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

[manee]

Did you watch the Australia/India series earlier this year? The ball movement off the seam and in the air, was here, there and everywhere and Hayden made 3 centuries in 3 Tests.

I'm not disputing that, but do you think it is a coincidence that he has failed in the three nations with the most lively pitches? The 1990s had lively pitches and great seam bowling - even you can't dispute that - why did Hayden fail in his 20 innings pre-2001 to score more than one century and two fifties?

 

[apesnani]

As a Pakistani who watched both teams play, I just see the current Aussie team just winning very comfortably.

Fielding, Fitness standards have gone up so much in the last 20 years that a team playing 20 years ago would just not compete. To be honest I could almost see this Aussie team of around 2004-05 winning by 10 wickets!

 

[aussie_ben91]

He averaged 61.80 in South Africa tour of 2001/02, with 1 hundred & 2 half-centuries from 5 innings against an attack which featured Allan Donald, Shaun Pollock & Makhaya Ntini.

In the 2005/06 series in South Africa. He made 2 telling scores of 94 & 102.

He has struggled in England but he made 181 n/o in a ODI in New Zealand aswell and after that series, prior to the World Cup 2007, said those are the sort've pitches he prefers to bat on.

 

[manee]

He has not done awfully in South Africa but the general record in the three nations is far worse than the others. Moreover, ODIs are irrelevant as we are talking about Test cricket.

 

[SciD]

Hayden > Tendulkar and Ponting combined.

 

[aditya123]

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.

Just before the Ashes 2001 Series you are talking about, the Aussie side you just mentioned lost to India(who were`nt nearly as strong as the West Indians of the 80s) !
And those pitches weren`t minefields !

So, your argument of the Aussies beating the great West Indian side on flat tracks fails.

 

[aussie_ben91]

Just before the Ashes 2001 Series you are talking about, the Aussie side you just mentioned lost to India(who were`nt nearly as strong as the West Indians of the 80s) !
And those pitches weren`t minefields !

So, your argument of the Aussies beating the great West Indian side on flat tracks fails.

LOL!

Yeah, on a dead subcontient wicket that offers nothing for the pace bowlers.

We'd still win because then Shane Warne would run through the Windies batting lineup who weren't exposed to quality spinners in spinning conditions. If that was the case, we'd probably play MacGilla aswell.

We'd probably win by innings because not in the great Windies bowlers would get any bounce out of those pitches,

My theory passes not fails.

 

[smssia0112]

Swing comes from humidity in the atmosphere. How has that changed since the 1980s?

Global Warming? Wait...:

I wouldn't say that there's a huge gap between them. Bowling wise, the Windies probably win it, McGrath and Warne are the only ones who would make the West Indies' side. As for batting, Australia may narrowly win there. Ponting, Hayden and Waugh are three of the best batsmen of all time. Lara and Richards are fantastic, but I reckon that the Aussie 3 are better.

Overall, I think that it would be close, but that the Windies could be a bit better.

 

[Cricket_god]

LOL!

Yeah, on a dead subcontient wicket that offers nothing for the pace bowlers.

We'd still win because then Shane Warne would run through the Windies batting lineup who weren't exposed to quality spinners in spinning conditions. If that was the case, we'd probably play MacGilla aswell.

We'd probably win by innings because not in the great Windies bowlers would get any bounce out of those pitches,

My theory passes not fails.

the fact of the matter is todays bowlers bowl on some placid wickets,
they are much quicker than the westindies bowlers were and the batsman
have developed better

they depended on four fast medium bowlers,on todays picthes they would have been exposed and they could show some respect for this generation
bowlers,australia could have easily white washed them

 

[smssia0112]

LOL!

Yeah, on a dead subcontient wicket that offers nothing for the pace bowlers.

We'd still win because then Shane Warne would run through the Windies batting lineup who weren't exposed to quality spinners in spinning conditions. If that was the case, we'd probably play MacGilla aswell.

We'd probably win by innings because not in the great Windies bowlers would get any bounce out of those pitches,

My theory passes not fails.

I think you're taking it way too far here. You might as well say that Australia would win because they wouldn't be 50 year olds when the series is played.

 

[aussie_ben91]

I think you're taking it way too far here. You might as well say that Australia would win because they wouldn't be 50 year olds when the series is played.

Hows that taking it to far?

If the match was held in India (like the person I quoted made out) then that is what would most likely happen, wouldn't it?

The pitches apparently favour the spinners and are slow & low and a pace bowlers nightmare.

 

[SciD]

I thaught McGrath and Dizzy bowled superbly in India using conditions and bowling with cross seam at times to advantage.

 

[Dare]

I don't have to know much about them. I saw him bowl and he wasn't swinging the ball. In today's age, if you're bowling 130kph on the spot then you're going to go. Sure, he'd probably be extremely effective in swinging conditions but I'm sure in the modern age where batsman come at the bowlers then everything would be a whole different kettle of fish.

And if you actually read my posts earlier, when I mentioned the series against Australia. Sobers never played in any of them.

If you're going to go and add on players like Llyod, Greenidge & Haynes as 'world-class' batsman then I might aswell add Mark Waugh, Adam Gilchrist, Damien Martyn & Justin Langer while we're at it. :

See thats why your argument fails dude, you admit that you dont know crap about the West Indies and yet you keep putting them down.

And where have you seen Marshall bowl?? on those crap youtube clips where you cant see anything. what do you think that his 376 wickets came out of nowhere. go and check his stats against India in India and Pakistan in Pakistan. Seriously man you are talking about a pace bowler who is in the top 3 pace bowlers of all time.
Marshall could swing the ball as well as anyone in his day and as well as anyone today. and he used the seam better than anyone to say that he would struggle in non swing conditions shows how little you know about him.

 

[Cricket_god]

See thats why your argument fails dude, you admit that you dont know crap about the West Indies and yet you keep putting them down.

And where have you seen Marshall bowl?? on those crap youtube clips where you cant see anything. what do you think that his 376 wickets came out of nowhere. go and check his stats against India in India and Pakistan in Pakistan. Seriously man you are talking about a pace bowler who is in the top 3 pace bowlers of all time.
Marshall could swing the ball as well as anyone in his day and as well as anyone today. and he used the seam better than anyone to say that he would struggle in non swing conditions shows how little you know about him.

todays pitches are alot placid than those days and medium pacers of those days would have been hammered,similarly todays batsman would have struggled in 70's

so its better not to compare teams form different era's

 

[sammy]

todays pitches are alot placid than those days and medium pacers of those days would have been hammered,similarly todays batsman would have struggled in 70's

so its better not to compare teams form different era's

any ? the windies batsmen seem to have done very well.