Will current Aussie side beat 95-99 ( Till WI 99 series ) side ?

[Coronis]

I’d like to see him taking a few more big hauls tbh.

 

[Slifer]

I’d like to see him taking a few more big hauls tbh.

That'll be tough in a team that will usually have at least two other class fast bowlers: Starc, Hazelwood etc.

 

[Gob]

Truth be told , McGrath is the only reason I am not claiming India 18/20 would beat Taylor’s Australia . Guy was a genius.
This brings me to my next question:
Was McGrath the most important reason behind Aussie domination between 95-07 ?

If you replace McGrath with Cummins , would that Australian side be as good ?

Played where?

 

[Gob]

As per the question, I think Warne is the only aspect in which Taylor's side has a clear edge over Cummins's side. Rest are more or less the same. Taylor's side obviously achieved more but Cummins's side has done well so far from what they played in. It is also important to note that Paine lost to India and Aust has improved a fair bit since (inclusion Carey, Improvement of Head, Usman, Green and Starc)

 

[Sunil1z]

Played where?

Obviously in Aus . Taylor’s side lost to 90s Indian side in Ind comfortably. So there is no doubt that 15-21 Indian side will beat them .

 

[Gob]

Obviously in Aus . Taylor’s side lost to 90s Indian side in Ind comfortably. So there is no doubt that 15-21 Indian side will beat them .

wat? Losing to India in India provides no indication as to how they would fare in Australian conditions. I mean Aust brushed aside the same Indian side in 99 (yes its technically Waugh's side but aside from Gilchrist, it was the same core group)

Taylor's Australia beat all of SA, WI, Pak and England both home and away when those teams had great fast bowlers and they were the undisputed number 1 since beating WI in 95. Stranger things have happened but they are not losing to a subcontinent side at home. Also ftr, Australian success aside, what are the other significant achievements from India in SENA countries from 15 to 21? From memory, they twice lost in SA, went down 4-1 to England and lost to New Zealand (was it twice?) and I cant think of a series win in any other SENA country. I think you massively over rating India here

 

[Sunil1z]

wat? Losing to India in India provides no indication as to how they would fare in Australian conditions. I mean Aust brushed aside the same Indian side in 99 (yes its technically Waugh's side but aside from Gilchrist, it was the same core group)

Taylor's Australia beat all of SA, WI, Pak and England both home and away when those teams had great fast bowlers and they were the undisputed number 1 since beating WI in 95. Stranger things have happened but they are not losing to a subcontinent side at home. Also ftr, Australian success aside, what are the other significant achievements from India in SENA countries from 15 to 21? From memory, they twice lost in SA, went down 4-1 to England and lost to New Zealand (was it twice?) and I cant think of a series win in any other SENA country. I think you massively over rating India here

Indian Team performed better than this Smith side in SA in 18 ( both India and Aus played back to back in 18 although both lost) also drew in ENG in 21/22 which is also at par with Smith side of 19 . Yeah India performed extremely poorly in NZ . I will give you this. But Indian side whitewashed both SL and BAN away while Smith side drew in Ban and SL.

So unless you are saying this Smith side is highly over-rated like Indian side , then I feel you are right .

I am measuring Taylor’s side w.r.t to this Smith side .
So how do you feel current Smith side will do against 90s Eng, 90s WI, 90s SA .

And please don’t compare this side with that 90s Indian side atleast overseas. Srinath, Prasad won’t make even current Indian side .
In Test matches bowlers win you games , batsman can at best support you .

 

[Gob]

Indian Team performed better than this Smith side in SA in 18 ( both India and Aus played back to back in 18 although both lost) also drew in ENG in 21/22 which is also at par with Smith side of 19 . Yeah India performed extremely poorly in NZ . I will give you this. But Indian side whitewashed both SL and BAN away while Smith side drew in Ban and SL.

So unless you are saying this Smith side is highly over-rated like Indian side , then I feel you are right .

I am measuring Taylor’s side w.r.t to this Smith side .
So how do you feel current Smith side will do against 90s Eng, 90s WI, 90s SA .

And please don’t compare this side with that 90s Indian side atleast overseas. Srinath, Prasad won’t make even current Indian side .
In Test matches bowlers win you games , batsman can at best support you .

What is Smith's side? This is Cummins's side

I don't think any side led by Smith was close to Taylor's side but the Australian side under Cummins has improved a lot in the last two years (since the defeat to India through personal change and player development) and I think the current Aust side would beat India in 2021 at home just like the Taylor's side would

What I'm saying in the simpler terms is that Aust side now (or ever since they replaced Harris with Khawaja) is a strong side and not far behind Taylor's side and both would beat India at home in Australia with the home advantage. That doesn't mean they are superior to India and India would return the favour in India

That's how I see it and I'd be surprised if most people disagree with me

 

[Gob]

Actually Taylor's Australia was not awfully different to Waugh's early Australia that won 16 in a row. All of Slater, Langer, Ponting, Waugh's, Warne, Gillespie, McGrath, Fleming etc were the core group under both captains. If India are beating Taylor's Australia 18 times out of 20 in Australia as you claim, they should be beating both Waugh's and Ponting's sides in Australia too very often than not

 

[Sunil1z]

Actually Taylor's Australia was not awfully different to Waugh's early Australia that won 16 in a row. All of Slater, Langer, Ponting, Waugh's, Warne, Gillespie, McGrath, Fleming etc were the core group under both captains. If India are beating Taylor's Australia 18 times out of 20 in Australia as you claim, they should be beating both Waugh's and Ponting's sides in Australia too very often than not

Where have I claimed that current Indian side will beat Taylor’s side 18 out of 20 times ?

Infact I am claiming opposite. I am saying due to McGrath, I am not even sure we can win in Aus . Please read my entire sequence of conversation. Don’t pick a conversation mid-way. When McGrath is injured I will say India can beat Taylor’s Aus.

You may feel that sub-continental side can’t win in Aus . But in 80-81 our side drew 3 Test series 1-1 against Aus side containing Greg Chappell, Lillee and Border .

And you might have misunderstood 18/20 . Those were the 2 years in which India won in Aus ?

 

[Gob]

Well **** I thought it was 18 out of 20

Yes without McGrath would be a closer call but batsmen (Waugh's, Slater, Ponting etc) will score the runs. Could go down like 03 series

 

[Red_Ink_Squid]

Daily reminder Head > Wadeugh

 

[Slifer]

Well **** I thought it was 18 out of 20

Yes without McGrath would be a closer call but batsmen (Waugh's, Slater, Ponting etc) will score the runs. Could go down like 03 series

?????

 

[subshakerz]

]

Losing in SL has absolutely no bearing how playing in Australia. If you read what I wrote you'd understand i mentioned that for my overall perspective of this Aus team vs Taylor's. And fun fact, Taylor didnt captain that Aus team that lost to SL in 99 and second the SL team from 99 was much much better than the current SL team. Surely you see that.

Anyway this same Cummins' Aus team that lost to India is going to beat Taylor's that lost to no one at home?

Cummins didn't captain against India.

 

[Slifer]

]

Cummins didn't captain against India.

Subs, you know I meant the same core players....

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Also ftr, Australian success aside, what are the other significant achievements from India in SENA countries from 15 to 21? From memory, they twice lost in SA, went down 4-1 to England and lost to New Zealand (was it twice?)

It was once in NZ. We beat them 1-0 in 2014 in the McCullum series, but that was prior to the timeframe.

 

[subshakerz]

Subs, you know I meant the same core players....

Yeah but in the same post you corrected that Taylor didn't captain in 99 SL.

Cummins is a better captain than Paine and IMO has improved this side.

Whether they are good enough to beat Taylor remains to be seen but not enough to go on based on current evidence. Regardless, I don't put the India loss much on this team. They were clearly superior to India and should have beaten them if they had better leadership.

 

[Slifer]

Yeah but in the same post you corrected that Taylor didn't captain in 99 SL.

Cummins is a better captain than Paine and IMO has improved this side.

Whether they are good enough to beat Taylor remains to be seen but not enough to go on based on current evidence. Regardless, I don't put the India loss much on this team. They were clearly superior to India and should have beaten them if they had better leadership.

Yeah I'm with you on that. Imo, if they played in Aus now, I'd back Cummins' team to win. But credit where it's due India beat them fair and square and that too, with their B team and Ind beat them a the G.

 

[Burgey]

As per the question, I think Warne is the only aspect in which Taylor's side has a clear edge over Cummins's side. Rest are more or less the same. Taylor's side obviously achieved more but Cummins's side has done well so far from what they played in. It is also important to note that Paine lost to India and Aust has improved a fair bit since (inclusion Carey, Improvement of Head, Usman, Green and Starc)

Taylor and Slater were better players against the moving ball than either Warner or Khawaja imo, though Khawaja is an excellent slow wicket player and Warner is awesome here. Obviously any match up will be in Aus so the openers sort of balance each other out.

if Boon is at three he’s every bit as good as Labushagne, if it’s Langer then Marnus is better.

Smith = Steve Waugh of the period in issue where he was averaging about 60, Mark Waugh shades Head.

Any specialist bat at six from the 90s side is better than Green, especially if it’s Ponting.

Healy is better than Carey, especially with the gloves - he’s about as good a wicket keeper as has ever played the game tbh.

warne obviously miles better than lyon

Cummins = McGrath or minutely worse than him

Gillespie and Starc is closer than people would think, but Haze is better than any of Reiffel or Fleming.

Player for player it’s quite close but at the end of the day Taylor’s side knocked over the Windies away and that probably gives it to them. If the current side wins in India (most unlikely) they would deserve to be considered as good as the late 90s team, especially given they’ll easily trounce the current England aide away, just as the 90s teams used to.

 

[halba]

Current side wouldnt win a single game. The basic reason is the late Shane Warne and Glenn Mcgrath. Sheer genius. you do realise this OP? how is this even a question??

The rest of the side fairly balanced(e.g. carey = gilchrist(on current form), labuschagne = waugh, punter= smith), but the magic of this fellow was quite spectacular.

None of the original world class batters would get troubled remotely by Nathan Lyon's trundlers(relative to this man below who hooped the ball around)

Also Mcgrath could extract more from a dead wicket than Cummins can- see the current test- Cummins only 1 wicket entire game. Mcgrath would've stiched them up by now - this SAF game would've been over by the Warne/Mcgrath combo by now. Mcgrath was getting wickets even in subcontinent, challenging most of the indian batsmen.

Cummins has not bowled to any players of the calibre of Tendulkar, Kallis or Brian Lara. Mcgrath has and has won his fare share of the battles e.g. the infamous WACA hattrick where Brian lara was the middle wicket.