Instances of series favorites being whitewashed?
 

I asked this in another thread but I thought it'd be interesting. The bookies thought england were better but they ended up getting whitewashed. Can anyone think of other instances where this has happened?

Off the top of my head, I can't remember - India were higher ranked but England was still favored to win last series.

England were favourites against India, as were Australia.

I honestly can't think of one, it'd be very rare anyway.

Were India favourites back in 2002 when they lost to NZ in NZ 2-0?

IND in AUS last month :laugh:

Id be surprised if they were favorites overseas - was that a 2 or 3 match series?

Aus were favorites.

No they were underdogs for the series and underdogs before every individual match.

2 match series.

People that would've thought India were favourites for that series :wacko:

I'm not so sure whether England were the favorites coming to UAE... :blink:

They were with the bookies. We're talking objective favourites.

Doubt it;

1) NZ were a reasonably strong Test side back then

2) Unlike in 08/09, NZ administrators didn't bend-over for India in those days and actually prepared wickets that suited NZ.

Well that's the only case that I could even conceivably think of where a team that was whitewashed may be favourites.

Otherwise England would surely be the first in over 15 years.

Series favorites have been defeated many times but dont recall a whitewash before this series

There haven't been that many whitewashes in test cricket history (compared to the # of series played excepting the minnows). So I'd be surprised if there were more than a handful of instances of a team being the FAVORITE and still getting whitewashed. Even bad teams often manage to pull out a single draw or at least the weather intervenes and one game gets drawn. A lot of things are often out of your control so that's why I thought its an interesting question.

My over under would be like 3 or 4 in the entire history of test cricket tbf.

And I can't think of a single instance. What about in the 90s when england were laughing at kumble and played an all pace attack ended up getting owned? It was in India so I'm not sure if they were favorites.

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?)