Australia's undefeated streak

[FaaipDeOiad]

A little while ago, I made a post in the South Africa v England thread about England being on the verge of reaching 5 victorious test series in a row. Looking through some stats, I discovered that England held the record for a series winning streak, with 8 between 1884 and 1892. I was a little surprised that the West Indies of the 80s didn't have this record, so I decided to have a look at the longest undefeated streaks in test series, and discovered something interesting.

The record is of course held by the West Indies, who went 29 series between 1980 and 1995 without being beaten, before Australia finally knocked them off. During this time, they drew 9 series (including 4 in a row at one point), and the most they ever won in a row was 7. In second place was England with 14, who didn't lose a series between 1951 and 1958. However, with Australia's recent win over Pakistan, they have moved up to 15 undefeated series since the 2001 loss to India (which seems like just yesterday to me), with two draws against New Zealand and India in that time.

So, other than showing the astonishing amount of cricket played these days, this also means that for the first time a side is in a position to challenge the West Indian record of 29 series without a loss. Any thoughts about whether or not they can do it? And if not, who will be the side that beats them?

 

[Neil Pickup]

England. Summer 2005.

 

[BoyBrumby]

It's really quite scary that Oz is halfway towards a record in about 4 years that it took The Windies 15 to set!

I guess I could some worthy point about there being too much test cricket nowadays, but that would make me steaming hypocrite as I've just had two days off solely to watch it on telly! Plus I'm already counting down to Bangladesh in May!!

Anyway, beating Australia....Hmm. Well, we won't! I'm hoping we managed to take a "live" test with The Ashes still at stake for the first time since 97, but that's about the limit of my ambition.

Looking at the ICC's schedule I see Oz tour SA in February 2006. If (and it's a big if) Warne & Glenda are gone (I can see McGrath knocking on the head after The Ashes) & Rudolph and Smith remember how to bat that could be interesting. But I’m clutching at straws really; Oz look awesome.

 

[C_C]

The record is of course held by the West Indies, who went 29 series between 1980 and 1995 without being beaten, before Australia finally knocked them off.

????

Knocked off ?!
In terms of consecutive series victories, they both are tied at seven.
In terms of consecutive series without losses, WI are about twice ahead.

 

[Long live Deano]

Australia will break 29 series undefeated

A little while ago, I made a post in the South Africa v England thread about England being on the verge of reaching 5 victorious test series in a row. Looking through some stats, I discovered that England held the record for a series winning streak, with 8 between 1884 and 1892. I was a little surprised that the West Indies of the 80s didn't have this record, so I decided to have a look at the longest undefeated streaks in test series, and discovered something interesting.

The record is of course held by the West Indies, who went 29 series between 1980 and 1995 without being beaten, before Australia finally knocked them off. During this time, they drew 9 series (including 4 in a row at one point), and the most they ever won in a row was 7. In second place was England with 14, who didn't lose a series between 1951 and 1958. However, with Australia's recent win over Pakistan, they have moved up to 15 undefeated series since the 2001 loss to India (which seems like just yesterday to me), with two draws against New Zealand and India in that time.

So, other than showing the astonishing amount of cricket played these days, this also means that for the first time a side is in a position to challenge the West Indian record of 29 series without a loss. Any thoughts about whether or not they can do it? And if not, who will be the side that beats them?

I have no doubt that the Australian side is capable of breaking the WI streak of 29 undefeated series. And I think that yes, they will do it. More than the quality of the players of today, I believe it will happen because of the Spirit and culture of the team, and the mental toughness imparted by the cricket System of Aus. But I hope that the series to come are not complete whitewashes. I want to see some resistance from other sides, and cant wait for Ashes 2005...

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

????

Knocked off ?!
In terms of consecutive series victories, they both are tied at seven.
In terms of consecutive series without losses, WI are about twice ahead.

Knocked off as in beat, which Australia did in 1995, thereby ending the West Indian undefeated run. Yes?

Anyway, I said in my post that Australia had just reached 15 undefeated series and the record is 29, so I don't know exactly what point you are trying to make. The question was whether or not anyone would beat Australia in the next 14 series.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Looking at the ICC's schedule I see Oz tour SA in February 2006. If (and it's a big if) Warne & Glenda are gone (I can see McGrath knocking on the head after The Ashes) & Rudolph and Smith remember how to bat that could be interesting. But I’m clutching at straws really; Oz look awesome.

One thing that occured to me is the possibility that Australia might lose the Super Series in October, which would probably count as a test series, considering one off tests are considered series for the purposes of the above records. Aside from that, it is honestly hard to see anyone doing it right now, although we have yet to see how much the loss of Warne and McGrath will hurt Australia.

 

[Crazy Sam]

I still can't see Australia losing 3 tests in a 5-match series against England, and I just can't see Australia being beaten by SAF next summer either.

 

[marc71178]

????

Knocked off ?!
In terms of consecutive series victories, they both are tied at seven.
In terms of consecutive series without losses, WI are about twice ahead.

I think he meant beat them in a series.

I still struggle how suddenly it's the first time a side's been in position to beat the record of 29 when they're only halfway there!

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

I think he meant beat them in a series.

I still struggle how suddenly it's the first time a side's been in position to beat the record of 29 when they're only halfway there!

Well, nobody else has passed 14 since the 50s! So certainly they are in a better position to beat the record than anyone else. Plus, there's no obvious candidate to beat Australia now, since they haven't lost anywhere outside of the subcontinent since 1992/93 but regularly lost there, and they've just finished two successful subcontinent tours.

 

[Neil Pickup]

I still can't see Australia losing 3 tests in a 5-match series against England, and I just can't see Australia being beaten by SAF next summer either.

Who says you're going to have to lose three?

 

[twctopcat]

Who says you're going to have to lose three?

1-0 will do me just nicely.

 

[Jono]

Gives me another reason to support England during the Ashes