Would a combined India/Pakistan have dominated cricket?

[_00_deathscar]

Since its Pakistan Independence Day (and India's is tomorrow), would a combined India/Pakistan team have dominated cricket?
If so, since when or during which period would the dominance have been?

You have to also account for the other teams being the same at their respective time.

 

[trundler]

Hanif, Hazare, Fazal, Khan Mohammad, Mankad in the early years wouldn't have been pushovers.

Pakistan have underachieved relative to the popularity of the sport and talent available since the 80s because the PCB do stupid ****. How did Anwar play only 55 tests? I

 

[Neptune]

No haha. Both **** and overrate.

 

[trundler]

Would 7/10 bits and pieces county all-rounder Imran have been allowed to develop into what he did become eventually and given as long a rope? Would Wasim have been plucked out of thin air? Cant really account for these what-ifs.

 

[harsh.ag]

Both **** and overrate.

Spoken like a true Englishman

 

[Burgey]

May have dominated for three weeks in early 2012 or so, at its highest. Can’t think of another era where they’d come close tbh. Basically mediocre since inception bar India the past 6-10 years. Will revert to mean soon enough.

 

[morgieb]

Almost certainly would've imploded at some points despite having the most talented team for most of the last 30-odd years.

 

[honestbharani]

Assuming all the players always played to how they ended up playing at the international level, would have been a serious challenge for Australia from the mid 90s, and been the best side post 2007 or so.

But that is just such a massive assumption as almost a million stars would have to align for every player to be what they ended up being etc. Of course, the best thing about such notions is the goodwill it generates between the fans for a brief moment or two on social media. A very worthwhile exercise at least for that.

 

[trundler]

There would've been far too much lobbying and regionalism. A Mumbai/Punjab XI would still be pretty strong though.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

“Dominated”. No.

 

[Uppercut]

I don't think either India or Pakistan would be as good at cricket as they are if they didn't have the other as a rival. Celtic/Rangers kind of situation.

 

[vcs]

Pakistan are historically garbage in Australia and much better than India in England and NZ. I wonder if a combined team would be the best or the worst of both worlds.

On the other hand, India have built a strong home record based on a tradition of spinners dominating in spin-friendly conditions. If we had historically played on more pace-friendly pitches, we might have lost out on that.

 

[Neptune]

Spoken like a true Englishman

Haha OK pal.

 

[Arachnodouche]

I don't think either India or Pakistan would be as good at cricket as they are if they didn't have the other as a rival. Celtic/Rangers kind of situation.

To an extent, but Australia has taken over the role of pantomime opponent/villain for India at least these last twenty years. Not a coincidence the team has become more competitive in this period.

 

[srbhkshk]

Nah, we would have a Punjab lobby and a Bombay lobby and a **** load of nit-picking over the religion of the players picked ,many a careers would be destroyed by infighting.

 

[_00_deathscar]

Nah, we would have a Punjab lobby and a Bombay lobby and a **** load of nit-picking over the religion of the players picked ,many a careers would be destroyed by infighting.

That's a given. In my hypothetical, assuming it all worked out - on talent alone...?

 

[srbhkshk]

That's a given. In my hypothetical, assuming it all worked out - on talent alone...?

Well, since my time of watching cricket (2000 onwards or so)-

In T20s no would touch a combined indo-pak team.

We'd dominate in tests and ODIs too but not to the same extent.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Certainly in the days before neutral umpires

 

[fredfertang]

They were nothing special when they were the same country

 

[trundler]

Certainly in the days before neutral umpires

Fred Goodall tho