Current Indian XI vs 90's Pakistan XI

[gazza619]

I am creating this thread as a certain poster brings this argument in every other thread. Lets have an honest discussion on who will win and put this issue to bed once and for all. I have used test match scenario as that is the ultimate battle.

Pakistan XI

S Anwar
A Sohail
I Ahmed
Inzamam-ul-Haq
M Yousuf
Saleem Malik
M Khan
W Akram (captain)
S Mushtaq
W Younus
S Akhtar

India XI

P Shaw
M Agarwal
C Pujara
V Kohli (captain)
A Rahane
H Vihari
W Saha
R Ashwin
U Yadav
J Bumrah
M Shami

 

[Ab Fan]

Yadav out, Ishant in.
Shaw out, Rohit in.

 

[gazza619]

Yadav out, Ishant in.
Shaw out, Rohit in.

Sounds good. Who wins and what margin?

 

[Mamoon]

Shaw is a brilliant talent but at the moment he won’t be first choice if Rohit was available. The way Rohit opened against South Africa and piled up mountains of runs, he would be first choice opener for now.

The Pakistani lineup has a much better fast bowling attack but the Indian team has a better spinner (two better spinners if you include Jadeja) as well as a better batting lineup.

In Asia, the Indian team would win because Kohli’s India is the most efficient team ever in Asian conditions.

Outside Asia, it would be close. Pakistan might win in England, but India would be favorites in South Africa and New Zealand and win comfortably in Australia.

Someone like Waqar will get slapped around by Kohli on Australian pitches. He never did well in Australia even while bowling to weaker batsmen than Kohli such as Slater, Langer etc.

Kohli’s India is the best Asian Test team ever. I completely agree with Ravi Shastri.

Meanwhile, 90’s Pakistan is seriously overhyped. They regularly lost at home to weaker sides including Sri Lanka and Zimbabwe.

1995 Sri Lanka and 1997 Zimbabwe will get whitewashed by Kohli’s India.

2010s India > 1990s Pakistan.

 

[szrana007]

Pakistan's away record in the 90's was was remarkable. Indian team of 2010's has a poor W/L ratio in SENA. Thats all you need to know.

 

[szrana007]

The Pakistan team that played India in 1999 and won 2 out of 3 matches would easily beat this current Indian team. That Pak team is one one of the strongest teams ever on paper.

 

[hitthestump]

Pakistan's main problem in the 90's was inconsistency (largely due to everything that happened off the field) but they did tend to raise their game against India and play properly.

I can't see many scenarios where Pakistan don't have a clear edge. On a seaming wicket India will collapse. On a dry, dead wicket reverse swing will run rampant.

Pakistan's batting is hit and miss but like i said, they generally raise their game against India. I don't think Anwar, Inzi and Yousuf will struggle too much against Bumrah and Shami.

 

[usmanraheel]

The Pakistan team should win without any issues.

Would be mouth watering seeing kohli against Wasim Waqar Akhtar, wow.

 

[Ashraful_Rox]

Pakistan would easily win this by an Innings and could even bundle out India below 36

 

[Heisenberg111]

Pakistan will win, 90's Pakistan extremely strong team on paper.

 

[Mobashir]

It's not even comparable.

Pakistan is way better in every département. Even our test match fielding is better than this indian team.

The batting is way superior and the bowling, the less said the better.
We will win in any condition anywhere.

 

[UP]

90’s team was swimming in politics which hindered their way to dominance in that decade.

If the 90’s folks were to be sincere - they should smash the current Indians left, right and centre. There’s little to no competition.

 

[Mobashir]

The 90's team is comparable with an indian all time XI with Indian all time XI batting being better and our bowling being better.

 

[Mobashir]

90’s team was swimming in politics which hindered their way to dominance in that decade.

If the 90’s folks were to be sincere - they should smash the current Indians left, right and centre. There’s little to no competition.

How do you want to compare a line up of Agarwal, Sharma, vihari, who are nobodies in test cricket to a good complete batting line up.
That leavs, Kohli, Pujara and Rahane who is still a lesser player than our 4 midle order players.

Kohli at this stage will be somewhere at par with Inzi.

Pujara is good but still not a Moyo's level and I will even say a lesser player than Saleem Malik.

 

[Thunderbolt14]

The 90's team is comparable with an indian all time XI with Indian all time XI batting being better and our bowling being better.

Definitely. I’d say that 90s team can beat this:

S Gavaskar
V Sehwag
R Dravid
S Tendulkar
V Kohli
MS Dhoni (wk)
K Dev
R Ashwin
A Kumble
Z Khan
J Bumrah

The batting lineups have the edge to India but there is a world of difference with the bowling.

A better comparison might be Pakistan’s current team versus India’s 90’s team.

 

[Buffet]

It's hard to make such calls for the team which lost/drew many series against SL/Zim in 90s.

 

[szrana007]

Pakistan's record in test cricket in SENA in the 90's

Matches played 26
Won 10
Lost 10
Drawn 6
W/L ratio of 1.0

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...anval1=span;team=7;template=results;type=team

India's record in SENA in 2010's

Matches played 36
Won 6
Lost 23
Drawn 7
W/L ratio of 0.26
https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...anval1=span;team=6;template=results;type=team

Pakistan of 90's miles better in SENA than India of 2010's.

 

[szrana007]

It's hard to make such calls for the team which lost/drew many series against SL/Zim in 90s.

Lost one series each to SL, Zim at home but has a much better record in SENA than India of 2010's. Check post no.17

 

[gazza619]

Pakistan's record in test cricket in SENA in the 90's

Matches played 26
Won 10
Lost 10
Drawn 6
W/L ratio of 1.0

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...anval1=span;team=7;template=results;type=team

India's record in SENA in 2010's

Matches played 36
Won 6
Lost 23
Drawn 7
W/L ratio of 0.26
https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...anval1=span;team=6;template=results;type=team

Pakistan of 90's miles better in SENA than India of 2010's.

To be honest I couldnt care less about the records. As you may know they can be deceiving.

I just want to know what would happen if these two XIs from two different era clash against each other.

 

[Mamoon]

Pakistan's record in test cricket in SENA in the 90's

Matches played 26
Won 10
Lost 10
Drawn 6
W/L ratio of 1.0

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...anval1=span;team=7;template=results;type=team

India's record in SENA in 2010's

Matches played 36
Won 6
Lost 23
Drawn 7
W/L ratio of 0.26
https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...anval1=span;team=6;template=results;type=team

Pakistan of 90's miles better in SENA than India of 2010's.

England and New Zealand are much stronger today than they were in the 90s.

Moreover, cricket is played outside SENA as well. Home results count too, and 90’s Pakistan was getting humiliated at home by Sri Lanka and Zimbabwe, who were decent sides but not elite teams by any means.

This Indian team is a destruction machine at home. They have only lost 1 Test in India from 2013 onwards and have thrashed a lot of top teams.

India of 2010s is far better than Pakistan of 90s. This is yet another example of the remarkable level of delusion and denial amongst Pakistani fans.

We may not be very good at cricket, but when it comes to delusion and denial, our fans are in a class of their own.

This is the worst post of this thread after the one that said that Kohli today is just about equal to Inzamam of 90’s. One can only laugh at this level of delusion.

Inzamam is not fit to tie Kohli’s shoelaces. Kohli is in the class of Tendulkar, Lara, Ponting and Sir Viv. Inzamam is not close that class.

 

[szrana007]

To be honest I couldnt care less about the records. As you may know they can be deceiving.

I just want to know what would happen if these two XIs from two different era clash against each other.

On paper 90's Pak team is one of the strongest teams ever. Its no comparison with the 2010's Indian team including the current one.

 

[Ab Fan]

Pakistan's record in test cricket in SENA in the 90's

Matches played 26
Won 10
Lost 10
Drawn 6
W/L ratio of 1.0

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...anval1=span;team=7;template=results;type=team

India's record in SENA in 2010's

Matches played 36
Won 6
Lost 23
Drawn 7
W/L ratio of 0.26
https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...anval1=span;team=6;template=results;type=team

Pakistan of 90's miles better in SENA than India of 2010's.

The four best teams in 90s apart from Pakistan were Australia, South Africa, West Indies and Sri Lanka

 

[szrana007]

England and New Zealand are much stronger today than they were in the 90s.

Moreover, cricket is played outside SENA as well. Home results count too, and 90’s Pakistan was getting humiliated at home by Sri Lanka and Zimbabwe, who were decent sides but not elite teams by any means.

This Indian team is a destruction machine at home. They have only lost 1 Test in India from 2013 onwards and have thrashed a lot of top teams.

India of 2010s is far better than Pakistan of 90s. This is yet another example of the remarkable level of delusion and denial amongst Pakistani fans.

We may not be very good at cricket, but when it comes to delusion and denial, our fans are in a class of their own.

This is the worst post of this thread after the one that said that Kohli today is just about equal to Inzamam of 90’s. One can only laugh at this level of delusion.

Inzamam is not fit to tie Kohli’s shoelaces. Kohli is in the class of Tendulkar, Lara, Ponting and Sir Viv. Inzamam is not close that class.

) Thanks for the laugh.

 

[szrana007]

The four best teams in 90s apart from Pakistan were Australia, South Africa, West Indies and Sri Lanka

England only lost to Australia and Pakistan at home in the 90's and that too twice. New Zealand under Fleming won there too in 1999. But two top teams West Indies and South Africa weren't able to win in England in the 90's.

 

[Ab Fan]

England only lost to Australia and Pakistan at home in the 90's and that too twice. New Zealand under Fleming won there too in 1999. But two top teams West Indies and South Africa weren't able to win in England in the 90's.

You have to just check W/L record to know who were top four teams in 1990s. Anyone arguing that West Indies or South Africa weren't stronger teams than England and New Zealand in 1990s must be joking.

 

[Ab Fan]

In 1990s, India at home had a better record than Pakistan at home. This means that India was a bigger fortress in 1990s than Pakistan was in the same decade.

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...span;team=6;team=7;template=results;type=team

It means that with Tendulkar, Azhar, Kumble and Srinath, we were a harder team to beat at home than Pakistan were at home with Inzy, Wasim, Waqar and Saqlain.

 

[szrana007]

You have to just check W/L record to know who were top four teams in 1990s. Anyone arguing that West Indies or South Africa weren't stronger teams than England and New Zealand in 1990s must be joking.

I am not saying that West Indies and South Africa weren't stronger teams than England in the 90's, just that they failed to win a series in England in the 90's, which Pakistan managed twice in 92 and 96.
South Africa lost in England in 1998 FYI.

 

[szrana007]

In 1990s, India at home had a better record than Pakistan at home. This means that India was a bigger fortress in 1990s than Pakistan was in the same decade.

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...span;team=6;team=7;template=results;type=team

It means that with Tendulkar, Azhar, Kumble and Srinath, we were a harder team to beat at home than Pakistan were at home with Inzy, Wasim, Waqar and Saqlain.

Yes 90's India was a very strong home team, but still lost 2 out of 3 matches to Pakistan in 1999 at home.

 

[Heisenberg111]

England and New Zealand are much stronger today than they were in the 90s.

Moreover, cricket is played outside SENA as well. Home results count too, and 90’s Pakistan was getting humiliated at home by Sri Lanka and Zimbabwe, who were decent sides but not elite teams by any means. This Indian team is a destruction machine at home. They have only lost 1 Test in India from 2013 onwards and have thrashed a lot of top teams.

India of 2010s is far better than Pakistan of 90s. This is yet another example of the remarkable level of delusion and denial amongst Pakistani fans.

We may not be very good at cricket, but when it comes to delusion and denial, our fans are in a class of their own.

This is the worst post of this thread after the one that said that Kohli today is just about equal to Inzamam of 90’s. One can only laugh at this level of delusion.

Inzamam is not fit to tie Kohli’s shoelaces. Kohli is in the class of Tendulkar, Lara, Ponting and Sir Viv. Inzamam is not close that class.

So what? same Zimbabwe and Sri Lanka were thrashed away by Pakistan in that decade and India have always been strong at home. Even in the 90's they were unbeatable at home. Home dominance doesn't mean much when you can't win abroad. This Indian team has a huge disparity between their home and SENA records.

 

[Mobashir]

This is when the problems starts... Some things are debatable, but really a test team with Vihari, Mayank, Sharma, Rahane has a better batting line up than Saeed Anwar, Ijaz Ahmed, Inzamam ul Haq, Mohammad Yousuf and Saleem Malik.

If the 36 all out didn't wake you up, I think nothing can wake up you up.

 

[Mamoon]

So what? same Zimbabwe and Sri Lanka were thrashed away by Pakistan in that decade and India have always been strong at home. Even in the 90's they were unbeatable at home. Home dominance doesn't mean much when you can't win abroad. This Indian team has a huge disparity between their home and SENA records.

A strong team is always very hard to beat at home. No great team in any era was inconsistent at home. The fact that Pakistan had a sketchy home record in the 90s proves that it wasn’t a great team by any means.

A team’s aura is built by dominating at home. Losing away from home is not that big of a deal.

The legendary Australian side from 2000 to 2007 never lost a series at home but they lost two series away from home - India (2001) and England (2005).

On the contrary, losing to India at home in 2003-04 or losing to England in the home Ashes of 2002-03 would have been more damaging to their reputation as a legendary Test team.

The 90s Pakistan is not viewed as a great Test team outside PP because they weren’t strong at home.

 

[Heisenberg111]

A strong team is always very hard to beat at home. No great team in any era was inconsistent at home. The fact that Pakistan had a sketchy home record in the 90s proves that it wasn’t a great team by any means.

A team’s aura is built by dominating at home. Losing away from home is not that big of a deal.

The legendary Australian side from 2000 to 2007 never lost a series at home but they lost two series away from home - India (2001) and England (2005).

On the contrary, losing to India at home in 2003-04 or losing to England in the home Ashes of 2002-03 would have been more damaging to their reputation as a legendary Test team.

The 90s Pakistan is not viewed as a great Test team outside PP because they weren’t strong at home.

Only because of politics and match fixing scandals did that team underperformed at home, otherwise 90's Pakistan is a very strong team on paper and were always a very feared side whenever they toured abroad unlike current Indian team.

 

[Mamoon]

This is when the problems starts... Some things are debatable, but really a test team with Vihari, Mayank, Sharma, Rahane has a better batting line up than Saeed Anwar, Ijaz Ahmed, Inzamam ul Haq, Mohammad Yousuf and Saleem Malik.

If the 36 all out didn't wake you up, I think nothing can wake up you up.

A strong batting lineup does not lose a series at home. They might lose a match, but they will always end up outperforming the opposition batting lineup in their home conditions over the course of a series.

To judge how good the batting lineup of a team is in a given era is very easy. Just look at how many home Test series they have lost.

India only lost one home series in this decade and that was in 2012 against England where their batsmen were past their prime and they needed a new set of batsmen.

After their transition, they haven’t lost a single home series from 2013 onwards. In fact, they have only lost one Test match during this period.

Pakistan’s batting lineup in the 90s was too reliant on Inzamam and Saeed Anwar and that is why they lost home series to weaker sides.

Ijaz was an average player. Anyone who thinks he was a superior batsman to Rohit or Rahane is blinded by nostalgia. Put Rohit or Rahane in the same team as Ijaz and they would outperform him most of the time.

The fact that an average batsman like Ijaz was Pakistan’s number 3 in the 90s shows how overrated that team was. Moreover, Saleem Malik was past his prime by mid to late 90s.

Mohammad Yousuf himself was a rookie in the 90’s and only came into his own from 2001 onwards.

In the 90’s, Pakistan batting was so shaky that terrible batsmen like Asif Mujtaba played 20+ Tests and didn’t score a single hundred.

On the other hand, Karun Nair was banished forever after 4 lean Tests in spite of scoring a triple-century against England.

I don’t know if 36 all out will wake Indians up or not, but nothing will wake Pakistani fans up. Easily the most deluded fans in the world.

 

[Mamoon]

Only because of politics and match fixing scandals did that team underperformed at home, otherwise 90's Pakistan is a very strong team on paper and were always a very feared side whenever they toured abroad unlike current Indian team.

Yeah and it is not anyone else’s problem so don’t expect concessions from others. No one told them to play politics and fix matches.

The bottom-line is that they lost multiple series at home and strong teams do not do that.

 

[Mobashir]

A strong batting lineup does not lose a series at home. They might lose a match, but they will always end up outperforming the opposition batting lineup in their home conditions over the course of a series.

To judge how good the batting lineup of a team is in a given era is very easy. Just look at how many home Test series they have lost.

India only lost one home series in this decade and that was in 2012 against England where their batsmen were past their prime and they needed a new set of batsmen.

After their transition, they haven’t lost a single home series from 2013 onwards. In fact, they have only lost one Test match during this period.

Pakistan’s batting lineup in the 90s was too reliant on Inzamam and Saeed Anwar and that is why they lost home series to weaker sides.

Ijaz was an average player. Anyone who thinks he was a superior batsman to Rohit or Rahane is blinded by nostalgia. Put Rohit or Rahane in the same team as Ijaz and they would outperform him most of the time.

The fact that an average batsman like Ijaz was Pakistan’s number 3 in the 90s shows how overrated that team was. Moreover, Saleem Malik was past his prime by mid to late 90s.

Mohammad Yousuf himself was a rookie in the 90’s and only came into his own from 2001 onwards.

In the 90’s, Pakistan batting was so shaky that terrible batsmen like Asif Mujtaba played 20+ Tests and didn’t score a single hundred.

On the other hand, Karun Nair was banished forever after 4 lean Tests in spite of scoring a triple-century against England.

I don’t know if 36 all out will wake Indians up or not, but nothing will wake Pakistani fans up. Easily the most deluded fans in the world.

If I understood the thread well is who is going to win the match, not really about the decade. 2020's onwards performances of the players also counts.

If it isn't the case then this thread is bizarre as you can really not compare Agzrwal, Vihari etc to anyone as they have done nothing in the 10's.

Player by player, these Indians are no match for the Pakistani names written.
As I said an all time Indian XI Will be a better match to the Pakistani team.

Moreover you same Karun Nair example is really outdated, as average players like Rahane have played 65 tests at 42. They have a number 6 who averages in the 30's. If it was a 50 averaging midle order you could argue about bench batsman being better than Babar Azam etc. So far India needs to try to find 4 good midle order batsman in their playing XI and then compare the bench players with top batsman going around.

I know you don't understand things so I will give you an example : you can argue that Pattinson is a very good bowler despite him not playing because he has three excellent bowlers in front of him.

 

[gazza619]

Losing away from home is not that big of a deal

That is just so wrong. If that is the case then why do we criticise our teams when they lose away games.

A team’s aura is based on a combination of home and away wins.

 

[Mobashir]

Everyone in international cricket savour the away wins and away performances way more than anything in test cricket.
There is a reason every Indian fan on this forum is so happy about the test series win in Australia in 2018.

But the bakht wants to tell everyone here that what really count is home performances to make another loose point.

To loose 23 matches in SENA and win 6 whatever else you do means your decade was far from what you really wanted to achieve.

Loosing against 1/2 weak teams some very weak teams doesn't mean you had a bad decade, that are upset.
The greatest ever odi Australian team lost to Bangladesh and that didn't change anything. Upset happens and they don't define what you did over a decade.
Surely the happen less in test cricket but still they can happen.

 

[Mobashir]

That is just so wrong. If that is the case then why do we criticise our teams when they lose away games.

A team’s aura is based on a combination of home and away wins.

True both are important. But an away series win, especially in SENA for Asian teams is the most important thing. Their value is so much bigger.

Some Indian posters even take them at the same importance as a world cup.

This one particular Indian fan is delusional. His love for India and hate for Pakistan makes him write anything.

 

[gazza619]

Shaw is a brilliant talent but at the moment he won’t be first choice if Rohit was available.

Waqar never did well in Australia even while bowling to weaker batsmen than Kohli such as Slater, Langer etc.

So whilst Shaw gets the praise of brilliance, Slater and Langer who in my book were the hardest to get out get defined by being weaker batsmen than Kohli ?

Why not say that Shaw is a weaker batsman than Rohit/Kohli?

 

[tyron_woodley]

Lmao your team would lose. Not a phainta would in Asian codntiosn you would get wrecked badly. No offence.

Even in 90s you guys din't exactly crush Australia, saffers etc.

Infact you even lost 3 0 at home.

Inshallah.

 

[YousafTheBeast]

Lmao your team would lose. Not a phainta would in Asian codntiosn you would get wrecked badly. No offence.

Even in 90s you guys din't exactly crush Australia, saffers etc.

Infact you even lost 3 0 at home.

Inshallah.

Give the ball to Shoaib Akhtar and we’ll all be saying Inna lillahi wa inna ilayhi raji'un x 10 against your current xi

 

[Thunderbolt14]

Give the ball to Shoaib Akhtar and we’ll all be saying Inna lillahi wa inna ilayhi raji'un x 10 against your current xi

“Well technically, it’s not 36 all out, it’s 36-0 with 10 retired hurts. There’s a difference”

 

[YousafTheBeast]

“Well technically, it’s not 36 all out, it’s 36-0 with 10 retired hurts. There’s a difference”

Retired hurt is only used if they survive 97mph bouncers to the head.

 

[tyron_woodley]

Give the ball to Shoaib Akhtar and we’ll all be saying Inna lillahi wa inna ilayhi raji'un x 10 against your current xi

In Asia my man. You will get carted just like everyone else.
There is a reason virat's sindia don't lose in Asia even if they miss key players. They will absolutely tonk Shoaib.

Even in 90s you guys got wrecked at home a couple of times by Aussies and saffers.

 

[YousafTheBeast]

In Asia my man. You will get carted just like everyone else.
There is a reason virat's sindia don't lose in Asia even if they miss key players. They will absolutely tonk Shoaib.

Even in 90s you guys got wrecked at home a couple of times by Aussies and saffers.

Mate, take your blue shades off for a second.

If you think Shaw, Agarwal, Pujara, Rahane, Vihari and Saha are good enough to take on Shoaib Akhtar regardless of the pitch and conditions, then you’re not deluded, you’re beyond that, with all respects.

 

[tyron_woodley]

Mate, take your blue shades off for a second.

If you think Shaw, Agarwal, Pujara, Rahane, Vihari and Saha are good enough to take on Shoaib Akhtar regardless of the pitch and conditions, then you’re not deluded, you’re beyond that, with all respects.

Check their records in Asia and you will be surprised. In ASIA. I am talking about ASSISI.

NOT ENGLUND, NOT KANGAROO LAND AND NOT KIWI LAND.

ASIA. I am talking Asia. You will get carted there just like every other team. Virat's India are the biggest baddest home bullies. I don't see any team challenging them at their best.

Think hard for a second. I am talking about Asian Condtions. It's death for your bowled or any for the matter.

90s weak as India beat Aussies 3 0 and drew with your ATG team.

Virat's India would crush your 90s team.

 

[hitthestump]

People should probably put records to the side. Why the 90's Pakistan side didn't achieve what they could have is a whole other thread.

 

[waleed88]

Depends how much reverse swing can factor in.

 

[YousafTheBeast]

Check their records in Asia and you will be surprised. In ASIA. I am talking about ASSISI.

NOT ENGLUND, NOT KANGAROO LAND AND NOT KIWI LAND.

ASIA. I am talking Asia. You will get carted there just like every other team. Virat's India are the biggest baddest home bullies. I don't see any team challenging them at their best.

Think hard for a second. I am talking about Asian Condtions. It's death for your bowled or any for the matter.

90s weak as India beat Aussies 3 0 and drew with your ATG team.

Virat's India would crush your 90s team.

YAAR KHUDA KA WASTA...

PRITHVI SHAW - 2 MATCHES IN ASIA
AGARWAL - 5 MATCHES IN ASIA
VIHARI - 1 MATCH IN ASIA
SAHA - 29 MATCHES IN ASIA

NOW BEFORE YOU TELL ME TO CHECK 90’s PAKISTAN RECORD IN ASIA, TELL ME HOW IN GODS NAME CAN YOU TELL ME THE CURRENT INDIAN TEAM WITH 3 PLAYERS WHO HAVE PLAYED LESS THAN 10 GAMES IN ASIA COMBINED CAN BE DOMINANT IN ASIA? IF IM NOT MISTAKEN, THE TITLE OF THIS THREAD SAYS CURRENT INDIAN XI, NO TENDULKAR, NO SEHWAG, NO DHONI ETC.

Virat’s Current Indian XI couldn’t crush a grape.

 

[waleed88]

If it's a 2 match series I would give them 1-1. 90's side was seriously unpredictable. Team would struggle at home but then draw a test match series against the best team in the world at that time = South Africa in their home ground. Lost 2-1 to Australia. Defeated England in their home ground twice. Won the Asian Test championship.

 

[shariqnoor]

Pakistan 90s team is more naturally gifted than the current India XI but the current Indian team is definitely more efficient and disciplined.

So I would think the current Indian team might win more than they would lose.

However, it would be important to consider as to when these matches would be played. If the matches are played according to rules and conditions of 90s, then Pakistan would've have a better chance of defeating the current India XI. But if these matches are played in today's conditions then no chance. Waqar would be a bang average bowler in today's cricket. His whole game revolved around reverse swing which is negligible in today's cricket. He would've been Haris Rauf v2.0 today.

 

[waleed88]

People forget that Saqlain Mushtaq was a monster during the 90's, and if spin is India's main lethal weapon, then Saqlain is much superior to Ashwin. Saeed Anwar and Inzamam would take Ashwin apart. Their pace bowling is alright in flat conditions. I don't remember clearly but the 1999 series Saqlain was the top wicket taker and would always get Sachin out if I'm not wrong.

 

[waleed88]

Plus I dunno about Indian team's defense when Dravid was struggling against Wasim on a completely flat track. Can't subtract the genius of Wasim Akram, don't think Kohli has a better defense than Dravid aka ball of the century.

This wicket is on a completely flat Indian track.

In this video Wasim had Dravid twice.

 

[tyron_woodley]

YAAR KHUDA KA WASTA...

PRITHVI SHAW - 2 MATCHES IN ASIA
AGARWAL - 5 MATCHES IN ASIA
VIHARI - 1 MATCH IN ASIA
SAHA - 29 MATCHES IN ASIA

NOW BEFORE YOU TELL ME TO CHECK 90’s PAKISTAN RECORD IN ASIA, TELL ME HOW IN GODS NAME CAN YOU TELL ME THE CURRENT INDIAN TEAM WITH 3 PLAYERS WHO HAVE PLAYED LESS THAN 10 GAMES IN ASIA COMBINED CAN BE DOMINANT IN ASIA? IF IM NOT MISTAKEN, THE TITLE OF THIS THREAD SAYS CURRENT INDIAN XI, NO TENDULKAR, NO SEHWAG, NO DHONI ETC.

Virat’s Current Indian XI couldn’t crush a grape.

You mean current India team or virat's best version peak team. Virat's peak India team in Asia would absolutely crush 90s Pakistan with relative ease. I am sorry.

29 wins in 30 games.

 

[YousafTheBeast]

You mean current India team or virat's best version peak team. Virat's peak India team in Asia would absolutely crush 90s Pakistan with relative ease. I am sorry.

29 wins in 30 games.

Why would you think I meant Virat’s peak Indian team in Asia when I mentioned Shaw, Agarwal and Vihari? Were those 3 in Kohli’s peak Indian team?

As much as you’re wrong, it’s your opinion.

 

[Justcrazy]

Pakistan Team will win 3- 1 in a 5 match series, bowling will make big difference.

 

[tyron_woodley]

Why would you think I meant Virat’s peak Indian team in Asia when I mentioned Shaw, Agarwal and Vihari? Were those 3 in Kohli’s peak Indian team?

As much as you’re wrong, it’s your opinion.

Current one might still give a tough fight bro. At home they are like bullies.

 

[Mamoon]

If I understood the thread well is who is going to win the match, not really about the decade. 2020's onwards performances of the players also counts.

If it isn't the case then this thread is bizarre as you can really not compare Agzrwal, Vihari etc to anyone as they have done nothing in the 10's.

Player by player, these Indians are no match for the Pakistani names written.
As I said an all time Indian XI Will be a better match to the Pakistani team.

Moreover you same Karun Nair example is really outdated, as average players like Rahane have played 65 tests at 42. They have a number 6 who averages in the 30's. If it was a 50 averaging midle order you could argue about bench batsman being better than Babar Azam etc. So far India needs to try to find 4 good midle order batsman in their playing XI and then compare the bench players with top batsman going around.

I know you don't understand things so I will give you an example : you can argue that Pattinson is a very good bowler despite him not playing because he has three excellent bowlers in front of him.

I repeat what I said - a strong batting lineup doesn’t lose multiple series at home. To gauge how strong a batting lineup is, check how many home series it has lost.

Strong teams can lose away from home. Even Australia lost in India and England in the 2000s, but they were invincible at home.

Kohli’s India have only lost 1 Test match at home. That is remarkable and shows their strength.

 

[Mamoon]

Everyone in international cricket savour the away wins and away performances way more than anything in test cricket.
There is a reason every Indian fan on this forum is so happy about the test series win in Australia in 2018.

But the bakht wants to tell everyone here that what really count is home performances to make another loose point.

To loose 23 matches in SENA and win 6 whatever else you do means your decade was far from what you really wanted to achieve.

Loosing against 1/2 weak teams some very weak teams doesn't mean you had a bad decade, that are upset.
The greatest ever odi Australian team lost to Bangladesh and that didn't change anything. Upset happens and they don't define what you did over a decade.
Surely the happen less in test cricket but still they can happen.

The great Australian team didn’t lose to Bangladesh in Australia and it was just a one-off ODI. We are not talking about one-off matches here.

Strong batting lineups don’t lose home Test series. You can perhaps only make an exception if the traveling team is legendary like West Indies and Australia of the past.

However, when you lose multiple home Test series to teams that cannot be considered legendary by any measure, it is enough proof that you are not a strong team.

If 90s Pakistan was as good as some here claim to be, it wouldn’t have lost to Sri Lanka in 1995 and Australia and Zimbabwe in 1998.

1998 version of Australia were not invincible like the ones in the 2000s.

Australia toured India in 1997 and Sri Lanka in 1999 and lost both series. They only won one series in Asia in that period, and guess what, it was in Pakistan in 1998, the team that our deluded fans are portraying as some champion side.

 

[Mamoon]

So whilst Shaw gets the praise of brilliance, Slater and Langer who in my book were the hardest to get out get defined by being weaker batsmen than Kohli ?

Why not say that Shaw is a weaker batsman than Rohit/Kohli?

Slater and Langer were resilient batsmen but you cannot compare their batting abilities to Kohli who is in the league of Viv, Sachin, Lara and Ponting. Slater and Langer were not in that class.

Kohli is also a dominant batsman and extremely strong off his pads with very strong wrists. He would have dominated Waqar but no doubt Kohli vs Wasim would have been a great battle.

Shaw is very young now. It won’t make sense to call him a weaker batsman than Kohli and Rohit because he has 15+ years left in him and we don’t know how high he will soar in the future.

 

[Mamoon]

That is just so wrong. If that is the case then why do we criticise our teams when they lose away games.

A team’s aura is based on a combination of home and away wins.

A strong team does not lose multiple series at home. Winning twice in England in the 90s with heavy ball-tampering helped Pakistan create an aura but that aura was destroyed when they lost to Sri Lanka, Australia and Zimbabwe at home.

Winning away from home is great but even the great Australia of 2000s lost twice away from home in two big series, but that didn’t change the perception of their unparalleled quality.

If you want to check how strong a team really is and how strong it’s batting lineup is, check how many series they have lost at home.

A strong team will always be dominant at home. They can or cannot be dominant away from home, but when it comes to home series, they will always show superiority.

90s Pakistan failed to do that. Overrated team with an unreliable batting lineup that was heavily dependent on two batsmen (Saeed and Inzamam) who were not in the league of Sachin, Lara and S. Waugh, the three best Test batsmen of the 90s.

 

[Varun]

Pakistan will smoke us.

We have 1.5 batsmen in our line-up.

 

[gazza619]

Pakistan will smoke us.

We have 1.5 batsmen in our line-up.

Thank you and that coming from an Indian poster carries a lot more weight.

An even match would have been if we were to pick an all time Indian XI

 

[tyron_woodley]

Thank you and that coming from an Indian poster carries a lot more weight.

An even match would have been if we were to pick an all time Indian XI

Lot of you have never played proper cricket.

In Asian condtions it's a whole different ball game. If you are talking about the current team and not virat's peak team of 2018 then perhaps there is reason to believe it will be close.

Peak virat's team would crush Pakistan of 90s with relatively no trouble.

 

[subshakerz]

Pakistan would at least draw in India and India would at least draw in Pakistan.

 

[tyron_woodley]

Remember players play t20and pointless odi bilaterals before a major test series. They are probably tired.

Imagine 90s biryani munching players vs current team. It won't be fun. If they are purely just playing tests without short format. Night wont end well for the paks.

Also add in IPL. Too much cricket. The old teams would die from exhaustion.

 

[Corridor of Uncertainty]

At the top of their game, led by Akram, 90's Pakistan would win in most conditions - home and away.

Problem is, there were so many extraneous factors you won't know which Pakistan player would be playing to win a particular match.

 

[tyron_woodley]

At the top of their game, led by Akram, 90's Pakistan would win in most conditions - home and away.

Problem is, there were so many extraneous factors you won't know which Pakistan player would be playing to win a particular match.

Could say the same about virat's India in Asia. When they are at their best they are absolutely unbeatable.

Even away they were quite good until this year. During losses as well it was mainly due to poor planning and prioritizing wrong formats at the wrong time.

 

[Mamoon]

At the top of their game, led by Akram, 90's Pakistan would win in most conditions - home and away.

Problem is, there were so many extraneous factors you won't know which Pakistan player would be playing to win a particular match.

“Everyone’s good is good. But how good is your bad?” - Tiger Woods

90’s Pakistan’s bad was really bad. They lost to Australia, Sri Lanka and Zimbabwe at home.

Sri Lanka was a good team then and Zimbabwe was a decent side, but if 90’s Pakistan was as strong as we claim to be, they wouldn’t have be been bested by these sides at home.

Australia in 1998 was not the Australia of 2000’s. They lost in India and Sri Lanka in 1996 and 1997. The only Asian team they beat away was, unsurprisingly, the overrated Pakistan of 90’s.

Kohli’s India’s worst performance in Asia was winning 2-1 vs Australia at home and winning 2-1 in Sri Lanka. That is how extraordinarily dominant they have been in Asia.

90’s Pakistan might compete really well against Kohli’s India outside Asia, but in Asia, they will get flogged.

 

[ethan hunt]

The 90s pakistan absolutely smoked teams like england and newzealand away and drew against an ATG Southafrican side in their backyard.

In asia where their is reverse swing the bowling was too hot even for the likes of dravid, tendulkar, ganguly, azharuddin.
Wasim would blow these batsmen away. Only kohli is the same class as the guys above.
I dont see how the current indian side would be able to compete anywhere.

 

[szrana007]

The 90s pakistan absolutely smoked teams like england and newzealand away and drew against an ATG Southafrican side in their backyard.

In asia where their is reverse swing the bowling was too hot even for the likes of dravid, tendulkar, ganguly, azharuddin.
Wasim would blow these batsmen away. Only kohli is the same class as the guys above.
I dont see how the current indian side would be able to compete anywhere.

Spot on. ATG Indian batting got blown away by Pakistan in 1999. I don't see how this current Indian batting stands a chance against that Pakistan bowling unit.

 

[tyron_woodley]

Spot on. ATG Indian batting got blown away by Pakistan in 1999. I don't see how this current Indian batting stands a chance against that Pakistan bowling unit.

aTG bowling of India would ruin your batsmen though. These players may struggle overseas but they will kill any bowler in Asia..that's the point.

You have a chance outside Asia. But in Asia there is only one king. That's virat's India at its best. They are extremely ruthless and very consistent. They are a killing machine.

 

[Ab Fan]

Indian bowlers average at home:-

Shami 21
Umesh 24
Ashwin 22
Jadeja 22

That's 4 ATG bowlers at home. And our best bowler, Bumrah hasn't even bowled till now at home. Imagine 5 ATG bowlers for home conditions! No one will stand a chance, not even some of all-time great teams from different generations.

 

[Last Monetarist]

The current Indian attack would be all over the brittle Pakistani batting line-up from the late 90s, which used to struggle against Srinath, Prasad, and Kumble.

It would be a closely fought series and will be arguably decided if Virat Kohli prevails against the Pakistani fast bowlers or not.

Most people thinking it would be a walkover either have selective memories or didn't follow the Pakistani team during that era.

 

[szrana007]

The current Indian attack would be all over the brittle Pakistani batting line-up from the late 90s, which used to struggle against Srinath, Prasad, and Kumble.

It would be a closely fought series and will be arguably decided if Virat Kohli prevails against the Pakistani fast bowlers or not.

Most people thinking it would be a walkover either have selective memories or didn't follow the Pakistani team during that era.

Srinath and Kumble were ATG bowlers at home, though. Prasad too used to get a lot of wickets at home.

 

[hitthestump]

This thread could go on forever.

The 90's Pakistan side is where the 'unpredictable' tag came from. They could be absolutely disasturous one minute and blow anyone away the next.

To figure out why would take it's own thread. But to use a well overused quote - if 90's Pakistan turn up on the day then it's very hard to argue a case for this current India team.

I also think people are forgetting how good Wasim, Waqar and Saqlain were.

 

[CommonIndian]

“Everyone’s good is good. But how good is your bad?” - Tiger Woods

90’s Pakistan’s bad was really bad. They lost to Australia, Sri Lanka and Zimbabwe at home.

Sri Lanka was a good team then and Zimbabwe was a decent side, but if 90’s Pakistan was as strong as we claim to be, they wouldn’t have be been bested by these sides at home.

Australia in 1998 was not the Australia of 2000’s. They lost in India and Sri Lanka in 1996 and 1997. The only Asian team they beat away was, unsurprisingly, the overrated Pakistan of 90’s.

Kohli’s India’s worst performance in Asia was winning 2-1 vs Australia at home and winning 2-1 in Sri Lanka. That is how extraordinarily dominant they have been in Asia.

90’s Pakistan might compete really well against Kohli’s India outside Asia, but in Asia, they will get flogged.

You really think the team consisting of the Jokers Shaw, Agarwal and Vihari are better than the team Ganguly captained.

Ganguly's team was much better than this overrated bunch of pseudo Agro boys which had Tendu, Dravid, Laxman, Sadagoppan Ramesh than came sehwag. Hell even Wasim Jaffer was so much better than this overrated boys. Srinath, Kumble, Agarkar, Zaheer, Nehra, Harbhajan are criminally very underrated.

Please be subtle in trolling and don't behave like Rakhi Sawant for seeking attention.

 

[gazza619]

Indian bowlers average at home:-

Shami 21
Umesh 24
Ashwin 22
Jadeja 22

That's 4 ATG bowlers at home. And our best bowler, Bumrah hasn't even bowled till now at home. Imagine 5 ATG bowlers for home conditions! No one will stand a chance, not even some of all-time great teams from different generations.

Srinath, Prasad, Kumble & Bhajji had averages of 26, 31, 25 & 27 at home which is not a gazillion miles away than the current lot. I take on board that current indian bowling is the best that India has produced but their batting is overated. Wasim, Akhtar and Saqi will rip through them without any problem.

 

[Last Monetarist]

Srinath and Kumble were ATG bowlers at home, though. Prasad too used to get a lot of wickets at home.

Yes, but the likes of Shami, Ishant, Ashwin and Jadeja are no mugs at home either. Even Umesh Yadav is decent in Indian conditions. The current attack is easily better than the Indian attack from the 90s. Pakistani batting during the 90s was talented, but notoriously fragile.

 

[szrana007]

Srinath, Prasad, Kumble & Bhajji had averages of 26, 31, 25 & 27 at home which is not a gazillion miles away than the current lot. I take on board that current indian bowling is the best that India has produced but their batting is overated. Wasim, Akhtar and Saqi will rip through them without any problem.

I remember Srinath took 13 wickets in the Kolkata test in 1999, but India still lost the match because Pakistan's pace attack was too hot to handle for their ATG batting, with Shoaib Akhtar leading the way.