his S/R would be now in the bat dominated ODI?

The 15 over fielding restriction rule was around in the 80's.

Richards would probablly of had the same SR today IMO.

 

[Ford_GTHO351]

these stats dont really prove anything. the fact that viv richards averaged only 50 while pointing,hayden and gilchrist are ahead of him by a mile gives you an idea of how flat wickets are these days and perhaps how poor the bowling is too.further if we were to judge the other WI batsmens averages comparing them to richards they dont look that bad at all.
however the argument could also be used the other way around,in that bowlers like mcgrath and gillespie have similar averages to marshall and roberts despite having to bowl on those flat wickets. i dont think this or any other comparison is going to work...its all about personal opinion.

You have to have something to measure ones performance & stats is a great in that regards.

As for the comparison its self, yes that's more to form opinions.

I don't think the standard of bowling today is poor at all. You are vurtually insulting the likes of Glenn McGrath, Shane Warne, Shaun Pollock etc.

 

[marc71178]

I don't think the standard of bowling today is poor at all. You are vurtually insulting the likes of Glenn McGrath, Shane Warne, Shaun Pollock etc.

How can he be insulting McGrath and Warne?!

 

[marc71178]

The 15 over fielding restriction rule was around in the 80's.

To by no means the same extent - in fact I believe it was only introduced oin the mid-90s - first being taken advantage of in the 96 world cup.

Richards would probablly of had the same SR today IMO.

I don't see how you come to that conclusion when the general run rates have gone up so much.

 

[tooextracool]

You have to have something to measure ones performance & stats is a great in that regards.

stats can at the most only be used to compare players from the same era. the bowlers and kind of pitches are different in different eras and it also doesnt take into account the fact that australians these days play half their matches at home on wickets that are now becoming the flattest in the world.

I don't think the standard of bowling today is poor at all. You are vurtually insulting the likes of Glenn McGrath, Shane Warne, Shaun Pollock etc.

only a few good bowlers around compared to the many greats around in the 80s.

 

[Swervy]

only a few good bowlers around compared to the many greats around in the 80s.

who were the GREAT bowlers of the 80's then

 

[marc71178]

only a few good bowlers around compared to the many greats around in the 80s.

Add in the fact that since he's Australian, he doesn't have to face most of them!

 

[Ford_GTHO351]

I don't see how you come to that conclusion when the general run rates have gone up so much.

Well the general run rates in both Test & ODI cricket have increased because nearly every batsman these days is willing to attack. Even the likes of Justin Langer & Mark Butcher are these days more attacking. Defensive batsmen like Aakash Chopra are less common these days then in the 80's.

So I believe that Richards wouldn't have needed to score at a faster rate because there would be other batsmen that can score quickly. I would reckon that Richards Test & ODI average not his strike rate would of increased if he was playing now.

 

[marc71178]

Interesting theory.

I wonder whether if he were in his prime now, where would the Windies fit Viv in the One Day line up?

I think he'd open.

 

[Ford_GTHO351]

Interesting theory.

I wonder whether if he were in his prime now, where would the Windies fit Viv in the One Day line up?

I think he'd open.

Richards opening would of been the best choice with Chanderpaul moving down to No.3 IMO.

 

[roseboy64]

i think it'd be better to compare Aus recently to the WI of the late 70's to 80's instead of just the 80's when some of their players were getting up in age.

 

[SJS]

I would have said the late 70's/early 80's Windies side was better but for the fact that they lacked quality spinners...even one.

Its mainly here that this Aussie side is better.