Best against the best

[vcs]

which is no shame tbh. eng of that period, thx to freddie turning superman, was as good a side as you can get in the last couple of decades. for me, the team was perhaps best in the world, in that brief period, and managed to topple the aussies at their mightiest.

Yeah, hopefully Fletcher can repeat what he did with them. /fingers crossed

 

[vcs]

IMO, India's current side would beat Australia's pre-Gilchrist team home and lose away.

 

[Migara]

Tendulkar also did better against Ambrose and walsh. And lara also struggled against India.

And Tendulkar though never scored against Murali like lara never struggled.Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

Sorry checked, he did struggle a bit. But then what happened to Murali against Sehwag ? Sehwag was all over Murali whenever i saw them playing.

Lara never faced Ambrose and Walsh and so didn't SRT against Kumble and Srinath. Don't bring in stupid points.

And if you really want to see how SRT did against Murali see how he fared in post-doosra era. IIRC Kallis averages better than SRT when playing Murali in SL. And Sehwag is not apart of this discussion. Yes, he was all over an injured, out of form Murali. Before 2008, well, Sehwag was no body.

 

[GotSpin]

It's definitely possible, the strength of the Indian batting alone makes sure of that.

I just think that over the course of a 5-match series where there is nowhere to hide, India's bowling will be exposed too often.

Indeed

 

[sehwag fan]

Lara never faced Ambrose and Walsh and so didn't SRT against Kumble and Srinath. Don't bring in stupid points.

And if you really want to see how SRT did against Murali see how he fared in post-doosra era. IIRC Kallis averages better than SRT when playing Murali in SL. And Sehwag is not apart of this discussion. Yes, he was all over an injured, out of form Murali. Before 2008, well, Sehwag was no body.

Murali always used to get injured while facing Sehwag. Sehwag has won India 2 test match in SL. Murali with all his doosra and teesra could never win SL a test match in India.

Sehwag was the top scorer in 2008 series in SL. And Murali who took 20 wickets in that series was injured.

Bowlers always get injured when they see sehwag in full flow.

Only Murali was injured . Tendulkar was never injured.


Averages 70 with SR of 94 in SL and Murali took 28 wickets in those test
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...1;template=results;type=allround;view=innings

Averages 79 with SR of 106 in IND
http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...41;template=results;type=batting;view=innings

So the fact is bowlers always get injured when they see Sehwag.



Warne was also injured in 1998 series in India

 

[bagapath]

Present indian team would beat the 95-99 aussie team 2-1 at home. And would lose by the same margin away. The gilchrist era team would win against India both home and away. The late taylor- early tugga aussie team was a very good team like the present Indian bunch. The later team, led by waugh and ponting, was a truly great one.

 

[Borges]

IMO, India's current side would beat Australia's pre-Gilchrist team home and lose away.

Yup. In general, that has been the expectation for India vis-a-vis any other good team for a fairly long time now. The great West Indians excepted of course.

Think this is still true as far as India vs. England or SA goes (that they drew home and away to SA was contrary to expectations).

India has always been a formidable side at home. And for a long period, a minnow away.

 

[bagapath]

At present we've lost to pak and aus in the last away series. Drawn with SL and SA. Beaten Eng, WI and NZ. At home we have drawn with SA and beaten everyone else. It is an awesome record. on par with the 95-99 aussie team's.

 

[honestbharani]

Pre gilly aussies had many unfinished agendas. They had lost to india. And srilanka. And had not beaten windies.

We have beaten everyone except SA. And not lost to anyone in 3 years. We don't have a bowling attack worthy of carrying mcwarne's kit. But we have better results.

What australia did afterwards is something this indian team can't even dream of. That is the champion stuff we should be talking about in this thread; it is not about individual bowlers.

well.. the guy who did the analysis on cricinfo is talking about bowlers as well as teams.. So there goes that. And as for what we have achieved, we have not beaten Australia in Australia either and Sri Lanka in Sri Lanka.. So Australia even pre Gilly was EASILY better than this INdian side. IT may change iwht the future tours but right now, that is how it is .

 

[smash84]

You are just trying to be more happy than Smileyshah, and I don't buy it for one second.

haha.......I'll take that as a compliment

i'd back the current indian team to thwart the 99 aus team, I wouldn't say they would dominate, but a draw or a narrow win is certainly possible.

I think for the current Indian team to beat the Aus team of 1999 they would have to improve their bowling and fielding. A narrow win is a possibility but I think, as Spark says, that in a5 test series Aus will edge it.

 

[smash84]

At present we've lost to pak and aus in the last away series. Drawn with SL and SA. Beaten Eng, WI and NZ. At home we have drawn with SA and beaten everyone else. It is an awesome record. on par with the 95-99 aussie team's.

yeah I still lol when I think of that loss to Pak. Khatmal coming handy (probably the only time in his career ) and leading Pak to a series win. It wasn't a really great Pakistan side tbh. Quite like Aus losing to India and SL 95-99

 

[sehwag fan]

yeah I still lol when I think of that loss to Pak. Khatmal coming handy (probably the only time in his career ) and leading Pak to a series win. It wasn't a really great Pakistan side tbh. Quite like Aus losing to India and SL 95-99

Apart from 1999, 2004 and 2005 every India-pak test series have been boring draws or one-sided. There have been 38 draws in 59 match . That tells you all.

Neither was series in India in 2007 very thrilling.

 

[smash84]

Apart from 1999, 2004 and 2005 every India-pak test series have been boring draws or one-sided. There have been 38 draws in 59 match . That tells you all.

Neither was series in India in 2007 very thrilling.

i thought that match was awesome. Irfan Pathan getting a hattrick in the first over and Khatmal hitting back.

 

[sehwag fan]

i thought that match was awesome. Irfan Pathan getting a hattrick in the first over and Khatmal hitting back.

I am talking about series. Even in 2007 series in Bangalore test Pakistan had imploded in 4 th innings .

1999, 2004, 2005 every match was interseting. In 2005 series Razzaq and Akmal had a very good partnership and saved Pakistan from a certain defeat.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/64125.html

 

[Kylez]

I am talking about series. Even in 2007 series in Bangalore test Pakistan had imploded in 4 th innings .

1999, 2004, 2005 every match was interseting. In 2005 series Razzaq and Akmal had a very good partnership and saved Pakistan from a certain defeat.

1st Test: India v Pakistan at Mohali, Mar 8-12, 2005 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

Sehwag Fan = Avada Kedavra

I'll take my $5 thanks.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Aus were super at home from the 1995 series onwards. I think it is a bit ridiculous to not count the 1999 series vs the West Indies as Australian being a dominant side, because there was really only one reason why we didn't dominate that series. That, and Harbhajan's series, are the two greatest one man crusades I've seen against Aus.

 

[bagapath]

That is a very valid argument, actually. May be the team had started peaking then but lara stalled them with his brilliance. I agree.

Two questions:

1) Did Australia win the crucial face saving test because Waugh dropped Warne?

2) With only 6 more overs to go, was McGrath really out in the Kolkata jail break 2001? I still wonder what would be the fate of indian cricket had he been given the benefit of doubt and the game had ended in a stalemate.

 

[honestbharani]

That is a very valid argument, actually. May be the team had started peaking then but lara stalled them with his brilliance. I agree.

Two questions:

1) Did Australia win the crucial face saving test because Waugh dropped Warne?

2) With only 6 more overs to go, was McGrath really out in the Kolkata jail break 2001? I still wonder what would be the fate of indian cricket had he been given the benefit of doubt and the game had ended in a stalemate.

I think Glenn was plumb that match when he was given out and was lucky to survive a couple oif the earlier shouts.

 

[honestbharani]

That is a very valid argument, actually. May be the team had started peaking then but lara stalled them with his brilliance. I agree.

Two questions:

1) Did Australia win the crucial face saving test because Waugh dropped Warne?

2) With only 6 more overs to go, was McGrath really out in the Kolkata jail break 2001? I still wonder what would be the fate of indian cricket had he been given the benefit of doubt and the game had ended in a stalemate.

And reg. your first point, NO.. coz Lara was carrying them single handedly and he was bound to fail at sometime and it happened in the last test..

 

[sehwag fan]

That is a very valid argument, actually. May be the team had started peaking then but lara stalled them with his brilliance. I agree.

Two questions:

1) Did Australia win the crucial face saving test because Waugh dropped Warne?

2) With only 6 more overs to go, was McGrath really out in the Kolkata jail break 2001? I still wonder what would be the fate of indian cricket had he been given the benefit of doubt and the game had ended in a stalemate.

8 overs was remaining still. Mcgrath couldn't have survived 8 overs surely even if he was not out .Tbh how India won that series is still beyond me. Kumble did not play in that series. In those days kumble used to win India at home. So it was still amazing India defeated OZ with one man bowling attack.