Instances of series favorites being whitewashed?

[smash84]

You're going to find bangladesh fans who think they can win in Australia if you look hard enough - that's part of being a fan. I think we all know that Indian fans were massively dissapointed at how India did in Australia - clearly that's not in question.

yep....IIRC the bangladeshi fans said that "they would eat Ajmal alive" in the Pak-Bangers series and win 2-0

 

[ganeshran]

England, on the back of three successive Ashes wins and not having lost a series anywhere for the best part of a decade, were expected to beat Australia in 1958/59, but lost 4-0 with one draw - strange parallel with the current series actually

Were Engand the favorites in the series against the Windies when Greig said " I will make them grovel". IIRC that series was a whitewash too

 

[Arachnodouche]

no, i think most "reasonable" Indian cricket followers felt that the debacle in England could have been just a blip. That Sachin and Laxman would surely pile it on against their old favorites. Also, seeing how green the Australian bowling was, and the fact that they'd just lost to NZ....you'd have had to be some skeptic to think we were outright underdogs.

 

[silentstriker]

no, i think most "reasonable" Indian cricket followers felt that the debacle in England could have been just a blip. That Sachin and Laxman would surely pile it on against their old favorites. Also, seeing how green the Australian bowling was, and the fact that they'd just lost to NZ....you'd have had to be some skeptic to think we were outright underdogs.

I am not sure about your point. I thought we had a chance in Australia too, at least to win a Test or two.

Are you saying 'reasonable' Indian cricket followers are more objective in judging their chances than the bookies who make a living out of it?

 

[fredfertang]

Were Engand the favorites in the series against the Windies when Greig said " I will make them grovel". IIRC that series was a whitewash too

That was 3-0 with two draws - Greigy thought we were favourites, obviously, and the WIndies had just been on the wrong end of a thumping in Australia, but for those who inhabited the real world it was generally accepted that Greig was talking bollocks from the minute he made his ill advised grovel comment

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

From the view point of a neutral, I feel this series was a lot closer than the scoreline would suggest. England were certainly in the 2nd and 3rd tests for quite a long period. I'd wager there have been considerably worse thrashings (even for favourites if I could be bothered thinking) where one or two tests have been drawn due to rain.

 

[ganeshran]

That was 3-0 with two draws - Greigy thought we were favourites, obviously, and the WIndies had just been on the wrong end of a thumping in Australia, but for those who inhabited the real world it was generally accepted that Greig was talking bollocks from the minute he made his ill advised grovel comment

Thanks.

 

[silentstriker]

From the view point of a neutral, I feel this series was a lot closer than the scoreline would suggest. England were certainly in the 2nd and 3rd tests for quite a long period. I'd wager there have been considerably worse thrashings (even for favourites if I could be bothered thinking) where one or two tests have been drawn due to rain.

Yea, I am not talking about the worst defeats - just whitewashed when favorites. I'm sure there have been instances of the favorites losing worse, but due to whatever reason (rain, maybe a last minute partnership), the final scoreline wasn't as bad.

And even when underdogs, I think many would say their loss in 06-07 was 'worse' even though Australia were the favorites.

 

[The Sean]

Did Australia go to South Africa as favourites in 1970? I think we might have - SA hadn't played a Test for several years and we'd just won in India, something it would take us decades to repeat.

 

[Xuhaib]

weren't some of SA-Aus encounters during the early 00's billed up as the unoffical world test championship only for Australia to steam roll them in every game. I know SA were not favorites but for a period in early 00's they were seen as the only side capable to challenge Aus for the top crown but were beaten black n blue when they had head to head meetings.

 

[vic_orthdox]

1989 Ashes, although there were the two drawn Tests, was a 6 Test series though.

 

[andruid]

Wasn't the England v. West Indies series, with the famous 'we'll make them grovel' quote an upset? Considering the respective teams's build ups.

 

[Dissector]

The only example I can think of was when SA beat India 2-0 in India. I wouldn't be surprised if India were favourites though probably not by much. And it was just a two-game series. So I think this whitewash was rather more remarkable. In their long saga of cricket losership, England have managed to write yet another remarkable chapter.

 

[G.I.Joe]

I seriously hear this a lot and it annoys me. First because it gives bcci too much credit in that you think they care about results over money and second, it seems to detract from the actual instances of BCCI acting like asses by making unsubstantiated claims. If you have a source Id be very happy to believe you.

Not having a go personally at you - I'm seriously wondering if there is any truth (eg did a curator or an nz official say something and I missed it?)

Yeah, it also ignores the fact that the homogenization happened everywhere for close to a decade. India didn't exactly keep rolling out the turners for visiting sides, NZ included.

 

[BoyBrumby]

It said in today's Independent that England have only been whitewashed seven times ever, including the most recent series, so I'd guess favourites being whitewashed is pretty rare.

Looking at the instances, the only times where we might have started as favs would've been the 1920/21 Ashes & the non-Ashes tour of Oz in 79/80 and even then both are debateable. In the former instance England had beaten Oz 4-1 on their previous visit, but that was ten years previous and in the latter, although England had won 5-1 in Australia only a year previously, the hosts were strengthened by the returning WSC players.

 

[nightprowler10]

Just wait a couple of days guys and CI will do an article on this matter after reading this thread.

 

[Nomanculture]

One off Tests don't count right?

I have a certain Test played at The Oval in 1998, if they do...

 

[Nomanculture]

Being serious, how were the odds when Aussies toured SL in 2004?

 

[shankar]

Yeah, it also ignores the fact that the homogenization happened everywhere for close to a decade. India didn't exactly keep rolling out the turners for visiting sides, NZ included.

In fact the two NZ series in India '02 and '11 probably had the most spin-unfriendly tracks among all the test series in India the last 10 years.

 

[Lostman]

Being serious, how were the odds when Aussies toured SL in 2004?

I was thinking of this as well. I had not yet turned 18, so I never followed lines that closely at the time.
But thinking about it, there is a good chance that SL were favorites. McGrath was injured, Warne was coming back after his drug ban and IIRC Pontings 1st series as captain.