Amarnath's 1983 Windies tour vs Steve Waugh's 1995 Windies tour

[MasterBlaster24]

Which was better?

Mohinder Amarnath in 1983: 598 runs at an average of 66.44(9 inns)

Steve Waugh in 1995: 429 runs at an average of 107.25(6 inns)

 

[OverratedSanity]

Amarnath scored 319 runs more than the second highest Indian runscorer. The ultimate one man show batting series against probably the best pace attack ever assembled.

 

[DrWolverine]

vs Marshall, Roberts, Garner & Holding

 

[DrWolverine]

vs Ambrose & Walsh

 

[DrWolverine]

Amarnath - 29, 40, 58, 117, 13, 91, 80, 54, 116
Waugh - 65, 15, 65*, 63, 21, 200

Waugh scored 50% of runs from just 1 innings

 

[Kenneth Viljoen]

Waugh for the importance and symbolism of the series , one dynasty official killed off, another on the rise.

 

[subshakerz]

Waugh because it led to a victory

 

[Thala_0710]

Waugh because it led to a victory

It's almost as if McGrath, Reiffel and Warne had a part to play in it

 

[subshakerz]

It's almost as if McGrath, Reiffel and Warne had a part to play in it

They did. But Waughs runs were tremendously consequential.

 

[Thala_0710]

They did. But Waughs runs were tremendously consequential.

Well ofc. If India had a half decent pace attack, Amarnath's runs might have been as well

 

[Thala_0710]

What did happen though was Amarnath faced a better attack, and was much more consistent throughout the series.... Whereas Waugh's record here is more reliant on one innings

 

[subshakerz]

Well ofc. If India had a half decent pace attack, Amarnath's runs might have been as well

Sure. But I think it's more high stakes when you know your innings may change the series result.

 

[Sliferxxxx]

Armanath and it's not close. Faced a much better attack and for goodness sakes this is 80s WI: better bowling, fielding, batting, slips, etc. Waughs led to victory but that had as much to do with facing a weaker WI and having McWarne to polish off the batting.

 

[DrWolverine]

Armanath and it's not close. Faced a much better attack and for goodness sakes this is 80s WI: better bowling, fielding, batting, slips, etc.

& unlimited bouncers

 

[subshakerz]

Armanath and it's not close. Faced a much better attack and for goodness sakes this is 80s WI: better bowling, fielding, batting, slips, etc. Waughs led to victory but that had as much to do with facing a weaker WI and having McWarne to polish off the batting.

Why was Ambrose Walsh weaker

 

[Johan]

Why was Ambrose Walsh weaker

significantly worse third and fourth bowlers I reckon

 

[subshakerz]

significantly worse third and fourth bowlers I reckon

Question do you think there is a bit less pressure when playing spectacularly against great opposition but on a sinking ship for a weaker team, versus on a better team but when a series result is in a line

 

[Sliferxxxx]

Why was Ambrose Walsh weaker

'83 had 4 great bowlers even if they weren't all at their peak or in form. And 1995 Ambrose was a shell of his former self having completed surgery in late 1994. 4>2.

 

[subshakerz]

And 1995 Ambrose was a shell of his former self having completed surgery in late 1994. 4>2.

Lol ok.

 

[Coronis]

Lol ok.

Its funny that you of all people are loling at this, the person who brings up Ambrose’s penetration issues post shoulder surgery all the time.