Can any team ever replicate the Aussie dominance of 2000s?

[The Bald Eagle]

EPL witnessed Arsenal of 2004 as invincibles, the football world observed the AC Milan of 1990s as the greatest ever team. The field of Boxing bear witness to the class of Mohammad Ali and Rocky Marciano. Likewise in cricket its hard to see beyond the brilliance of Aussie side of 2000s who were perfect in almost every facet of cricket be it in fielding, batting or bowling.

So the big question is has there ever been a better side than Aussies of 2000s. If not then follow up question is will there ever be one to dwarf them?

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Poll added Guys!

 

[Major]

Very difficult. Australia was a side to beat, and no matter who they played, we would be supporting the other side, or the under dogs. Winning just one game in a 3 match series was a very big deal.

I remember that series where NZ won 2 games and when Zimbabwe beat Pontings team in the World T20. What a side Australia was.

They were soo good that they even had a series between Australia vs Australia A and it was a jam packed stadium.

Our Indian fans live in this delusion that their team has or could replicate that lol.

I seriously thought that England would replicate that success after the 2019 World Cup win, because they team was just different with Ben Stokes, but even they have died down a bit.

I think only Australia can replicate that dominance.

 

[captain.hansolo]

This period coincided with a decline in some of the other teams: India were not the bowling tour de force that they are now, South Africa had not yet experienced the manna from heaven that is devillers, and Pakistan were already on their way to become cattle fodder. Sri Lanka still had some bite with Sangakara and Murlitharan… but the tldr is that Australia ascended from strength to strength whereas the rest of the world was mostly stagnant. Then came the big tide which raised all ships. And the level of competition rose, and becoming an overwhelmingly dominant force became challenging. Even current India cannot dominant either England or Australia they way Australia dominated the world between 2002 and 2009.

 

[Cricket Warrior]

Honestly speaking right now India is looking even more threatning compared to Australia of early 2000's they have all the check boxes ticked to dominate for another 10 years in my opinion.

 

[Rana]

Very difficult. Australia was a side to beat, and no matter who they played, we would be supporting the other side, or the under dogs. Winning just one game in a 3 match series was a very big deal

@shaz619

Wasn’t this guy claiming in another thread that Ashraful was a poor, poor player?

Bangladesh beat Australia for the first time ever because of Ashraful in 2005

 

[sweep_shot]

Honestly speaking right now India is looking even more threatning compared to Australia of early 2000's they have all the check boxes ticked to dominate for another 10 years in my opinion.

I disagree because current India couldn't win a Test series in England, NZ, and South Africa. Aussies were winning everywhere.

India won in England and NZ many years ago but not this current group.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Honestly speaking right now India is looking even more threatning compared to Australia of early 2000's they have all the check boxes ticked to dominate for another 10 years in my opinion.

Don't worry bro they will find a way to mess things up for themselves lol.

 

[Rana]

Honestly speaking right now India is looking even more threatning compared to Australia of early 2000's

Yeah that’s not even remotely true

The Australian team up until 2007 was phenomenal. They won 3 50 over world cups in a row. India will probably never achieve this feat unless they host 3 world cups (50 overs) at home in a row.

 

[mominsaigol]

EPL witnessed Arsenal of 2004 as invincibles, the football world observed the AC Milan of 1990s as the greatest ever team. The field of Boxing bear witness to the class of Mohammad Ali and Rocky Marciano. Likewise in cricket its hard to see beyond the brilliance of Aussie side of 2000s who were perfect in almost every facet of cricket be it in fielding, batting or bowling.

So the big question is has there ever been a better side than Aussies of 2000s. If not then follow up question is will there ever be one to dwarf them?

No because people forget that 2000 Australia was also the first team to actually play modern era 2016 cricket.

They were the only side to actually score 300+ totals in an era were 220 to 250 was par.

Previously other teams only had a few batsmen who could go bamg bamg like saeed Anwar, Jaysuria, but Australia jam packed their side with modern cricketers.

They were the ones who started the trend of no 3 being the position where your best batsmen bats at no 3. They were the ones who started the trend of trying to bowl out the opposition with strategies whereas during this time the focus was bowl line and length and wait for things to happen, But Australia got into the minds of batsmen.

By 1996 they had completly changed the game whereas every other team including top sides like India were still playing catchup with the likes of dravid batting in odi.

It took India all the way till 2007 to finally catchup to 2000 Australian style, SA was the only side who could catchup but they were inconsistent. England took till 2016 to catch up.

And pakistan still hasn't caught up after all this time.

They started an entire era and many of their placeholder rules like your best batsmen bats at no 3 and your most aggressive batsmen opens has been emulated by sides today such as India (Rohit no 1, Kohli no 3) etc.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

No because people forget that 2000 Australia was also the first team to actually play modern era 2016 cricket.

They were the only side to actually score 300+ totals in an era were 220 to 250 was par.

Previously other teams only had a few batsmen who could go bamg bamg like saeed Anwar, Jaysuria, but Australia jam packed their side with modern cricketers.

They were the ones who started the trend of no 3 being the position where your best batsmen bats at no 3. They were the ones who started the trend of trying to bowl out the opposition with strategies whereas during this time the focus was bowl line and length and wait for things to happen, But Australia got into the minds of batsmen.

By 1996 they had completly changed the game whereas every other team including top sides like India were still playing catchup with the likes of dravid batting in odi.

It took India all the way till 2007 to finally catchup to 2000 Australian style, SA was the only side who could catchup but they were inconsistent. England took till 2016 to catch up.

And pakistan still hasn't caught up after all this time.

They started an entire era and many of their placeholder rules like your best batsmen bats at no 3 and your most aggressive batsmen opens has been emulated by sides today such as India (Rohit no 1, Kohli no 3) etc.

Yep they were ahead of their time. People eulogize Sehwag as bazball forerunner but they forget what havoc Gilchrist used to cause at 6th position. Was a feast not treat to watch.

 

[mominsaigol]

Honestly speaking right now India is looking even more threatning compared to Australia of early 2000's they have all the check boxes ticked to dominate for another 10 years in my opinion.

Not even close.

India in 2024 may have been unbeaten but none of their wins screamed dominance besides Afghanistan and minnows.

Against pakistan they all collapsed and were lucky that Pant understood the NY pitch and played their.

In multiple games they had to rely on dube performing.

They got extremly lucky with Australia and the final, in the final Kohli clicked despite being a walking wicket the entire tournament and Stark bowling rubbish allowed Hitman to come back in form at the right time whereas before that game India was consistently at 10 for 2.

Their batting throughout the tournament was dodgy. They won due to their impressive bowling, Batting did not win it. India is not a balanced side by any metric and Bumrah hard carries them as Bumrah bowling basically means the opposition has 40 overs or 16 overs to bat.

Classic Australia was downright invincible in every department, winning multiple cups and genuinely spanking teams left and right.

I remember watching highlights of a game against NZ where they scored 380 in an era where 250 was a winning total and NZ was already packed up.

Heck Mcgraths 4 of 8 in 10 overs against India with the likes of Sachin, Sehwag etc batting is probably the greatest bowling spell I've ever seen with Bumrah not even coming close to this performance.

 

[captain.hansolo]

I disagree because current India couldn't win a Test series in England, NZ, and South Africa. Aussies were winning everywhere.

India won in England and NZ many years ago but not this current group.

Not quite. They lost the ashes and while in 2008 (?) did better India, I consider that series a blip rather than the norm. Heck even India managed to run them the whole nine yards in 2003 and were it not for some sympathetic umpiring they would have lost to a side whose top fast bowling talent for ajit agarkar.

 

[Mesozoic]

Nope..

That Australian team won three ODI world cups in a row away from home soil in three different continents and conditions by dismantling three different teams in each final.

Even with all our (India's) talent and resources and money, we'll never be able to replicate it that monstrous feat.

 

[sweep_shot]

Not quite. They lost the ashes and while in 2008 (?) did better India, I consider that series a blip rather than the norm. Heck even India managed to run them the whole nine yards in 2003 and were it not for some sympathetic umpiring they would have lost to a side whose top fast bowling talent for ajit agarkar.

2008? That was not the ATG team.

Aussie ATG team was from 1999 till 2007. McGrath and Warne retired in 2007. Gilchrist, Langer, and Martyn also retired at that time (from Test).

Australia won Ashes in 2001, 2003, and 2007.

Australia dominated everywhere during their ATG run.

 

[captain.hansolo]

2008? That was not the ATG team.

Aussie ATG team was from 1999 till 2007. McGrath and Warne retired in 2007. Gilchrist, Langer, and Martyn also retired at that time (from Test).

Australia won Ashes in 2001, 2003, and 2007.

Australia dominated everywhere during their ATG run.

They lost in India in 2001

 

[sweep_shot]

They lost in India in 2001

I know but they won in 2004.

They conquered everywhere during that period. India couldn't do that during current run as they failed to win a series in NZ, SA, and England.

 

[sweep_shot]

@captain.hansolo

Accomplishments of ATG Australia:

1) 3 ODI World Cup titles.
2) Series win in India (2004).
3) Series win in England (2001).
4) Series win in South Africa (2002).
5) Series win in New Zealand (2005).
6) Series win in Sri Lanka (2004).
7) Was unbeaten at home. Nobody defeated them in a home Test series during their ATG run.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Most teams had poor bowling attack except SA in the 2000s. If anything India played better in Australia than other teams. Drew the series in Australia 1-1. Would have won 2-1 but for Parthiv patel's terrible keeping. In 2004 Australia beat India luckily. Tendulkar went missing in 2 tests. And also there was another match where India Just need 200 runs on day 5 with 10 wickets in hand. But it was rained out.

 

[Major]

@shaz619

Wasn’t this guy claiming in another thread that Ashraful was a poor, poor player?

Bangladesh beat Australia for the first time ever because of Ashraful in 2005

so based on one game, ashraful has become a great player?

Your logic is absurd.

 

[shaz619]

@shaz619

Wasn’t this guy claiming in another thread that Ashraful was a poor, poor player?

Bangladesh beat Australia for the first time ever because of Ashraful in 2005

Misbah has been off the telly for some time, damaak is in hibernation mode

 

[mominsaigol]

Tbf Ashraful isn't anything special if you compare him to worldy standards.

However the fact that Bangladesh was lucky to find someone like him in their country which has a lack of infrastructure is extremely impressive and surprising.

You don't expect players who can handle prime aussie bowling to cone from a country such as Bangladesh.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

@captain.hansolo

Accomplishments of ATG Australia:

1) 3 ODI World Cup titles.
2) Series win in India (2004).
3) Series win in England (2001).
4) Series win in South Africa (2002).
5) Series win in New Zealand (2005).
6) Series win in Sri Lanka (2004).
7) Was unbeaten at home. Nobody defeated them in a home Test series during their ATG run.

Even a single win against them looked like a feat. And now even a series win against them in home conditions just look OK.

 

[RyanRyan10]

Not even close.

India in 2024 may have been unbeaten but none of their wins screamed dominance besides Afghanistan and minnows.

Against pakistan they all collapsed and were lucky that Pant understood the NY pitch and played their.

In multiple games they had to rely on dube performing.

They got extremly lucky with Australia and the final, in the final Kohli clicked despite being a walking wicket the entire tournament and Stark bowling rubbish allowed Hitman to come back in form at the right time whereas before that game India was consistently at 10 for 2.

Their batting throughout the tournament was dodgy. They won due to their impressive bowling, Batting did not win it. India is not a balanced side by any metric and Bumrah hard carries them as Bumrah bowling basically means the opposition has 40 overs or 16 overs to bat.

Classic Australia was downright invincible in every department, winning multiple cups and genuinely spanking teams left and right.

I remember watching highlights of a game against NZ where they scored 380 in an era where 250 was a winning total and NZ was already packed up.

Heck Mcgraths 4 of 8 in 10 overs against India with the likes of Sachin, Sehwag etc batting is probably the greatest bowling spell I've ever seen with Bumrah not even coming close to this performance.

Sehwag was not even a part of that match or that tour, and the Indian team was an average side during that time. Australia themselves were 5-59 on that track. I'm not questioning the excellence of McGrath, who I consider the best pacer of all time, but what you posted is factually incorrect.

 

[Devadwal]

Very difficult. Australia was a side to beat, and no matter who they played, we would be supporting the other side, or the under dogs. Winning just one game in a 3 match series was a very big deal.

I remember that series where NZ won 2 games and when Zimbabwe beat Pontings team in the World T20. What a side Australia was.

They were soo good that they even had a series between Australia vs Australia A and it was a jam packed stadium.

Our Indian fans live in this delusion that their team has or could replicate that lol.

I seriously thought that England would replicate that success after the 2019 World Cup win, because they team was just different with Ben Stokes, but even they have died down a bit.

I think only Australia can replicate that dominance.

Indian team were won the series against Australia in 2001 at Home and draw away from home (2004)

 

[Devadwal]

Australia team of 2000 were won 10 consecutive series at home while current Indian team are undefeated 17* series so far .

 

[RidiculousMan]

I would say Indian team has done it. It was unfortunate they couldn't win 2023 WC.

 

[FearlessRoar]

Yes India is on that track now

 

[Bhaijaan]

Australia were lucky Bharat had not emerged as a force in cricket at that time and yet we went toe to toe with them Aussies and slayed them
From time to time.

If we had these blokes all emerge in one generation like the Aussies were lucky to have , we would have smashed them.

Hitman > Hayden
Tendulkar > Gilchrist
Kohli > Ponting
Gambhir > Clarke
Yuvraj > Symonds
Pandya > Waugh
Dhoni >> Waugh
Warne > Kuldeep
Lee > Zaheer
Bumrah > Gillespi
Shami > McGrath

 

[Aang_The_last_airbender]

Too many formats and League cricket now! It will be hard to replicate the aura of 2000s.
Only other team that can come close to replicating that is India. for that we need a couple of Bumrah's and Ashwin/Jadeja level bowlers for 5 years. We have only one Bumrah so far.

 

[Major]

Indian team were won the series against Australia in 2001 at Home and draw away from home (2004)

Good for them

 

[Muhammad Saad]

Australia were lucky Bharat had not emerged as a force in cricket at that time and yet we went toe to toe with them Aussies and slayed them
From time to time.

If we had these blokes all emerge in one generation like the Aussies were lucky to have , we would have smashed them.

Hitman > Hayden
Tendulkar > Gilchrist
Kohli > Ponting
Gambhir > Clarke
Yuvraj > Symonds
Pandya > Waugh
Dhoni >> Waugh
Warne > Kuldeep
Lee > Zaheer
Bumrah > Gillespi
Shami > McGrath

pretty acceptable list except that Bhumrah , Shami and Pandya being inferior to their counterparts

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Australia were lucky Bharat had not emerged as a force in cricket at that time and yet we went toe to toe with them Aussies and slayed them
From time to time.

If we had these blokes all emerge in one generation like the Aussies were lucky to have , we would have smashed them.

Hitman > Hayden
Tendulkar > Gilchrist
Kohli > Ponting
Gambhir > Clarke
Yuvraj > Symonds
Pandya > Waugh
Dhoni >> Waugh
Warne > Kuldeep
Lee > Zaheer
Bumrah > Gillespi
Shami > McGrath

Are you serious? Lol

 

[jnaveen1980]

Australia were lucky Bharat had not emerged as a force in cricket at that time and yet we went toe to toe with them Aussies and slayed them
From time to time.

If we had these blokes all emerge in one generation like the Aussies were lucky to have , we would have smashed them.

Hitman > Hayden
Tendulkar > Gilchrist
Kohli > Ponting
Gambhir > Clarke
Yuvraj > Symonds
Pandya > Waugh
Dhoni >> Waugh
Warne > Kuldeep
Lee > Zaheer
Bumrah > Gillespi
Shami > McGrath

With 3 formats and plethoar of league cricket Australia would have struggled to keep Mcgrath fit.

Australia - Mcgrath = 70%
Australia - Mcgrath -Warne = 50%

Two guys made all the difference. Infact current Australian pace attack is more versatile.

 

[pratiktc]

From 1999 - 2005 Aus was blessed with 4 x Tier 1 ATG players at their peak (McGrath, Warne, Ponting, Gilly).

It is very rare that so many ATGs are in a playing XI over an extended period. IMO the only similiar team was 1980-1985 West Indies where Richards, Marshall, Holding ,Garner, Greenidge and Haynes formed the fulcrum.

I believe WI team were overall stronger outfit and better in

both batting and pace bowling but Aus had a beautifully spread out array of ATGs (spin, pace, aggressive batting and relentless accumulation) which made their cricket attractive to watch. Additionally the decade of 1990-2000 saw the rise of Australia's best ever domestic batters. Maher, Law, Lehmann, Bevan, Hodge, Love, Elliott were all international class batters who all were worthy of 80-100 Test careers in other countries.

I think the legend of Aus team of 00s benefited from improved TV coverage and also general weakness of most other international teams in the late 90s- early 00s. A bit like Federer's domination before Nadal became a force. Eng, NZ were both low quality teams, Pak and SA reeling from fixing exposes. WI were tumbling downhill.

If we critically examine the 00s Aus team the pace bowling stocks did not have any great depth. Gillespie and Lee were merely good Test bowlers and Kasprowicz, Bichel, Nicholson were all average support casters. In fact the current Aus pace depth is probably better than the 00s team.

Some other posters have commented about Aussie batters revolutionizing scoring rates in 00s and with tactics. My honest opinion is that this is nonsense.
Some batters Slater, Hayden, Gilchrist and Ponting pushed the envelope by being naturally aggresive but it wasn't really a cultural shift. Rest of the Aus batters were playing normal cricket. Tactically also the Aussies werent doing anything out of the box. In fact they carried joke allrounders like Ian Harvey and Shane Lee for ages trying to ape batting depth of Woolmer's SA teams until they managed to uncover Andy Symonds

 

[IndoorCricket]

Australia had match winners all the way. Utter dominance. Very difficult to replicate such a feat.

 

[kron]

You can have mcg at peak
Warne at peak
All of goat 2000 era players but you still won't beat peak kohlis india in India or rahane's india.

That is for certain.

Away from home yes india will.lose to that peak Aussie side too but it will be competitive. Both series will be competitive.

Mcg is the goat bowler regardless.

Also that Oz team would fare better vs the field.

Nz and eng conditions are still a problem for india. Well we did draw there in eng. But let's see next time

 

[kron]

With 3 formats and plethoar of league cricket Australia would have struggled to keep Mcgrath fit.

Australia - Mcgrath = 70%
Australia - Mcgrath -Warne = 50%

Two guys made all the difference. Infact current Australian pace attack is more versatile.

Without mcg that team is nothing. Even a weakened indian side drew in aus without mcg.

He is the goat bowler.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Without mcg that team is nothing. Even a weakened indian side drew in aus without mcg.

He is the goat bowler.

REmember the famous 2005 Ashes win for England. Mc zgrath stepped on the ball and picked up an ankle injury in the warm up game. He sat out for 2 games. England won both tests.

 

[kron]

Btw 80s West indies were greater than ozzzz easy.

Goat pace attack.

 

[kron]

REmember the famous 2005 Ashes win for England. Mc zgrath stepped on the ball and picked up an ankle injury in the warm up game. He sat out for 2 games. England won both tests.

Mcgrath is the first name on the sheet for me 10/10

3 fast bowlers for me are the greatest

Marshall
Mcgrath
Garner

You can add steyn and potentially bumrah.

Wasim is up there too.

No one else.

 

[RahulBose]

Everyone likes Nostalgia.
Every metric says humans are living better lives now then they ever had before, but people still feel for their respective growing up decade (90s for me)

This is the clear logical fallacy of Golden age.

What I am trying to say is - people, specially Pakistani fans, would never accept the dominance of Indian cricket, because it is a logical fallacy.

They would always find some weird metric in which the Aussies of yore were better.

The real answer is - India has been the best cricketing team in the 2012-2024 period(all formats combined)

 

[BouncerGuy]

I don't think any team will be able to match what Australia did in 2000s. unstoppable. Winning world cups for fun.

 

[U$ofA]

Wonderful set of players. Though would like to see their record in Asia. Especially India. How they did against India in India over the years. I would say the second best all time behind the WI of the 80's.

Judging the by the conversations here, the only other team in play seems to be India. The rest are not even in the discussion.

 

[Bhaijaan]

With 3 formats and plethoar of league cricket Australia would have struggled to keep Mcgrath fit.

Australia - Mcgrath = 70%
Australia - Mcgrath -Warne = 50%

Two guys made all the difference. Infact current Australian pace attack is more versatile.

Kohli would sledge McGrath and he would never be the same again.

 

[UP]

That Aussie team can’t be matched. It was filled with match winners and atg players. They dominated home and away. Won world cups and champion trophies for fun.

 

[U$ofA]

I don't think any team will be able to match what Australia did in 2000s. unstoppable. Winning world cups for fun.

Agreed. There was that run of three ODI WC if I am right. Very hard to match that. Also, going forward not sure how many ODI WC there will be. Given the declining support for ODI's.

Another aspect of the Aussie team was their run in tests. They were very good there as well.

 

[BouncerGuy]

Agreed. There was that run of three ODI WC if I am right. Very hard to match that. Also, going forward not sure how many ODI WC there will be. Given the declining support for ODI's.

Another aspect of the Aussie team was their run in tests. They were very good there as well.

They were a complete package and dominating every event and series in that era. Simply unbeatbale.

 

[Devadwal]

They were a complete package and dominating every event and series in that era. Simply unbeatbale.

Yes only indian team were gave them fight in test cricket or win the series against them .

 

[U$ofA]

Yes only indian team were gave them fight in test cricket or win the series against them .

Yes, they did poorly in India given the greatness of that team. Went back to look at stats, they won the one series because of a rain out in the final test where India needed 100 runs in final innings to draw level.

Also, cannot believe how poor Warne was in India. The most friendliest of bowling conditions for him. He averaged something like 50 in bowling.

 

[Hitman]

Yes, they did poorly in India given the greatness of that team. Went back to look at stats, they won the one series because of a rain out in the final test where India needed 100 runs in final innings to draw level.

Also, cannot believe how poor Warne was in India. The most friendliest of bowling conditions for him. He averaged something like 50 in bowling.

43.11

 

[Cricket Warrior]

Yes current team of India in my opinion but would be interesting to see how they will perform without rohit and kohli

 

[Buffet]

Yes current team of India in my opinion but would be interesting to see how they will perform without rohit and kohli

Nah, Aus team had many ATG players and many very great players. The weakest link in that test team was pretty good as well. Same can't be said about the current Indian team.

 

[Buffet]

Yes, they did poorly in India given the greatness of that team. Went back to look at stats, they won the one series because of a rain out in the final test where India needed 100 runs in final innings to draw level.

Also, cannot believe how poor Warne was in India. The most friendliest of bowling conditions for him. He averaged something like 50 in bowling.

Indian batting line up had some of the best players of spin in history. Murali and Warne, both were thrashed in India.

 

[mominsaigol]

Yes current team of India in my opinion but would be interesting to see how they will perform without rohit and kohli

No, not even close. Current team India lost to Sri lanka lol.

Within India in 2023 they curated every pitch to their liking lol.

In 2024 they had extremly close encounters, againat pakistan, they were lucky that rizwan and inad played the worst innings possible, and that pakistan's MO was basically a tail starting from no 3. The pitch showed that it got harder and harder to bat, Pakistan could have ended the game in the first 5 overs getting something like 60 to 70 and tuk tuked the rest of the way, but that's what happens when you have 2 non pp openers and crapola No 3-7.

Then against Australia, Rohit after failing an entire tournament kicked off and Hitman usually thrives on Rubbish bowling, Stark bowled absolutely rubbish, Afterwards Bumrah is the one who saved them from Travis head really, Marsh also threw his wicket away.

Sa in the final chocked big time and it was the Bumrah show.

Again not trying to take credit away from India, But outside of their home den, they haven't really been dominating teams, they've been winning yes, but multiple close calls, close encounters have resulted.

Classic Australia was smacking every team left and right, black and blue? It was one sided affairs. Alot of people use to be shocked that they even managed to win one game against them in a bilaterals, They knew finals was an impossible situation to beat them in?

One side didn't have any equals, Whereas with India, I don't feel that their unbeatable. I feel that they are THE BEST TEAM, but they don't give the vibes of being unbeatable excluding home conditions.

 

[sweep_shot]

No, not even close. Current team India lost to Sri lanka lol.

Within India in 2023 they curated every pitch to their liking lol.

In 2024 they had extremly close encounters, againat pakistan, they were lucky that rizwan and inad played the worst innings possible, and that pakistan's MO was basically a tail starting from no 3. The pitch showed that it got harder and harder to bat, Pakistan could have ended the game in the first 5 overs getting something like 60 to 70 and tuk tuked the rest of the way, but that's what happens when you have 2 non pp openers and crapola No 3-7.

Then against Australia, Rohit after failing an entire tournament kicked off and Hitman usually thrives on Rubbish bowling, Stark bowled absolutely rubbish, Afterwards Bumrah is the one who saved them from Travis head really, Marsh also threw his wicket away.

Sa in the final chocked big time and it was the Bumrah show.

Again not trying to take credit away from India, But outside of their home den, they haven't really been dominating teams, they've been winning yes, but multiple close calls, close encounters have resulted.

Classic Australia was smacking every team left and right, black and blue? It was one sided affairs. Alot of people use to be shocked that they even managed to win one game against them in a bilaterals, They knew finals was an impossible situation to beat them in?

One side didn't have any equals, Whereas with India, I don't feel that their unbeatable. I feel that they are THE BEST TEAM, but they don't give the vibes of being unbeatable excluding home conditions.

I agree.

Current India team also lost 1-2 in Bangladesh. They also didn't win any trophy from 2013 till 2024.

ATG Aussie team won 1999 WC, 2003 WC, 2007 WC, and 2006 CT. They won Test series in India, Sri Lanka, South Africa, New Zealand, England, and West Indies. They won everywhere. They also didn't lose a single home Test series.

So, current India team is nowhere close to ATG Aussie team.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Indian batting line up had some of the best players of spin in history. Murali and Warne, both were thrashed in India.

In Test matches India vs Australia neck and neck in 2000s. Played 20 tests against each other. India won 7. Australia won 7. This was supposed to be the ATG side along with WI 1980s side and Bradman side. They didn't exactly steam roll India because INdia played Warne the best. Everyone else was clueless. Basit ali was made into a joker by Warne.

 

[kron]

Nah, Aus team had many ATG players and many very great players. The weakest link in that test team was pretty good as well. Same can't be said about the current Indian team.

Without mcgrath that team is nothing.

Mcgrath made that team great. All others stat padded because of mcgrath

Take him out and they are nothing special. But that applies to most great teams. There is always one or 2 top tier players who make the difference.

 

[sweep_shot]

Without mcgrath that team is nothing.

Mcgrath made that team great. All others stat padded because of mcgrath

Take him out and they are nothing special. But that applies to most great teams. There is always one or 2 top tier players who make the difference.

How?

That team had Warne, Brett Lee, Ponting, Hayden, Gilchrist, Damien Martyn, Langer etc.

Every single player in that team was a superstar.

There was a reason why they won 4 ICC trophies, was unbeaten in home Test series, and won everywhere away (Test) during that period.

 

[kron]

How?

That team had Warne, Brett Lee, Ponting, Hayden, Gilchrist, Damien Martyn, Langer etc.

Every single player in that team was a superstar.

There was a reason why they won 4 ICC trophies, was unbeaten in home Test series, and won everywhere away (Test) during that period.

Take mcgrath out and they won't win a single title but that's OK.

 

[Buffet]

Without mcgrath that team is nothing.

Mcgrath made that team great. All others stat padded because of mcgrath

Take him out and they are nothing special. But that applies to most great teams. There is always one or 2 top tier players who make the difference.

1993 - 2007 ( When Mcgrath played )

Aus W/L was 2.1 when Mcgrath did not play.
Aus W/L was 4.2 when Mcgrath played.

So , yes.. Mcgrath was the player who doubled the efficiency of Aus Team, but taking out the best all format bowler in history will have an impact on any team, including ATG Aus team. McGrath was a notch above anyone else playing in Aus ATG team and it's clear from stats, but Aus had many very good players at same time. Team's record without Mcgrath puts it just behind SA so you can't say that team was nothing without McGrath.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Take mcgrath out and they won't win a single title but that's OK.

Australia's W/L ratio is under 1 in 2000s against India if you include only matches that were played by Sachin. The only series that Australia won in India was when Tendulkar did not appear in those 2 tests.

 

[kron]

1993 - 2007 ( When Mcgrath played )

Aus W/L was 2.1 when Mcgrath did not play.
Aus W/L was 4.2 when Mcgrath played.

So , yes.. Mcgrath was the player who doubled the efficiency of Aus Team, but taking out the best all format bowler in history will have an impact on any team, including ATG Aus team. McGrath was a notch above anyone else playing in Aus ATG team and it's clear from stats, but Aus had many very good players at same time. Team's record without Mcgrath puts it just behind SA so you can't say that team was nothing without McGrath.

They wouldn't win any of thr icc titles without mcgrath though or dominate in rankings. Will be top 3 sure. But not numero uno

 

[sweep_shot]

They wouldn't win any of thr icc titles without mcgrath though or dominate in rankings. Will be top 3 sure. But not numero uno

How are you sure about that?

They had players like Mark Waugh, Steve Waugh, Ponting, Lehmann, Langer, Hayden, Gilchrist, Brett Lee, Warne, McGill, Gillespie, Bevan, Symonds, Damien Martyn etc.

Fact of the matter is they won 4 ICC trophies and they are the greatest team of all time. They also won Test series everywhere and were unbeaten at home (not a single series loss at home).

 

[jnaveen1980]

They wouldn't win any of thr icc titles without mcgrath though or dominate in rankings. Will be top 3 sure. But not numero uno

South Africa was a complete team. But gross underachievers. Also SA lacked a genuine match winning spinner in their armory. That held them back. That is where Warne's presence was a major boost for Australia. Nobody had clue against Warne other than India/ Lara.

 

[BouncerGuy]

I guess not. Australia of 2000s is pretty much unmatchable. TBH, that era was different, different rules etc. SO cannot really compare that team with any team of today.

 

[Hikaru]

Cricket had two faces pre-2005, devepoled well off West and a poor subcontinent where a few freakishly good individual players were the only saving grace. The competition wasn't strong enough and Aussies did dominate like no one else.

I personally dont see such domination in Cricket ever again, it's a far more competitive era with Bharat's rise.

 

[Justcrazy]

Australia of that era had several match winners as well as mentally strong players. Its not possible to have that many match winners together in one team. It was a big coincidence.

 

[mominsaigol]

Without mcgrath that team is nothing.

Mcgrath made that team great. All others stat padded because of mcgrath

Take him out and they are nothing special. But that applies to most great teams. There is always one or 2 top tier players who make the difference.

Are you kidding?

Gilchrist, Jaysuria and many others was a generational batter. Nowadays seeing batsmen like Warner, Qdk, Butler are common, But gilchrist changed the whole game? He was basically the next era VIV.

Gone were the days of 1990 where you went tuk tuk, anchored and steadied your way to a 250 score.

Similarly hayden followed suit? These 2 openers were ahead of their time followed by Ricky pointing.

Pointing unlike other batters during that era had the mentality of " First I think about hitting a 6, them 4, then 3, then 2, then 1 and then dot.

And Damien martyn was a true successor to Dean Jones and was extremly classy, Bevan was a scray finisher and Andrew symmons is highly underrated alongside waugh.

It's just Australia is a 25M population and during 2000's it was much much less like at 14 to 16M max

Whereas India is a 1.3B population and even 10 to 20 years ago had crazy high numbers so aussie players like Dean Jones, Damien martyn, Micheal Bevan, Symmons, Brad Hodge, Mattew Hayden are pretty much ghosts

Whereas in India even medicore players like KL Rahul have social media go and all of India go crazy on them.

Dean Jones is basically the father of Modern cricket, and Damien martyn was the probs the most classiest batter in his era, But they hardly ever get mentioned Whereas even Indian Fixers like azhruddin have entire Bollywood Biopics made on them

 

[kron]

How are you sure about that?

They had players like Mark Waugh, Steve Waugh, Ponting, Lehmann, Langer, Hayden, Gilchrist, Brett Lee, Warne, McGill, Gillespie, Bevan, Symonds, Damien Martyn etc.

Fact of the matter is they won 4 ICC trophies and they are the greatest team of all time. They also won Test series everywhere and were unbeaten at home (not a single series loss at home).

None of them are mcgrath class. None. Zero. Not even Warne who got destroyed in India


Mcgrath is the difference maker. Look at the stats too if you are a stat nerd

They are a nothing side without mcgrath. Maybe top 3 that's it.

 

[kron]

South Africa was a complete team. But gross underachievers. Also SA lacked a genuine match winning spinner in their armory. That held them back. That is where Warne's presence was a major boost for Australia. Nobody had clue against Warne other than India/ Lara.

Yea na south africa always were overrated. Donald aside they were nothing special. Pollock did mostly nothing vs australia. And always choked badly in key games.

In tests yes they were both great but they just lacked match winners. Always come up short when it matters.

 

[Ab Fan]

South Africa was a complete team. But gross underachievers. Also SA lacked a genuine match winning spinner in their armory. That held them back. That is where Warne's presence was a major boost for Australia. Nobody had clue against Warne other than India/ Lara.

South Africa didn't had a Gilchrist either. They sticked with a 30 averaging keeper batsman for 15 years, and he was a powerful man in the team and captain's favourite.

 

[Ab Fan]

The thing with Australia is that they have a clutch gene. If they play a formidable side, they are likely to win the tournament but if they play a decent side even then with a slice of luck going their way, they can beat teams in knockout and win the tournament.

That's why they won consecutive World Cups.But in Test cricket, in the mid 2000s, they couldn't even beat Sri Lanka away from home. It was not a team way better in terms of skills but it was way better due to the ability to show up in big games in white ball cricket and all their players had this in them.

 

[mominsaigol]

None of them are mcgrath class. None. Zero. Not even Warne who got destroyed in India


Mcgrath is the difference maker. Look at the stats too if you are a stat nerd

They are a nothing side without mcgrath. Maybe top 3 that's it.

Mcgrath isn't the sole difference maker.

In 2003 world cup final, the top 4 especially Martin and Pointing sealed india's fate right their and then.

The old rules made it next to impossible to chase 359 down, It was an era where Australia was cranking 350 to 380 scores while the rest of the world were settling for 250-270. The score was already too much for India, It would have required a miracle to won

Lee and bichel got the key wickets of dravid and Ganguly who were well set. Lehman's Run out of sehwag was a game changer.

The main wicket was getting Sachin out which is why people give credit to mcgrath.

Again I'm not trying to say Mcgrath bowled bad, he got 3 wickets of zaheer, Kaif and Sachin and went for 6RR but it isn't all mcgrath like you're claiming

Gilchrist, Hayden, Pointing and Damien murdered the indian bowling, The run out of sehwag by lehmann, Lee and bichel getting dravid and ganguly out etc etc.

Classic Australia was a collective hive. Not a one man show which current India is as they've often had to rely on Bumrah getting them out of a rut like he did against Pakistan, australia and sa this cup.

 

[kron]

Mcgrath isn't the sole difference maker.

In 2003 world cup final, the top 4 especially Martin and Pointing sealed india's fate right their and then.

The old rules made it next to impossible to chase 359 down, It was an era where Australia was cranking 350 to 380 scores while the rest of the world were settling for 250-270. The score was already too much for India, It would have required a miracle to won

Lee and bichel got the key wickets of dravid and Ganguly who were well set. Lehman's Run out of sehwag was a game changer.

The main wicket was getting Sachin out which is why people give credit to mcgrath.

Again I'm not trying to say Mcgrath bowled bad, he got 3 wickets of zaheer, Kaif and Sachin and went for 6RR but it isn't all mcgrath like you're claiming

Gilchrist, Hayden, Pointing and Damien murdered the indian bowling, The run out of sehwag by lehmann, Lee and bichel getting dravid and ganguly out etc etc.

Classic Australia was a collective hive. Not a one man show which current India is as they've often had to rely on Bumrah getting them out of a rut like he did against Pakistan, australia and sa this cup.

Not really. India have shami bumrah and siraj when he is in form too.

Then there is pant etc and pandya both dint play in odi 2023 final and also wtc final. Bumrah dint play in the final.

In odi If it was any other bowler they wouldn't have got Sachin out unlike mcg. But I agree that 2003 final batsmen did the job.

What about 2007 and 1999? Mcgratj made the difference.

 

[mominsaigol]

Not really. India have shami bumrah and siraj when he is in form too.

Then there is pant etc and pandya both dint play in odi 2023 final and also wtc final. Bumrah dint play in the final.

In odi If it was any other bowler they wouldn't have got Sachin out unlike mcg. But I agree that 2003 final batsmen did the job.

What about 2007 and 1999? Mcgratj made the difference.

2023 India curated every pitch to their favour, Outside of that their just slightly superior to other teams, They don't surpass them by miles, Bumrah is the one who made the difference in 2024.

For 2007, that was mostly Adam Gilxhrist going bamg bang, 281 in 38 overs is even difficult for today's standards bro? In 2007 it was freaking impossible? The one ball reverse swing would have made the middle overs a nightmare?

Mcgrath only has one wicket and that too of a tail ender? Jaysuria and Sangakara were dismissed by clarke and Hodge? Yes ncgrath was economical, his 7 put massive pressure on sri lanka, But even so, no way in hell sri lanka was chasing that unless rauf and shaheen were bowling to them?

As for 1999, that was mcgrath and Warne, Mcgrath was the most economical but Warner took 4 wickets and Warne wickets were the most key of Ijaz, Moin and Afridi(Waseem akram not really relevant)

Look bro, I am not saying Mcgrath is rubbish or he didn't do anything or he was a passenger, He was a key contributor but you're acting as if he was the main man for Australia and 1999,2003 and 2007 is solely because of him?

Australia was a collective hive, They had the best bowling, fielding and Batting period. Saying its all Mcgrath is a huge disrespect to the likes of pointing, Gilchrist, warne and many others who played gun roles and got MOM'S for their performances.

 

[kron]

2023 India curated every pitch to their favour, Outside of that their just slightly superior to other teams, They don't surpass them by miles, Bumrah is the one who made the difference in 2024.

For 2007, that was mostly Adam Gilxhrist going bamg bang, 281 in 38 overs is even difficult for today's standards bro? In 2007 it was freaking impossible? The one ball reverse swing would have made the middle overs a nightmare?

Mcgrath only has one wicket and that too of a tail ender? Jaysuria and Sangakara were dismissed by clarke and Hodge? Yes ncgrath was economical, his 7 put massive pressure on sri lanka, But even so, no way in hell sri lanka was chasing that unless rauf and shaheen were bowling to them?

As for 1999, that was mcgrath and Warne, Mcgrath was the most economical but Warner took 4 wickets and Warne wickets were the most key of Ijaz, Moin and Afridi(Waseem akram not really relevant)

Look bro, I am not saying Mcgrath is rubbish or he didn't do anything or he was a passenger, He was a key contributor but you're acting as if he was the main man for Australia and 1999,2003 and 2007 is solely because of him?

Australia was a collective hive, They had the best bowling, fielding and Batting period. Saying its all Mcgrath is a huge disrespect to the likes of pointing, Gilchrist, warne and many others who played gun roles and got MOM'S for their performances.

Lol India dint do any pitch doctoring except in the final which they lost.

Their bowling is clearly the best in the world.

But yea fair enough about Australia.

In tests missing Glen mcgrath makes more of a difference. Odi looks like everyone contributed. I still don't feel they are the same team without mcgrath and I have serious doubt if they would win icc titles witgour mcgrath
Maybe 1 out of 4 they managed to win that era.

First player on the team sheet for me is not Warne who I find overrated.

It's mcgrath. I don't care 2 hoots about punter Gunter Hayden's fat belly power or Lehmann etc. I want mcgrath. Give mcgrath to any team and he would make them a top 2 side. Greatest bowler of all time. He destroyed all top batsmen. He destroyed sacchu Bacchu, Lara etc

No bowler comes close. They are very much beatable withour mcg for me.

 

[mominsaigol]

Lol India dint do any pitch doctoring except in the final which they lost.

Their bowling is clearly the best in the world.

But yea fair enough about Australia.

In tests missing Glen mcgrath makes more of a difference. Odi looks like everyone contributed. I still don't feel they are the same team without mcgrath and I have serious doubt if they would win icc titles witgour mcgrath
Maybe 1 out of 4 they managed to win that era.

First player on the team sheet for me is not Warne who I find overrated.

It's mcgrath. I don't care 2 hoots about punter Gunter Hayden's fat belly power or Lehmann etc. I want mcgrath. Give mcgrath to any team and he would make them a top 2 side. Greatest bowler of all time. He destroyed all top batsmen. He destroyed sacchu Bacchu, Lara etc

No bowler comes close. They are very much beatable withour mcg for me.

Claiming Mcgrath is the best bowler is different from claiming he was the biggest reason Australia won which isn't true by any metric.

Sachin would have had a nightmarish time chasing 359 even if he didn't get dismissed early, Even sehwag could only muster a run a ball against the entire aussie attack and their stupidly good God like fielding.

Sachin is good but their are limits to a human endeavour.

That aussie attack + their batting is freakishly strong, Add to that the crazy fielding ontop of it being a final? It's not easy brother.

You're talking about one man vs an entire atg hive wailing on you while you're dealing with cripples at the other end?

 

[kron]

2023 India curated every pitch to their favour, Outside of that their just slightly superior to other teams, They don't surpass them by miles, Bumrah is the one who made the difference in 2024.

For 2007, that was mostly Adam Gilxhrist going bamg bang, 281 in 38 overs is even difficult for today's standards bro? In 2007 it was freaking impossible? The one ball reverse swing would have made the middle overs a nightmare?

Mcgrath only has one wicket and that too of a tail ender? Jaysuria and Sangakara were dismissed by clarke and Hodge? Yes ncgrath was economical, his 7 put massive pressure on sri lanka, But even so, no way in hell sri lanka was chasing that unless rauf and shaheen were bowling to them?

As for 1999, that was mcgrath and Warne, Mcgrath was the most economical but Warner took 4 wickets and Warne wickets were the most key of Ijaz, Moin and Afridi(Waseem akram not really relevant)

Look bro, I am not saying Mcgrath is rubbish or he didn't do anything or he was a passenger, He was a key contributor but you're acting as if he was the main man for Australia and 1999,2003 and 2007 is solely because of him?

Australia was a collective hive, They had the best bowling, fielding and Batting period. Saying its all Mcgrath is a huge disrespect to the likes of pointing, Gilchrist, warne and many others who played gun roles and got MOM'S for their performances.

And Warne barn karne and Binga all reap the rewards cause of McGrath's pressure. Mcgrath puts all batsmen under pressure.

He creates wickets by being economical. They are forced to hit other bowlers. Without mcgrath that won't happen easily. All the other bowlers were nothing special.

 

[mominsaigol]

And Warne barn karne and Binga all reap the rewards cause of McGrath's pressure. Mcgrath puts all batsmen under pressure.

He creates wickets by being economical. They are forced to hit other bowlers. Without mcgrath that won't happen easily. All the other bowlers were nothing special.

Yes but the other bowlers aren't run machines and getting taken to the cleaners.

It's odi and their 4 bowlers + 2 part timers playing as well? And economy wise all of them aren't too far off Mcgrath excluding the Pakistan final where mchrath was head and shoulders > the rest in economy.

I've seen full match games of 1999, 2003, 2007 final.

I have no issues with people claiming Mcgrath was the best bowler of that era but you're acting as if the rest are medicore? Their not, everyone bowled extremly well to sanath jaysuria and THAT IS NOT AN EASY FEAT.

you're acting like mcgrath was the issue while everyone else like sanga, Ijaz, Jaysuria, Sehwag had a halwa time.

They didn't, Sehwag was struggling tooth and nail against every bowler, so was Jaysuria and that is not an easy fest to achieve against these 2.