Revisiting 80s WI vs 2000s Aus

[DrWolverine]

Love him or hate him but as long as WI had one Curtly Ambrose, even with protective gear, he kept Australia in check.

Are you saying they would face more problems if they faced Marshall/Holding/Garner or Marshall/Patterson/Ambrose/Walsh?

 

[Sliferxxxx]

I also like the discussions around the other two modern teams in contention ie RSA and India and they more or less hit the nail on the head as to why those team come up short.

 

[Sliferxxxx]

Are you saying they would face more problems if they faced Marshall/Holding/Garner or Marshall/Patterson/Ambrose/Walsh?

Bishop for Patterson and they'd have issues with either attack. McWarne is no walk in the park either fwiw. Very tight contest which is why I feel either team is winning 2-1 at home to the other.

 

[subshakerz]

Bishop for Patterson and they'd have issues with either attack. McWarne is no walk in the park either fwiw. Very tight contest which is why I feel either team is winning 2-1 at home to the other.

I think in tests with evenly matched sides I favor the bowling advantage. I also think WI were harder to best. They didn't lose a series in 15 years.

 

[Migara]

Came across this video as the classic debate is discussed by Bumble and Kimber.

I thought it summarized the key points, WIs pace advantage, Aus batting advantage, WI harder to defeat in a series, Aus have a better winning rate.

The point I want to ask though is which advantage will lead to a series victory, the bowling or batting? Kimber seems to think Aus having more lower order strength is the clincher.

The whole question has two answers.

Warne, Gilchrist.

These are the biggest achillis heels of WI. Having said that they didn't have a penchant to bowling like McGrath too. However the series will depend on how WI play Warne. Advantahe to WI was that their two best playera of spin Kanhai and Lloyd are left handed.

Aussie batting probably will struggle against pace, but there will be always one or two batsmen who will put up a fight. Gilchrist probably going to be their best bat unless WI play a good spinner.

 

[Migara]

I think in tests with evenly matched sides I favor the bowling advantage. I also think WI were harder to best. They didn't lose a series in 15 years.

The side manage to draw them, had a very good spinner. Now take out Qadir and put Warne their. Pakistan would have won 2-1 easy. Even may have whitewashed them. And the other team who beat them had Hadlee. McGrath is a like to like replacent. Now jus imagine both of them in the same team.

 

[Coronis]

The side manage to draw them, had a very good spinner. Now take out Qadir and put Warne their. Pakistan would have won 2-1 easy. Even may have whitewashed them. And the other team who beat them had Hadlee. McGrath is a like to like replacent. Now jus imagine both of them in the same team.

Which very good spinner?

 

[govinda indian fan]

The whole question has two answers.

Warne, Gilchrist.

These are the biggest achillis heels of WI. Having said that they didn't have a penchant to bowling like McGrath too. However the series will depend on how WI play Warne. Advantahe to WI was that their two best playera of spin Kanhai and Lloyd are left handed.

Aussie batting probably will struggle against pace, but there will be always one or two batsmen who will put up a fight. Gilchrist probably going to be their best bat unless WI play a good spinner.

Kanhai retired in 74. You ment kalicharan

 

[subshakerz]

The whole question has two answers.

Warne, Gilchrist.

These are the biggest achillis heels of WI. Having said that they didn't have a penchant to bowling like McGrath too. However the series will depend on how WI play Warne. Advantahe to WI was that their two best playera of spin Kanhai and Lloyd are left handed.

Aussie batting probably will struggle against pace, but there will be always one or two batsmen who will put up a fight. Gilchrist probably going to be their best bat unless WI play a good spinner.

I don't rate Gilly against quality pace frankly unless the attack is tired or pitch flat. Flintoff ruined him if you recall.

 

[Sliferxxxx]

The side manage to draw them, had a very good spinner. Now take out Qadir and put Warne their. Pakistan would have won 2-1 easy. Even may have whitewashed them. And the other team who beat them had Hadlee. McGrath is a like to like replacent. Now jus imagine both of them in the same team.

. The West Indies in 99 with just Lara, Ambrose and Walsh managed to draw vs McWarne, now take them out and replace them with Marshall, Garner, Holding, Viv, Kalli, Lloyd, Greenidge etc. Using your logic, WI may even have whitewashed them easily....smh.

 

[Migara]

Kanhai retired in 74. You ment kalicharan

My bad Kalicharan it is.

 

[Migara]

. The West Indies in 99 with just Lara, Ambrose and Walsh managed to draw vs McWarne, now take them out and replace them with Marshall, Garner, Holding, Viv, Kalli, Lloyd, Greenidge etc. Using your logic, WI may even have whitewashed them easily....smh.

Nah I am talking about putting Warne in the Pakistani side that went toe to toe. Neck to neck with WI. If not for ridiculous cheating by WI umpires, Pakistan should have won it 2-1. So a side running WI as close as that with only Imran, Wasim and Miandad. Now think of what Australian XI can do to them.

 

[Johan]

Nah I am talking about putting Warne in the Pakistani side that went toe to toe. Neck to neck with WI. If not for ridiculous cheating by WI umpires, Pakistan should have won it 2-1. So a side running WI as close as that with only Imran, Wasim and Miandad. Now think of what Australian XI can do to them.

Windies was past their best by 88

 

[Sliferxxxx]

Windies was past their best by 88

This exactly. The discussion is about a full strength WI team with Lloyd, Kallicharan, Marshall. Holding, Garner, Viv and co. That team beat Pakistan in Pakistan with Imran, Qasim, Javed and Qadir. Matter of fact, they should have won 3-0 but for weather.

 

[Sliferxxxx]

Nah I am talking about putting Warne in the Pakistani side that went toe to toe. Neck to neck with WI. If not for ridiculous cheating by WI umpires, Pakistan should have won it 2-1. So a side running WI as close as that with only Imran, Wasim and Miandad. Now think of what Australian XI can do to them.

Ok so now consider a side ie England 2005 that actually beat Australia with pace. And that pace isn't remotely in the same class a 80s WI nor is the batting for that matter. You say WI never came up against a spinner as good as warne, that's true but what's also true is Australia never faced relenting pace like 80s WI.

 

[Sliferxxxx]

Nah I am talking about putting Warne in the Pakistani side that went toe to toe. Neck to neck with WI. If not for ridiculous cheating by WI umpires, Pakistan should have won it 2-1. So a side running WI as close as that with only Imran, Wasim and Miandad. Now think of what Australian XI can do to them.

You mentioned Nz that beat WI in 1980 and that's fair. Though it's interesting you harp on "cheating" WI umpires in '88 but completely neglect the rampant cheating by new zealands. But moving on. Consider the 2003 BGT where Australia drew with India at home, and very nearly lost the 4th test and series. And all India had was great batting and decent bowling. Oh what, "McGrath and Warne were missing." That's cute. Warne is a non issue for India. But if you use McGrath missing as an excuse, I can use a missing peak Viv from that 80s series in NZ.

 

[Migara]

You mentioned Nz that beat WI in 1980 and that's fair. Though it's interesting you harp on "cheating" WI umpires in '88 but completely neglect the rampant cheating by new zealands. But moving on. Consider the 2003 BGT where Australia drew with India at home, and very nearly lost the 4th test and series. And all India had was great batting and decent bowling. Oh what, "McGrath and Warne were missing." That's cute. Warne is a non issue for India. But if you use McGrath missing as an excuse, I can use a missing peak Viv from that 80s series in NZ.

NZ cheated, that we all agree, and so did WI.

Now the important thing is that to see who did best against WI during that time. Imran did very well, a fast, swing bowler. Not that accurate, but bowls ridiculous amounts of wicket taking balls. Then Hadlee, McGrath like very accurate bowler. And in those two series, Abdul Qadir. Pakistan, who won way less against other oppositions than West Indies, incidentally had the most suitable attack to curtail West Indies. Australia of 00s, had exactly similar attack. Unlike Pakistan, they had a monster batting side too. Pakistan, with much inferior batting, stuck it our for two series to draw it. So it comes all down to how WI is going to handle McGrath and Warne. Finally what WI can to Gilchrist. With Ponting, he was the best player of pace in that side.

 

[Migara]

Windies was past their best by 88

Pakistan drew in 86 series and 88 series. It was not a single series either.

 

[subshakerz]

Not that accurate, but bowls ridiculous amounts of wicket taking balls.

Imran had a better ER than Hadlee and Marshall. He was very accurate, I don't know where there is an impression he was loose somehow.

 

[Johan]

Pakistan drew in 86 series and 88 series. It was not a single series either.

that's fine, 86 was played on such landmines, they'd have beaten Australia too