Would Andrew Symonds have made a difference in India?

[Richard]

Not between March 1998 and March 2001 he didn't. Nor against anyone until February 1993.

He also did decently against India in 2004/05 despite missing the one Test of the series on the sort of pitch he'd almost certainly have caused havoc on.

 

[Precambrian]

Not between March 1998 and March 2001 he didn't. Nor against anyone until February 1993.

He also did decently against India in 2004/05 despite missing the one Test of the series on the sort of pitch he'd almost certainly have caused havoc on.

If that Warne (who is not between 1998March-2001March) came up against a Tendulkar of 1998, and a Laxman of (2001, 2003-04), and a Dravid (2002-06), and a Ganguly (2008), he'd have still struggled. Oh, not to mention a Sehwag of (2003)

 

[Richard]

I doubt he'd have struggled, as such. I wouldn't have expected him to dominate, but he could've held his own, IMO.

 

[Ikki]

Yes, he would have. Would have had a better batsman than White, a better spinner than White, a better fielder than White and we would have had more luck in winning the tosses

 

[GIMH]

As to the question - of course he'd have made a difference, Andrew Johns would have made a difference. A fan throwing a bottle of water on the pitch would have made a difference. Would that difference have caused Australia to do better or worse? Tough question. I'd hope worse, but I'm not really sold either way.

This is a great point. Symonds isn't good enough in himself to be worth a two-match deficit, but as Corey said, what if he'd ran out Harby (I think) in the first dig of the first test? Virtual history is a dangerous game.