West Indies (70's-80's) vs Australia (2000's)?

[smssia0112]

I haven't heard of Croft either, know all the rest though. We're not talking about the team today though because that's ridiculous, talk about the Australia with Warne and McGrath, or even the Waugh era.

 

[WestIndian]

"Now" would mean 2000's.

Personally I think Australia would win a a very close contest.

ha ha ha in your dreams son, only in your dreams.

WestIndian added 5 Minutes and 48 Seconds later...

Lol.. I completely forgot about Marshall.

I've never heard of Croft before.

ha ha ha how old is this guy???

 

[aussie_ben91]

I'm 17? :

No seriously, I haven't heard of him but I've heard of the rest of the great Windies bowlers and judging by his statistics it would be stupid to put a guy who played 27 odd Tests over household names like Roberts or Holding or a guy who played well over 100 tests in Courtney Walsh.

 

[manee]

This is supposed to be a time period of two great teams and I don't believe that Walsh nor Ambrose played with Roberts.

 

[shravi]

Michael Holding was asked the same question in his Cricinfo Interview. You can see it on CricinfoTV.

 

[Dare]

I'm 17? :

No seriously, I haven't heard of him but I've heard of the rest of the great Windies bowlers and judging by his statistics it would be stupid to put a guy who played 27 odd Tests over household names like Roberts or Holding or a guy who played well over 100 tests in Courtney Walsh.

No offense but Croft is a household name for those who know about West Indies cricket in the 70's-80's. As you can see from the sig Andy Roberts is my favorite bowler of all time but I just thought that Croft brings another dimension with the way he bowls, In my XI you have similar bowlers in Ambrose and Garner and than Marshall who is probably the best of all the WI great bowlers and the best pace bowler of all-time in my eyes.
Walsh is obviously a legend but and like I said before I hate to leave Holding, Walsh and Roberts out but just as easy as any of the 4 pace bowlers that I included got in so can the 3 that i didn't put in the XI.

 

[karnog]

The problem with picking WI is that there are so many brilliant pace bowlers that its so hard to pick just 4. Australia have a set 4 bowlers in Mcgrath, Warne, Lee and Gillespie. I can't think of anyone else. Maybe Stuart Clark. As a result the windies win the bowling segment. The batting is also fairly set for an Aussie team without Ponting, Waugh brothers, Hayden and Langer is just a joke. So Australia:
Hayden
Langer
Ponting
Mark Waugh
Steve Waugh
Clarke? Hussey?
Gilchrist
Warne
Lee
Gillespie
Mcgrath

As for WI you cant have a side without Greenidge, Haynes, Llloyd, the great VIV RICHARDS (love this guy) and Dujon. You can pick any 4 bowlers from Croft, Marshall, Holding, Garner, Ambrose, Roberts, Bishop and Walsh. Any 4 and they'll trounce Australia's bowling attack. Batting is in Australia's hands but not by much. WI had also richie richardson, Sobers (though may have retired in 69...), gomes and a fair few others. So really:
Haynes
Greenidge
VIV
Sir Garfield Sobers
Clive Lloyd
Richardson/Gomes/Kanhai? (i think thats his name)
Jeffery Dujon
Insert 4 fast bowlers.

Also, WI were the best fielding side in the world back then. Outright. Australia are equal with SA (some say Australia is better, some say otherwise) so in terms of dominance WI against get points. But to say who was better? Well its hard to tell. Benaud said the SA side in the 50s was the best fielding side he ever say (he said so on channel 9) so modern fielding may not be another world to the previous eras. So we'll give it "honours even" to both.

If WI were playing in Australia Australia wins. In WI then Windies. On a neutral venue i think the windies bowling attack will decimate Australia's batting. Australia's bowling in the form of Shane Warne will provide a means of skittling and decimating them in the 4 and 5 days. I think Lee and Gillespie would easily be outplaced though Lee has found some excellent consistency recently. With an attack centred around Warne and Mcgrath it'll be tough for Australia. I think WI win on a neutral venue.

So WI-2, AUS-1
Remember, WI have 2 decades to choose from. Australia have only 1 but it seems hard to see Australia dominate for another ten years.

 

[aussie_ben91]

I reckon Australia had a stronger team assembled at one specific time in the 2001 Ashes series which makes Australia better.

Justin Langer
Matthew Hayden
Ricky Ponting
Mark Waugh
Steve Waugh
Damien Martyn
Adam Gilchrist
Shane Warne
Brett Lee
Jason Gillespie
Glenn McGrath

At this point aswell is where the likes of Langer, Hayden, Ponting, Martyn, Gilchrist & McGrath were coming into their prime while the Waugh brothers, Warney & Gillespie were already at their best.

Australia would win on a flat pitch, they'd probably win on a cracked pitch aswell because our batting is far superior. Take out Viv & Sobers and the Windies batting looks fairly weak.

 

[aussie_ben91]

*Bump*

After watching a few West Indies matches from the 1980's. IMO I'd say Australia would not only defeat the Windies but literally destroy them.

Wasn't really impressed by Malcom Marshall, he looks like the sort of bowler who nowadays would get slaughtered by attacking batsman worldwide. I'd hate to see him come up against the likes of Hayden, Symonds, Gilchrist because I'd have no doubt that he would get destroyed.

McGrath & Warne would rip through their batting lineup aswell.

Also, I'd like to also mention that the theory that pitches weren't flat until the modern days is a load of ****. The matches played in the 1980's were flat is not flatter then the modern day pitches! Infact I'd have to say the bowler look far more threatening nowadays aswell. The pace of some of the Windies bowler don't even look like they'd have a chance of hitting any batsman in the head!

 

[karnog]

The ball is an absolute blur with the windies fast bowlers. Might be the camera though. As for not hurting the players you've got to be kidding. The windies were well known for it. Even when they wore helmets injuries were common. Add to the fact their bowling averages (low 20s) and you had a lot of good, solid batsman in their time makes their team so fearful. Aussies would hammer em in ODIs but admittingly it was just introduced back then so the idea of scoring at a rate was a completely different ball field. I didn't keep an eye on the pitches though. Also, the bats nowadays a far superior to the ones used in those days too. You have to give credit to that too. Which gives validity to warne-mcgrath duo bull dozing them.

 

[aussie_ben91]

They look like they're bowling mid 130kph.

About the bats, I don't know if I was seeing things but the 1988 the bowl was racing off the bat!

 

[manee]

*Bump*

After watching a few West Indies matches from the 1980's. IMO I'd say Australia would not only defeat the Windies but literally destroy them.

Wasn't really impressed by Malcom Marshall, he looks like the sort of bowler who nowadays would get slaughtered by attacking batsman worldwide. I'd hate to see him come up against the likes of Hayden, Symonds, Gilchrist because I'd have no doubt that he would get destroyed.

McGrath & Warne would rip through their batting lineup aswell.

Also, I'd like to also mention that the theory that pitches weren't flat until the modern days is a load of ****. The matches played in the 1980's were flat is not flatter then the modern day pitches! Infact I'd have to say the bowler look far more threatening nowadays aswell. The pace of some of the Windies bowler don't even look like they'd have a chance of hitting any batsman in the head!

:

They look like they're bowling mid 130kph.

Roberts has been timed at 150+kph, Holding has been timed at mid 140s kph so bang goes your theory.

 

[karnog]

That and they measured it at where the batsman was. Nowadays they show it from release point. The bats are way better nowadays. Easily.

 

[aussie_ben91]

Haha, this Manee guy is such a tool. :

Why don't you actually go watch clips of them bowling and compare them with fast bowlers in the modern day instead of going on statistics and theories of bitter older people for once. You probably won't believe it as you come across as the guy who doesn't think the originals can be 'bettered' by anyone.

I just watched Fidel Edwards bowl a 84.7mph ball and it looked far more pacey then anything I saw Malcom Marshall bowl.

 

[manee]

I have watched him bowl extensively and I find him pretty sharp as well as a fantastic exponent of swing, but how am I supposed to argue from what I have seen with you who does not rate what he has seen?!