Did Sachin Tendulkar play against average teams or all-time great teams?

[Dr_Bassim]

I usually don't bring up any comparisons because its harder to transcend generations and compare the skillset of cricketers over 10-20 years. I feel that its an unfair comparison because as the game evolves, naturally there will be changes and some skillsets will improve over their counterparts.

But the current rage is that people are mentioning that current Australia winning the World Cup is a bigger achievement for Australians because the quality of cricket is so high. This is the exact reason that Indian posters put forward for them failing to win the tournament because the skillset of the current generation is quite high. They also mention that Australia being finalists in 1996, and 3-time World Champions during 1999, 2003 and 2007 was not really that great of an achievement because of the standard of cricket was so poor during that time that no team could compete against Australia.

If we start to accept this at face value, we run into a difficult situation.

If Bradman in 1930s and 1940s faced poor attacks because cricket was not professional and cricket now is highly professional so we shouldn't gauge his knocks, then that's a fair call.

If Tendulkar is the epitome of batting greatness because he negated Wasim, Waqar, Ambrose, Walsh and all other greats at the peak of his time, then that's also a fair call.

But how does this happen, that Tendulkar is an ATG for playing in the same era when all the teams were weak (which is the reason Australia won the World Cup) but Bradman gets screened out because the teams were not good enough yet. How do we say that Tendulkar was any good, if the Australian team of yesteryear was simply winnning against average teams of that generation.

So, it seems hypocritical now.

Somehow cricket was poor when Bradman played, evolved when Tendulkar played (other teams were poor and their results can't be counted as exceptional, but Tendulkar was somehow exceptional) and then again cricket went down after Tendulkar and rose again as Bumrah started emerging into the scene.

Anyone with an iota of sense would understand that this is a failing argument.

So lets think about this.

Was Australia of late 90s and 2000s really a tremendous team that beat everyone that was good or was Tendulkar just accumulating against poor teams of 90s and 2000s and we should really discount his runs because all the teams were of poor standard.

Discuss.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Welcome to the Tendulkar hypocrisy zone

It is a zone where goal posts get shifted and logic takes a backseat.

I am glad that in the modern era people are tearing down the Tendulkar myth.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

Australia had a level of professionalism that was unseen elsewhere in the 90's/early 00's. South Africa under Woolmer were 2nd.


None of the other teams came even close with respect to fitness, training, workload management etc. Only 1999 onwards did the likes of NZ, India etc. start slowly inculcating certain things in their cricket system.

The game as a whole has moved on to ever higher standards since then.

The Aussies are still ahead but the gap is not as much as it once was.

Not sure what Tendulkar's numbers have to do with anything. His career spanned nearly two and a half decades .

 

[jnaveen1980]

In 90s he hardly played any Tests. Think about it Root played 145 tests in his first 12 years. Sachin played just 80 tests. If he had played more tests against weaker sides his record would be astronomous. WI was a great team in the 90s with Ambrose and Walsh. You can use N number of filters Tendulkar went through every era.

 

[TheSultan]

A simple metric - probably not an ideal one as not everything is 100% correct.

The ICC ranking points. Whatever you say about them, they aim to take in to account opposition, pitch conditions, bowling level etc etc.

Tendulkar never in his whole test career surpassed 900 points. His peak was 898 in 2002 after a match against Zimbabwe.

Comparatively, Lara, Kallis, Ponting and Sangakarra (not to mentioned the Othet ATGs like King Viv, Bradman etc) all passed 900.

As I said, it’s not all just about rankings. You need to couple with test averages, longevity etc

But it is quite striking that Tendulkar never ever in his > 20 year career passed 900.

 

[TheSultan]

Australia had a level of professionalism that was unseen elsewhere in the 90's/early 00's. South Africa under Woolmer were 2nd.


None of the other teams came even close with respect to fitness, training, workload management etc. Only 1999 onwards did the likes of NZ, India etc. start slowly inculcating certain things in their cricket system.

The game as a whole has moved on to ever higher standards since then.

The Aussies are still ahead but the gap is not as much as it once was.

Not sure what Tendulkar's numbers have to do with anything. His career spanned nearly two and a half decades .

I’ve read what you’ve said carefully. Are you implying the current Aussie team is better or equal to Steve Waugh’s Aussies and the other teams have closed the gap?

So does this mean we devalue all cricket played in the 90s including (what actually matters to you guys) - Tendulkar.

I think that’s the point of the OP?

 

[shaz619]

No offence to anybody but Sachin tainted his legacy during the second half of his career especially, he became a gimmick. Most of his runs were very soft and his hundreds were more important than everything else, once he achieved his target that was it. Defensively he was a great player, but that lack of intent was often justified due to the phantom pressure weighing on his shoulders, he was very weak mentally but did well for someone so handicapped when it came to his size.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Amount of garbage i see in this thread

 

[ravisurya]

So that also means the Wasim and Qasim basically took wickets against pretty mediocre teams which would make Bumrah the best fast bowler ever to come out of Asia?

 

[Nikhil_cric]

I’ve read what you’ve said carefully. Are you implying the current Aussie team is better or equal to Steve Waugh’s Aussies and the other teams have closed the gap?

So does this mean we devalue all cricket played in the 90s including (what actually matters to you guys) - Tendulkar.

I think that’s the point of the OP?

I'm saying the gap between the Aussies and the rest have reduced. That includes bowling attacks too.

There's no point comparing across eras. Some of the cricket from the 80's will look comical right now.

SRT was great for his era and that's all that matters.

 

[Buffet]

There was only one ATG team in 90s and that was Aus team.

SA was very very good team.

Pakistan was good team with flaws.

WI started as a good team but kept declining in 90s.

India was great team at home but very poor away.

Eng/NZ/SL were poor teams.

------------------

That's the team reading for me for 90s.

Great thing about 90s was we had many ATG pacers ( Wasim, Waqar, McGrath, Donald, Ambrose and so on and also the best offspinner/best leg spinner in history at same time. Facinating time for test cricket.

When cricket was filled with ATG bowlers in 90s, SRT was an outlier. I have not seen more ATG bowlers playing at same time in any decade.

 

[FearlessRoar]

Yes, Sachin Tendulkar faced way stronger bowlers during his time. I mean, have you seen the likes of Wasim Akram, Waqar Younis, Allan Donald, Shane Warne, Brett Lee, Shoaib Akhtar, and Muttiah Muralitharan? They were beasts on the pitch.

And let's be real, the bowlers today just don't seem to have the same level of firepower, except for Jasprit Bumrah.

 

[Buffet]

There were not many ATG teams which SRT played. He played many ATG bowlers.

 

[Buffet]

Yes, Sachin Tendulkar faced way stronger bowlers during his time. I mean, have you seen the likes of Wasim Akram, Waqar Younis, Allan Donald, Shane Warne, Brett Lee, Shoaib Akhtar, and Muttiah Muralitharan? They were beasts on the pitch.

And let's be real, the bowlers today just don't seem to have the same level of firepower, except for Jasprit Bumrah.

Cummins is behind Bumrah but I will rate him among the best as well.

 

[jnaveen1980]

There were not many ATG teams which SRT played. He played many ATG bowlers.

1999 Australian series where they had started the dominance he won man of the series award in Australia despite getting 3 horrible umpiring decisions. He has seen it all. He has seen all the conditions. All the bowlers. This is just to run down his achievments with weird filters something you can do against any player. He already earned the recognition from all the greats of cricket including Bradman.

 

[TheSultan]

I'm saying the gap between the Aussies and the rest have reduced. That includes bowling attacks too.

There's no point comparing across eras. Some of the cricket from the 80's will look comical right now.

SRT was great for his era and that's all that matters.

This does not make any sense. You’re comparing eras by saying teams were not as professional etc but when the question comes to Tendulkar then “there’s no point comparing eras”

 

[Nikhil_cric]

A simple metric - probably not an ideal one as not everything is 100% correct.

The ICC ranking points. Whatever you say about them, they aim to take in to account opposition, pitch conditions, bowling level etc etc.

Tendulkar never in his whole test career surpassed 900 points. His peak was 898 in 2002 after a match against Zimbabwe.

Comparatively, Lara, Kallis, Ponting and Sangakarra (not to mentioned the Othet ATGs like King Viv, Bradman etc) all passed 900.

As I said, it’s not all just about rankings. You need to couple with test averages, longevity etc

But it is quite striking that Tendulkar never ever in his > 20 year career passed 900.

There was only one ATG team in 90s and that was Aus team.

SA was very very good team.

Pakistan was good team with flaws.

WI started as a good team but kept declining in 90s.

India was great team at home but very poor away.

Eng/NZ/SL were poor teams.

------------------

That's the team reading for me for 90s.

Great thing about 90s was we had many ATG pacers ( Wasim, Waqar, McGrath, Donald, Ambrose and so on and also the best offspinner/best leg spinner in history at same time. Facinating time for test cricket.

When cricket was filled with ATG bowlers in 90s, SRT was an outlier. I have not seen more ATG bowlers playing at same time in any decade.

View attachment 146126

There's no point talking about this, lol. Haters will claim that 90's were the greatest bowling but somehow Inzi was only slightly weaker than SRT. As that record show he was only a Robin Smith level player and scored runs heavily after pitches got flatter in the 2000's .

 

[Nikhil_cric]

This does not make any sense. You’re comparing eras by saying teams were not as professional etc but when the question comes to Tendulkar then “there’s no point comparing eras”

I'm saying there's no point comparing players across eras. All players, barring a few exceptions, are probably better athletes now than the ones 30 years ago.

 

[kingusama92]

He played against some seriously good bowlers at their peak.

In fact, some of these are the greatest bowlers of all time - Warne, Murali, Wasim, McGrath, Donald, and Waqar to name a few.

If you can pile up runs against these guys in various formats, you are the real deal.

 

[Buffet]

1999 Australian series where they had started the dominance he won man of the series award in Australia despite getting 3 horrible umpiring decisions. He has seen it all. He has seen all the conditions. All the bowlers. This is just to run down his achievments with weird filters something you can do against any player. He already earned the recognition from all the greats of cricket including Bradman.

His away average was 56-57 as well in 90. To put it in perspective Lara averaged 44 away from home in 90s. Drastic difference between him and Lara in tons over all and also tons away from home in 90s. They do clubbed together as great batsmen in 90s, but SRT was a league above Lara in 90s.

 

[giri26]

Sachin was way ahead in ODIs in the 90's that it is not even funny. In the 90's the openers overall averaged about 32 and struck at 67, Sachin since he started to open in 1994 averaged 48 at a SR of 91. Even when we take the 90's overall Sachin Averaged 43 at a SR of 86. He was that much ahead in ODIs. Even in Tests the typical average of a top 5 batter in that era was around 37 and Sachin averaged 58. So yeah he dominated 90's. It is not his fault that India were such a poor team, the same way WI was even though Lara was a great. Lara despite having a great bowling attack and Hooper, Chanders, Adams etc still couldn't get too many wins. Sachin did not have good bowling attack and had a very timid batting line up who would crumble once he got out.

 

[TheSultan]

There was only one ATG team in 90s and that was Aus team.

SA was very very good team.

Pakistan was good team with flaws.

WI started as a good team but kept declining in 90s.

India was great team at home but very poor away.

Eng/NZ/SL were poor teams.

------------------

That's the team reading for me for 90s.

Great thing about 90s was we had many ATG pacers ( Wasim, Waqar, McGrath, Donald, Ambrose and so on and also the best offspinner/best leg spinner in history at same time. Facinating time for test cricket.

When cricket was filled with ATG bowlers in 90s, SRT was an outlier. I have not seen more ATG bowlers playing at same time in any decade.

View attachment 146126

Good points about the bowling attacks, but why stop at 1999? McGrath, Wasim, Waqar, Shoaib, Donald, Pollock still played till at least 2003.

McGrath and Warne went on to 2006/7 and were as good as ever.

It’s fair to say Australia, South Africa and Pakistan still had world class attacks till 2006. (With naturally some personnel changes here and there)

Also, Why not start at 1989 when Sachin made his debut?

This is what @DeadlyVenom said about the twilight zone!

I don’t even know the stats up to 2003 or 2006, but would be interesting to see if your hypotheses about Tendulkar being an outlier still hold.

 

[Dr_Bassim]

The point of this thread is not to devalue Sachin.

People think I am having a go at Sachin while its quite the opposite.

You say "cricketing standards" have improved and current modern teams are better than ATG team of Australia in 1990s.

You argue that 1990 Australian team was overrated because rest of the teams were weak.

But you commend Tendulkar for playing against weak teams?

I will keep repeating till it sinks in.

If Tendulkar is an ATG of the game then Australian team of 1990 was an ATG team also and was a great team irrespective of opposition level.

You cannot choose to pick and choose what you like from eras.

 

[jnaveen1980]

His away average was 56-57 as well in 90. To put it in perspective Lara averaged 44 away from home in 90s. Drastic difference between him and Lara in tons over all and also tons away from home in 90s. They do clubbed together as great batsmen in 90s, but SRT was a league above Lara in 90s.

Yup. He underachieved given his talent. The way he pulled good length balls at Perth as an 18 year old signalled the arrival of a genius. He also did not get many Tests when he was at his absolute peak. Had to play with fixers like Azharuddin.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

The point of this thread is not to devalue Sachin.

People think I am having a go at Sachin while its quite the opposite.

You say "cricketing standards" have improved and current modern teams are better than ATG team of Australia in 1990s.

You argue that 1990 Australian team was overrated because rest of the teams were weak.

But you commend Tendulkar for playing against weak teams?

I will keep repeating till it sinks in.

If Tendulkar is an ATG of the game then Australian team of 1990 was an ATG team also and was a great team irrespective of opposition level.

You cannot choose to pick and choose what you like from eras.

Once they stop picking and choosing he is instantly devalued.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

The point of this thread is not to devalue Sachin.

People think I am having a go at Sachin while its quite the opposite.

You say "cricketing standards" have improved and current modern teams are better than ATG team of Australia in 1990s.

You argue that 1990 Australian team was overrated because rest of the teams were weak.

But you commend Tendulkar for playing against weak teams?

I will keep repeating till it sinks in.

If Tendulkar is an ATG of the game then Australian team of 1990 was an ATG team also and was a great team irrespective of opposition level.

You cannot choose to pick and choose what you like from eras.

They were an ATG team . So were the Windies of the 70's and 80's .

That doesn't mean modern cricket hasn't progressed a lot since then.

 

[Buffet]

Sachin was way ahead in ODIs in the 90's that it is not even funny. In the 90's the openers overall averaged about 32 and struck at 67, Sachin since he started to open in 1994 averaged 48 at a SR of 91.

Yes, that's correct. He was outlier in ODI as an opener by a large margin. Jaya, Gilly and SRT had SR of 90, but SRT averaged 12-15 runs higher than them with same SR. Gap was that huge.

Good points about the bowling attacks, but why stop at 1999? McGrath, Wasim, Waqar, Shoaib, Donald, Pollock still played till at least 2003.

McGrath and Warne went on to 2006/7 and were as good as ever.

It’s fair to say Australia, South Africa and Pakistan still had world class attacks till 2006. (With naturally some personnel changes here and there)

Also, Why not start at 1989 when Sachin made his debut?

This is what @DeadlyVenom said about the twilight zone!

I don’t even know the stats up to 2003 or 2006, but would be interesting to see if your hypotheses about Tendulkar being an outlier still hold.

I picked 90s because so many ATG were in their peak years. Some retired or some close to retiring. But honestly, I just picked 90s because you can easily pull record for each decade.

Donald retired around 2001 end. Ambrose retired in 2000. Wasim and Waqar were declining and not that great in start of 00s. Pollock was really great in 90s, as good as any pacer, but he was not that great in 00s.

 

[Buffet]

The point of this thread is not to devalue Sachin.

People think I am having a go at Sachin while its quite the opposite.

You say "cricketing standards" have improved and current modern teams are better than ATG team of Australia in 1990s.

You argue that 1990 Australian team was overrated because rest of the teams were weak.

But you commend Tendulkar for playing against weak teams?

I will keep repeating till it sinks in.

If Tendulkar is an ATG of the game then Australian team of 1990 was an ATG team also and was a great team irrespective of opposition level.

You cannot choose to pick and choose what you like from eras.

Aus will be an ATG team in any era.

 

[Hitman]

A simple metric - probably not an ideal one as not everything is 100% correct.

The ICC ranking points. Whatever you say about them, they aim to take in to account opposition, pitch conditions, bowling level etc etc.

Tendulkar never in his whole test career surpassed 900 points. His peak was 898 in 2002 after a match against Zimbabwe.

Comparatively, Lara, Kallis, Ponting and Sangakarra (not to mentioned the Othet ATGs like King Viv, Bradman etc) all passed 900.

As I said, it’s not all just about rankings. You need to couple with test averages, longevity etc

But it is quite striking that Tendulkar never ever in his > 20 year career passed 900.

According to the same ICC rankings -

1. Wasim Akram was never rated the #1 Test bowler at any stage of his career.

2. Wasim Akram is rated at the 80th spot in All Time ICC Test bowling rankings.

3. Each and every one of Wasim Akram's contemporary fast bowlers are rated way, way higher than him.

4. Mohammad Yusuf is ahead of Brian Lara in the All Time ICC Test batting rankings.

 

[Hitman]

According to the same ICC rankings -

1. Wasim Akram was never rated the #1 Test bowler at any stage of his career.

2. Wasim Akram is rated at the 80th spot in All Time ICC Test bowling rankings.

3. Each and every one of Wasim Akram's contemporary fast bowlers are rated way, way higher than him.

4. Mohammad Yusuf is ahead of Brian Lara in the All Time ICC Test batting rankings.

Here's the list -

All Time ICC Test Bowling Rankings : Best Ever Test Bowlers

ICC Player Rankings

www.relianceiccrankings.com

 

[mominsaigol]

Regardless in test their were multiple people > Sachin.

In odi Sachin is unmatched statistically and is > others but the gap isn't that high, their multiple eras where people have been > Sachin and his 2nd half is mostly soft scoring however I appreciate his longevity. By 2011 his innings were mostly garbo. So was his final Bangladesh 2012 innings.

Sachin is good, and is still the best odi player but passionate Indian fans need to stop combining folklore and fantasy with reality. Sachin is the best odi player of his era and top 10 test player of his era

But he isn't bhagwan that'll come and smite lighting on others, the God of cricket couldn't do anything in the 2003 final where sehwag outperformed him, couldn't do much when it counted the most in 2007, although he did top score on the charts table.

He's a terrific player but this obsession on him being a folklore needs to stop as well as this fantasy obsession on creating narratives of classic Australia and India.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Sachin is GOD of cricket, Deal with it. lol I am not even big Sachin fan anymore. Pak fans hate sachin given that he has won 3 man of the matches in 5 world cup matches against Pakistan that hate is understandable. That's okay. But who are you guys trying to convince other than yourself.

 

[Dr_Bassim]

Sachin is GOD of cricket, Deal with it. lol I am not even big Sachin fan anymore. Pak fans hate sachin given that he has won 3 man of the matches in 5 world cup matches against Pakistan that hate is understandable. That's okay. But who are you guys trying to convince other than yourself.

I have no issues accepting this if you accept that the ATG Australian team of 90s and 2000 was much better than the current Indian and Australian teams and a class apart.

And that the current Indian team is a poor team with only Bumrah being an exceptional player.

 

[mominsaigol]

Sachin is GOD of cricket, Deal with it. lol I am not even big Sachin fan anymore. Pak fans hate sachin given that he has won 3 man of the matches in 5 world cup matches against Pakistan that hate is understandable. That's okay. But who are you guys trying to convince other than yourself.

No one hates Sachin, people acknowledge that he's good, however you guys put him on chuck norris level folklore when he clearly isn't.

He didn't perform every game, vanished In 2003 final, Wasn't around for 2007 in clutch moments, him top scoring is as irrelevant as Babar top scoring in 2021.

Him being the best odi player of his era and being the top 5 to 10 best test players of his era is different from saying

Please stop assuming everyone is an indian hater or die hard pakistani supporter. I vouch for alot of people here who just love the sport from a neutral standpoint. Being born pakistani or american or European doesnt mean you need to die hard support your country. People who aren't from Portugal dream of Protugal winning because they love ronaldo lol, they ain't hypocrites for that.

If someone doesnt have your opinion but wants to discuss, either discuss or you can bow out, it's a difference in opinion that's all. Has nothing to do with people hating on indians

 

[jnaveen1980]

I have no issues accepting this if you accept that the ATG Australian team of 90s and 2000 was much better than the current Indian and Australian teams and a class apart.

And that the current Indian team is a poor team with only Bumrah being an exceptional player.

Team and individuals are not the same. Because certain individuals made them look better. Same match up may not work in another era. In Tests they did not even dominate the 2000s India. Only in ODIs they were good because they were ahead of time. It is easy to judge an individual than a team. It is way too complex compare a team across the era.

Current Australian bowling unit is already the best in history

'Mates for life' on verge of becoming Aussies' best pace trio | cricket.com.au

A couple more wins this summer will see the 'Big Three' add another slice of history to a record…

www.cricket.com.au

 

[mominsaigol]

Team and individuals are not the same. Because certain individuals made them look better. Same match up may not work in another era. In Tests they did not even dominate the 2000s India. Only in ODIs they were good because they were ahead of time. It is easy to judge an individual than a team. It is way too complex compare a team across the era.

Current Australian bowling unit is already the best in history

'Mates for life' on verge of becoming Aussies' best pace trio | cricket.com.au

A couple more wins this summer will see the 'Big Three' add another slice of history to a record…

www.cricket.com.au

Current Australian bowling unit is already the best in history

^^ No offence, but I'm starting to think this isn't your account. No way this is actually you.

This aussie team's bowling is a far cry from even that of 2015 let alone classic, citing an article has to be the most rubbish argument you can make.

Please stop viewing everything from an indian lens.

 

[jnaveen1980]

No one hates Sachin, people acknowledge that he's good, however you guys put him on chuck norris level folklore when he clearly isn't.

He didn't perform every game, vanished In 2003 final, Wasn't around for 2007 in clutch moments, him top scoring is as irrelevant as Babar top scoring in 2021.

Him being the best odi player of his era and being the top 5 to 10 best test players of his era is different from saying

Please stop assuming everyone is an indian hater or die hard pakistani supporter. I vouch for alot of people here who just love the sport from a neutral standpoint. Being born pakistani or american or European doesnt mean you need to die hard support your country. People who aren't from Portugal dream of Protugal winning because they love ronaldo lol, they ain't hypocrites for that.

If someone doesnt have your opinion but wants to discuss, either discuss or you can bow out, it's a difference in opinion that's all. Has nothing to do with people hating on indians

This is cricket. Nobody can perform in every match. He didn't vanish in 2003 final. Back then chasing 360 was ridiculously difficult. So he had to take risks. Didn't come off. He could have tuk tuked and made 100 in 120 balls like Babar. He didn't do that. 10 pls years later India ridiculously hunted down 350 plus chases three times. In each occasion Kohli made 100. People learnt how to chase big totals over a period. Sorry dude. You are not convincing anyone other than yourself. Yes we have different opinions. We will never be on the same page on certain topics. This is one such topic. I have criticized Sachin as much as anyone else. But I also acknowledge what he brought to the game.

During the fixing saga he stood firm and gave something to cheer about. So fans won't forget that. You cannot understand if you are not an Indian fan. That is why people won't pay attention to filters, stats all the theories. He inspired generations of cricketers like this one



"
"I had no idea I'd play cricket when I started watching him. I started watching cricket during the 1992 World Cup. When I learnt that it (WC) is going to be held in Australia, we'd go to the neighbour's house to watch the matches because we didn't have cable at that time.

That is when my neighbour told me about Sachin Tendulkar. He was like 19 years old at that time, and I was like, 'wow', I started copying his shots whenever he came to bat. My brothers used to mock me, saying, 'sit down, you won't become Tendulkar by copying his shots'. From thereon I started watching and playing cricket. I started with the tennis ball then moved on to the leather ball," Sehwag said on his inspiration behind taking up cricket.

- Sehwag

 

[jnaveen1980]

Current Australian bowling unit is already the best in history

^^ No offence, but I'm starting to think this isn't your account. No way this is actually you.

This aussie team's bowling is a far cry from even that of 2015 let alone classic, citing an article has to be the most rubbish argument you can make.

Please stop viewing everything from an indian lens.

That is from Australian media lol Not my media. I lived through that era too. I also know how much they depended on two individuals. Two ATG bowlers. This unit is not like the at. Boland came in took 6 for 7. Too bad they lost Pattinson. Another great bowler in the making. Just tell me who was the best fast bowler in that era other than Mcgrath from Australia. We are talking about unit. not individual. Current unit is significantly better. 2 of them can clock 140k whenever they want. One can cross 150k.

 

[jnaveen1980]

2000 Austrlaian batting >> Current batting. I agree. Barring Smith/Warner there is not much. But you cannot say current bowling is not as good as 2000 Australian bowling. That is patently false.

 

[mominsaigol]

That is from Australian media lol Not my media. I lived through that era too. I also know how much they depended on two individuals. Two ATG bowlers. This unit is not like the at. Boland came in took 6 for 7. Too bad they lost Pattinson. Another great bowler in the making. Just tell me who was the best fast bowler in that era other than Mcgrath from Australia. We are talking about unit. not individual. Current unit is significantly better. 2 of them can clock 140k whenever they want. One can cross 150k.

Idc which media it is from. The first thing media students in college are taught is to lie and make stories for a gullable crowd. In the same way media expects us to believe that Bill gates came from nothing or that Oprah winfrey went to school wearing a box or potatoes. It's freaking ludicrous and destroys all validity when you post such things.

Literally a year ago I had someone come upto showing an interview from Anil kumble claiming rizwan is top 3 best batsmen in the world due to sri lanka innings and boy did that interview go flat.

2024 Australian bowling is rubbish compared to even 2015. Current starc is on his last legs and is a burnt corpse. Stoinis and green are average. Cummings is good and Hazelwood is good but neither are > Lee or gillsipie as bowlers. Mcgrath is on a different atmosphere. The quality in gap between Warne and Zampa is sky high.

Stoinis is nowhere nit close to the allrounder that Watson was and Watson came late and slightly after the classic period or well towards the brunt end of it.

Steve smith even in his absolute prime in odi is a bootleg version of pointing, he's only superior in test. Gilchrist as a keeper is superior to 100 inglis's or wade's or whatever other careey's show up.

Only 2015 starc and 2015 steve smith version compare to the classic and would enter into the team and maybe cummins in the playing 15 somewhere in the squad. 2024 starc would get booted into oblivion and have his visa cancelled.

Kuda ka khoof karo, you guys can't differentiate between versions that's your issue, and that's why you kept falsely associating 2024 kohli with 2014-2016 and argued 2024 India would go against 2003 Australia.

2003 Australia would wash 2024 India, and not just them so would 2003 pakistan on its last legs, and so would 2003 sa etc etc

2024 India wasn't that strong that you are making it out to be, it's just stronger then 2021 India and 2012 India. 2019 India, 2017 India, and many others are all superior to 2024 team which is relying on the corpses of rohit and kohli and bumrah with sky sometimes playing a blinder or Pant flaking a 50 against pakistan.

2024 India was beyond fragile lol

 

[mominsaigol]

This is cricket. Nobody can perform in every match. He didn't vanish in 2003 final. Back then chasing 360 was ridiculously difficult. So he had to take risks. Didn't come off. He could have tuk tuked and made 100 in 120 balls like Babar. He didn't do that. 10 pls years later India ridiculously hunted down 350 plus chases three times. In each occasion Kohli made 100. People learnt how to chase big totals over a period. Sorry dude. You are not convincing anyone other than yourself. Yes we have different opinions. We will never be on the same page on certain topics. This is one such topic. I have criticized Sachin as much as anyone else. But I also acknowledge what he brought to the game.

During the fixing saga he stood firm and gave something to cheer about. So fans won't forget that. You cannot understand if you are not an Indian fan. That is why people won't pay attention to filters, stats all the theories. He inspired generations of cricketers like this one



"
"I had no idea I'd play cricket when I started watching him. I started watching cricket during the 1992 World Cup. When I learnt that it (WC) is going to be held in Australia, we'd go to the neighbour's house to watch the matches because we didn't have cable at that time.

That is when my neighbour told me about Sachin Tendulkar. He was like 19 years old at that time, and I was like, 'wow', I started copying his shots whenever he came to bat. My brothers used to mock me, saying, 'sit down, you won't become Tendulkar by copying his shots'. From thereon I started watching and playing cricket. I started with the tennis ball then moved on to the leather ball," Sehwag said on his inspiration behind taking up cricket.

- Sehwag

Also I'm not trying to convince anyone

You being Indian arguing for Sachin who's an Indian presenting me media hype doesn't help your case on not being biased on said hindsight. And idkw you're brining Babar into this when I didn't compare bobby to Sachin. I never said Sachin was a bad player.

However I draw the line when Indian posters are trying to revise history to suit their biased narrative. Make these arguments towards any Australian and they'll beat you with a bag of bricks

 

[Devadwal]

What is more embarassing that people who were started watching cricket after 2005 or 2010 are commenting about Sachin .

They don't even watched how was Sachin played.

 

[Dr_Bassim]

I see people are still stuck on this fact.

Sachin is great but Australian ATG team was not good because rest of teams were poor.

However, somehow when Sachin played those poor teams, they became amazing as Sachin performed and became top class for him only.

I will not this narrative die as this is the most biased Indian viewpoint I have ever seen in history of the game.

 

[mominsaigol]

What is more embarassing that people who were started watching cricket after 2005 or 2010 are commenting about Sachin .

They don't even watched how was Sachin played.

I'm sure you've been watching since the 1920's.

 

[kingusama92]

I see people are still stuck on this fact.

Sachin is great but Australian ATG team was not good because rest of teams were poor.

However, somehow when Sachin played those poor teams, they became amazing as Sachin performed and became top class for him only.

I will not this narrative die as this is the most biased Indian viewpoint I have ever seen in history of the game.

Maybe I'm confused but why is Sachin being judged based on the opposition's batting quality?

Shouldn't the only thing used to determine a batsman's performance be the opposing bowling attack + fielding + pitch conditions?

 

[Ab Fan]

Sachin is an all time great of the game because he faced multiple ATG fast bowlers and multiple ATG spinners in his generation and still stood as the best of his era. Additionally, he also stood as a top level batsman for the longest period of time than any other batsman.

I don't get the exact context so it is hard for me to comment on. However, I have not seen anyone devaluing Australian team of 90s and 00s being taken seriously.

 

[Hawkeye]

Sachin is GOD of cricket, Deal with it. lol I am not even big Sachin fan anymore. Pak fans hate sachin given that he has won 3 man of the matches in 5 world cup matches against Pakistan that hate is understandable. That's okay. But who are you guys trying to convince other than yourself.

Honestly bro why do you think some Pak fans won’t rate Sachin because he was really good against us?

It should be the opposite. Those who really thrash the opposition are respected a lot more.

Example is Kohli, Sehwag, Rohit, Yuvraj, Bumrah.

They are respected almost unanimously in Pakistan and people actually go crazy for them because they have thrashed us so bad each time we have played against them.

There is an actual fear and respect for these cricketers.

Almost nobody rates Sachin as high as these guys. This is not meant to say Sachin wasn’t a great. He sure was one of the best batters of his time along with other high impact batters. And longevity isn’t easy too.

But don’t bring the argument that we don’t respect him because he won against us.

That simply isn’t true and we weren’t threatened much whenever he would face Pak. Iconic and thrashing knocks just aren’t there. Except maybe one or two.

 

[mominsaigol]

Sachin is an all time great of the game because he faced multiple ATG fast bowlers and multiple ATG spinners in his generation and still stood as the best of his era. Additionally, he also stood as a top level batsman for the longest period of time than any other batsman.

I don't get the exact context so it is hard for me to comment on. However, I have not seen anyone devaluing Australian team of 90s and 00s being taken seriously.

A bunch of Indian posters went berserk and acted like current Indian team of 2024 is superior to classic Australia

 

[mominsaigol]

Honestly bro why do you think some Pak fans won’t rate Sachin because he was really good against us?

It should be the opposite. Those who really thrash the opposition are respected a lot more.

Example is Kohli, Sehwag, Rohit, Yuvraj, Bumrah.

They are respected almost unanimously in Pakistan and people actually go crazy for them because they have thrashed us so bad each time we have played against them.

There is an actual fear and respect for these cricketers.

Almost nobody rates Sachin as high as these guys. This is not meant to say Sachin wasn’t a great. He sure was one of the best batters of his time along with other high impact batters. And longevity isn’t easy too.

But don’t bring the argument that we don’t respect him because he won against us.

That simply isn’t true and we weren’t threatened much whenever he would face Pak. Iconic and thrashing knocks just aren’t there. Except maybe one or two.

These guys don't understand that saying Sachin isn't great =/= Disagreeing with Sachin being a folklore level myth.

Indians view Sachin as some chuck norris level myth which is getting annoying

 

[jnaveen1980]

Honestly bro why do you think some Pak fans won’t rate Sachin because he was really good against us?

It should be the opposite. Those who really thrash the opposition are respected a lot more.

Example is Kohli, Sehwag, Rohit, Yuvraj, Bumrah.

They are respected almost unanimously in Pakistan and people actually go crazy for them because they have thrashed us so bad each time we have played against them.

There is an actual fear and respect for these cricketers.

Almost nobody rates Sachin as high as these guys. This is not meant to say Sachin wasn’t a great. He sure was one of the best batters of his time along with other high impact batters. And longevity isn’t easy too.

But don’t bring the argument that we don’t respect him because he won against us.

That simply isn’t true and we weren’t threatened much whenever he would face Pak. Iconic and thrashing knocks just aren’t there. Except maybe one or two.

PUtting down Sachin by Pak fans started long back since Imran khan's days. Comments like "Inzamam is better than Sachin against pace" were ridiculous from Imran. Almost this is like time pass for pak fans. They would pick a new hero every time just to put down Sachin. That included even Jonathan Trott, Mike Hussey. First Lara, Ponting. It is a subconscious thing. Only genuinely neutral fans have no gripe with Sachin's popularity, achievements. "Almost nobody" rates sachin as high as Rohit/Yuvraj? Seriously? lol You can say Pakistan fans, sympathizers are the only one who would do that. Sure You are entitled to your biased opinion. Fair enough. This is why when it comes to Sachin Indian fans and Pakistan fans are never going to be on the same page. If anything 180 degrees.

 

[jnaveen1980]

A bunch of Indian posters went berserk and acted like current Indian team of 2024 is superior to classic Australia

Not Indian fan lol That thread was initiated not by an Indian.

 

[jnaveen1980]

These guys don't understand that saying Sachin isn't great =/= Disagreeing with Sachin being a folklore level myth.

Indians view Sachin as some chuck norris level myth which is getting annoying

Sachin inspired generations of cricketers. Ofcourse he will be viewed that way. Why do you care how Indians treat Sachin as their hero. WHy do you get annoyed. Every country has the right to celebrate their hero. They celebrated Gavaskar, Kapil Dev, Tendulkar.

 

[mominsaigol]

PUtting down Sachin by Pak fans started long back since Imran khan's days. Comments like "Inzamam is better than Sachin against pace" were ridiculous from Imran. Almost this is like time pass for pak fans. They would pick a new hero every time just to put down Sachin. That included even Jonathan Trott, Mike Hussey. First Lara, Ponting. It is a subconscious thing. Only genuinely neutral fans have no gripe with Sachin's popularity, achievements. "Almost nobody" rates sachin as high as Rohit/Yuvraj? Seriously? lol You can say Pakistan fans, sympathizers are the only one who would do that. Sure You are entitled to your biased opinion. Fair enough. This is why when it comes to Sachin Indian fans and Pakistan fans are never going to be on the same page. If anything 180 degrees.

And what about aussie fans? Or neutral fans? Just because someone is of a certain origin doesn't mean their put to get India. Many people aren't from Portugal but support ronaldo and want Portugal to win.

Aussie fans both local australians that ive personally chatted believe classic Australia is miles ahead of any team and their is no equal, so why do you feel the keed to act high and mighty to discredit them.

Not Indian fan lol That thread was initiated not by an Indian.

I started that thread to ask about india's legacy post rohit, Kohli and bumrah. I'm not the one who felt the need to Shove Sachin and Australia in the thread for the sake of it

 

[mominsaigol]

Sachin inspired generations of cricketers. Ofcourse he will be viewed that way. Why do you care how Indians treat Sachin as their hero. WHy do you get annoyed. Every country has the right to celebrate their hero. They celebrated Gavaskar, Kapil Dev, Tendulkar.

I don't have an issue with how you view someone, I have an issue with you feeling the need to attack in pairs and wolves to people who don't see eye to eye. And anyone who thinks Sachin is not folklore be it a pakistani or a neutral fan, you feel the need to Shove regional nonsense onto to them or cite narratives about them or create past narratives.

 

[jnaveen1980]

And what about aussie fans? Or neutral fans? Just because someone is of a certain origin doesn't mean their put to get India. Many people aren't from Portugal but support ronaldo and want Portugal to win.

Aussie fans both local australians that ive personally chatted believe classic Australia is miles ahead of any team and their is no equal, so why do you feel the keed to act high and mighty to discredit them.

I started that thread to ask about india's legacy post rohit, Kohli and bumrah. I'm not the one who felt the need to Shove Sachin and Australia in the thread for the sake of it

"Miles ahead" is the part that i disagree with. If you just say "They are better" i would agree. We even showed why that is the case. You are talking about how Indians go hyper about Sachin. DO you see the irony. You are going "hyper" over Australia side like guys like Smith, Cummins, Warner, Starc, Hazlewood, Lyon are some kind of two bit players.

 

[mominsaigol]

"Miles ahead" is the part that i disagree with. If you just say "They are better" i would agree. We even showed why that is the case. You are talking about how Indians go hyper about Sachin. DO you see the irony. You are going "hyper" over Australia side like guys like Smith, Cummins, Warner, Starc, Hazlewood, Lyon are some kind of two bit players.

No one said these guys are 2 bit players,

As I said I've personally chatted qith many local aussies who share the exact same opinion and many of them watched that entire era and are pretty old now lol.

You didn't show me anything on that being the case, you assuming a moral victory in your head means nothing beyond grand delusion.

 

[jnaveen1980]

No one said these guys are 2 bit players

As I said I've personally chatted qith many local aussies who share the exact same opinion amd many of them watched that entire era and are pretty old now lol.

You didn't show me anything on that being the case, you assuming a moral victory in your head means nothing beyond grand delusion.

Anecdotal evidence is not evidence. It is again biased. I even shared the article from Australian magazine. You consider that is less worth than some random guys sharing something with you. okay. So what you say is patently untrue. Even Australian media has strong opinion about this attack.

Here is another article

Why Australia’s bowling quartet are the best in Test history

Pat Cummins, Mitch Starc, Josh Hazlewood and Nathan Lyon are now the most successful Test attack of all time, with more records to come.

www.smh.com.au

Among the 100 plus wicket takers in Aussies. Look who is at the top in terms of strike rate

 

[Unleashed]

He has been retired for ten years and still he lives rent free in Pakistani heads. Also a big achievement

 

[jnaveen1980]

As a team 2000 Australia was better because they had monsterous batting line up unlike the current unit. Althought these guys bat well enough to be a top side they still miss some links. Labuschagne did manage to paper over some cracks. But he is not like Michael clarke or Hussey. So yea battingwise that unit was stronger. Bowlingwise this unit is no less than any unit in Australian history.

 

[mominsaigol]

Anecdotal evidence is not evidence. It is again biased. I even shared the article from Australian magazine. You consider that is less worth than some random guys sharing something with you. okay. So what you say is patently untrue. Even Australian media has strong opinion about this attack.

Here is another article

Why Australia’s bowling quartet are the best in Test history

Pat Cummins, Mitch Starc, Josh Hazlewood and Nathan Lyon are now the most successful Test attack of all time, with more records to come.

www.smh.com.au

Among the 100 plus wicket takers in Aussies. Look who is at the top in terms of strike rate

This is not aussie media , this is one dude who wrote an article.

And I warned you about media. Sohaib Akhtar has clowned Sachin many times, and unlike this article he's a cricketer so ig I should take his opinion over yours. Waqar younis clowned Sachin for breaking his nose and media went wild at the time for bloody nose Sachin. He was memed for years for his 2003 final fail?

It's just Sachin is a brand bigger then anything in India and unfortunately India has the privilege of a 1.3B attack mindset.

Lastly brother giving me stats doesn't do a damn. Anyone who's seen mcgrath and classic Australia knows the difference night and day. You're constantly stretching against a wall all to simply argue the original premise of why you'd take a washed up rohit captaining a 2024 side against classic Australia lol and trying to argue that current rubbish stark somehow fits into the team.

 

[mominsaigol]

As a team 2000 Australia was better because they had monsterous batting line up unlike the current unit. Althought these guys bat well enough to be a top side they still miss some links. Labuschagne did manage to paper over some cracks. But he is not like Michael clarke or Hussey. So yea battingwise that unit was stronger. Bowlingwise this unit is no less than any unit in Australian history.

Explain mcgrath's 4-8 against the mighty Sachin, laxman, ganguly, dravid etc etc? Ain't Sachin your God?

 

[mominsaigol]

Sachin is the God of cricket. Hence the God vanished In 2003 final because he couldnt handle the humanely pressure of 350+ while sehwag could.

The God got humilated by mcgrath 4-8 .

Apparently the excuse is that Even God cannot perform in every game, because God is human

 

[jnaveen1980]

Explain mcgrath's 4-8 against the mighty Sachin, laxman, ganguly, dravid etc etc? Ain't Sachin your God?

Explain 3 sixes against Mcgrath at Nairobi by Sachin. Explain Mcgrath's wicketless day at Eden Gardens. Explain Mcgrath's wide tactics as Australia was in danger of losing a test to New zealand.

'For the first time, I saw genuine fear in Australia. They might have lost a Test they had dominated'

Craig McMillan, Jason Gillespie, Mark Richardson and John Buchanan look back to a thriller at the Gabba 19 years ago

www.thecricketmonthly.com

"For the first time, I saw genuine fear because they were in a position from where they could lose the Test despite dominating for a bulk of the match. I think Chris Cairns and I put on 50 in 30 balls or something. We picked Glenn McGrath and Shane Warne for 30 in two overs or so. Suddenly their meetings got longer, they were taking time, McGrath was bowling down leg or wide outside off. You knew they genuinely feared losing at that point."

 

[Buffet]

I don’t even know the stats up to 2003 or 2006, but would be interesting to see if your hypotheses about Tendulkar being an outlier still hold.

I don't think he stands out as outlier in 00s period because he was not the same aggresive batsman after 90s and also plenty of batsmen started scoring heavily in 00s who used to struggle in 90s.

Maybe I'm confused but why is Sachin being judged based on the opposition's batting quality?

Shouldn't the only thing used to determine a batsman's performance be the opposing bowling attack + fielding + pitch conditions?

+1

If a batsman does well in all conditions agaisnt all teams when 6-8 ATG bowlers used to play then that's the criterion to judge a batsman. Opposition's batting quality is irrelevant.

I don't think poster thought much here. he wasn't trying to put down SRT. It was simply a response to some posters in earlier thread claiming that current Aus team is much closer to ATG Aus team. I don't think that's true. ATG Aus team had a far superior batting line up with Gilly as a trump card. Yes, as a bowling unit, peak Cummins and team will be much closer to past. Aus team. Aus bowling unit has been gun due to fantastic pace unit and good enough spinner in Lyon. Over all, there is a clear gap between ATG Aus team and current Aus team.

 

[mominsaigol]

Explain 3 sixes against Mcgrath at Nairobi by Sachin. Explain Mcgrath's wicketless day at Eden Gardens. Explain Mcgrath's wide tactics as Australia was in danger of losing a test to New zealand.

'For the first time, I saw genuine fear in Australia. They might have lost a Test they had dominated'

Craig McMillan, Jason Gillespie, Mark Richardson and John Buchanan look back to a thriller at the Gabba 19 years ago

www.thecricketmonthly.com

"For the first time, I saw genuine fear because they were in a position from where they could lose the Test despite dominating for a bulk of the match. I think Chris Cairns and I put on 50 in 30 balls or something. We picked Glenn McGrath and Shane Warne for 30 in two overs or so. Suddenly their meetings got longer, they were taking time, McGrath was bowling down leg or wide outside off. You knew they genuinely feared losing at that point."

No you first, Sachin is GOD right, Why couldn't God deal with mcgrath in the final? Is it because you're god is human and not the entity that you think

 

[jnaveen1980]

I don't think he stands out as outlier in 00s period because he was not the same aggresive batsman after 90s and also plenty of batsmen started scoring heavily in 00s who used to struggle in 90s.


+1

If a batsman does well in all conditions agaisnt all teams when 6-8 ATG bowlers used to play then that's the criterion to judge a batsman. Opposition's batting quality is irrelevant.

I don't think poster thought much here. he wasn't trying to put down SRT. It was simply a response to some posters in earlier thread claiming that current Aus team is much closer to ATG Aus team. I don't think that's true. ATG Aus team had a far superior batting line up with Gilly as a trump card. Yes, as a bowling unit, peak Cummins and team will be much closer to past. Aus team. Aus bowling unit has been gun due to fantastic pace unit and good enough spinner in Lyon. Over all, there is a clear gap between ATG Aus team and current Aus team.

That is pretty much what i was telling. Too many hyperboles triggered this argument. "Miles ahead" "will crush the current team" kind of hyperboles

 

[mominsaigol]

That is pretty much what i was telling. Too many hyperboles triggered this argument. "Miles ahead" "will crush the current team" kind of hyperboles

They will, the classic team would have a field day with the likes of 2024 stark on his last legs bowling 10 overs.

As I said you can't differentiate between versions, your response to explain Sachin's 3 sixes to mcgrath proves it.

It makes sense why you were arguing 2024 India with the likes of rohit and kohli on their last legs and the dead weights of dube and jadeja marching on to take on 2003 Australia

 

[jnaveen1980]

No you first, Sachin is GOD right, Why couldn't God deal with mcgrath in the final? Is it because you're god is human and not the entity that you think

Because Indian bowlers leaked way too many and India had to take chance from the get go? How many times Australia successfully chased 300 plus totals in 2000? out of 7 times Australia failed to chase 300 6 times in the 2000s

 

[jnaveen1980]

They will, the classic team would have a field day with the likes of 2024 stark on his last legs bowling 10 overs.

As I said you can't differentiate between versions, your response to explain Sachin's 3 sixes to mcgrath proves it.

It makes sense why you were arguing 2024 India with the likes of rohit and kohli on their last legs and the dead weights of dube and jadeja marching on to take on 2003 Australia

Do you realize India beat Australia in the world T20, 2007 semi final right? Sreesanth was unplayable. Even Gilchrist sorta admitted to that. COmpare Sreesanth with Bumrah.

 

[mominsaigol]

Do you realize India beat Australia in the world T20, 2007 semi final right? Sreesanth was unplayable. Even Gilchrist sorta admitted to that. COmpare Sreesanth with Bumrah.

firstly that was t20 when it was new, not odi, even Zimbabwe beat that team.

Secondly you're further proving my point on versions.

You assume every version of Sachin is the same when 2007 > 2003 > 2012 Sachin.

Similarly 2015 starc >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2024 starc who is pretty much in retirement mode.

Similarly 2014 kohli >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2024 kohli who was a passenger until the final.

Similarly mcgrath has various versions.

The fact that you think 2024 aussie team is comparable to 2003 aussie team and you're argument is you're underestimating smith who was dropped from 2024 due to garbo form and starc who was rubbish in 2024 and trying to equate that to 2015 shows how little you're understanding is.

2015 Australia vs 2003 is debatable. 2003 Australia crushes 2024/2023 no contest in a odi series. But you're obsessed qith assuming players don't change over time and remain the same

 

[jnaveen1980]

firstly that was t20 when it was new, not odi, even Zimbabwe beat that team.

Secondly you're further proving my point on versions.

You assume every version of Sachin is the same when 2007 > 2003 > 2012 Sachin.

Similarly 2015 starc >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2024 starc who is pretty much in retirement mode.

Similarly 2014 kohli >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2024 kohli who was a passenger until the final.

Similarly mcgrath has various versions.

The fact that you think 2024 aussie team is comparable to 2003 aussie team and you're argument is you're underestimating smith who was dropped from 2024 due to garbo form and starc who was rubbish in 2024 and trying to equate that to 2015 shows how little you're understanding is.

2015 Australia vs 2003 is debatable. 2003 Australia crushes 2024/2023 no contest in a odi series. But you're obsessed qith assuming players don't change over time and remain the same

2024 Australian side would lose to 2003 side. That doesn't mean 2003 Australian side would crush this Indian side. 2003 Australian side had Mcgrath, Bichel, Lee, Brad Hogg . Just 4 main bowlers. Lehmann/Symonds shared 5th bowling. Are you saying they are some kind of world class bowling unit? They won because of their batting and score board pressure. India scored 234 in 39 overs even after Sachin exit. In current scenario if India wins the toss at Ahmedabad kind of pitch they are going to beat any side from any era. Even back then India should have opted to bat first. A cardinal mistake.

 

[mominsaigol]

2024 Australian side would lose to 2003 side. That doesn't mean 2003 Australian side would crush this Indian side. 2003 Australian side had Mcgrath, Bichel, Lee, Brad Hogg . Just 4 main bowlers. Lehmann/Symonds shared 5th bowling. Are you saying they are some kind of world class bowling unit? They won because of their batting and score board pressure. India scored 234 in 39 overs even after Sachin exit. In current scenario if India wins the toss at Ahmedabad kind of pitch they are going to beat any side from any era. Even back then India should have opted to bat first. A cardinal mistake.

2024 Indian side is a corpse carrying rohit who fired against australia at the right time capitalising on shark's rubbish bowling, otherwise he was a passenger for the group stage and final.

Kohli in 2024 was a passenger until the final.

Sky is useless in odi and has a garbo record.

The spin unit got dismantled by klaseen and got beaten into oblivion.

Dube and jadeja are useless.

Pant isn't spectacular in odi

The likes of Sachin, sehwag etc inn2003 at their absolute primes are > the 2024 joke lot that had 3 heart attacks and rode on bumrah's coat tails for pakistan, australia and Sa.

Australia already murked a much stronger Indian 11 with the exception of Bumrah. Even kudkeep and axar patel weren't anything special aka their 2024 versions unless you're still riding on patel being a goat spinner for imad wasim lol.

2024 India is amongst the weakest Indian teams excluding 2021 and 2012.

The fact that rohit, Kohli and bumrah were their best players despite both kohli and rohit more or less being passengers for the most part is telltale signs.

You already agreed that 2003 australia would wash 2024 australia. You Agreed correct? I have this statement of yours? Well 2024 australia nearly beat India, they lost because bumrah had to step in again, Marsh threw his wicket away and starc single handidelt lost the game.

You guys are insane if you think taking a burnt out 2024 rohit and kohli who literally decided to retire after alongside dube as well as a team that lost to current sri lanka due to the absence of Bumrah is taking in 2003 australia which I rank > 2007 australia.

You've gone totally bonkers.

 

[jnaveen1980]

2024 Indian side is a corpse carrying rohit who fired against australia at the right time capitalising on shark's rubbish bowling, otherwise he was a passenger for the group stage and final.

Kohli in 2024 was a passenger until the final.

Sky is useless in odi and has a garbo record.

The spin unit got dismantled by klaseen and got beaten into oblivion.

Dube and jadeja are useless.

Pant isn't spectacular in odi

The likes of Sachin, sehwag etc inn2003 at their absolute primes are > the 2024 joke lot that had 3 heart attacks and rode on bumrah's coat tails for pakistan, australia and Sa.

Australia already murked a much stronger Indian 11 with the exception of Bumrah. Even kudkeep and axar patel weren't anything special aka their 2024 versions unless you're still riding on patel being a goat spinner for imad wasim lol.

2024 India is amongst the weakest Indian teams excluding 2021 and 2012.

The fact that rohit, Kohli and bumrah were their best players despite both kohli and rohit more or less being passengers for the most part is telltale signs.

You already agreed that 2003 australia would wash 2024 australia. You Agreed correct? I have this statement of yours? Well 2024 australia nearly beat India, they lost because bumrah had to step in again, Marsh threw his wicket away and starc single handidelt lost the game.

You guys are insane if you think taking a burnt out 2024 rohit and kohli who literally decided to retire after alongside dube as well as a team that lost to current sri lanka due to the absence of Bumrah is taking in 2003 australia which I rank > 2007 australia.

You've gone totally bonkers.

So you are talking about T20 final lol I showed how India beat the crap out of Australia in 2007 semi ifnal you said 'It is just T20". How can a team that lost to bowling of RP Singh, Sreesanth, Harbhajan, Irfan would survive against Bumrah. If you are strictly talking about T20, that Australian side would get even worse pasting than 2007 pasting.

 

[mominsaigol]

So you are talking about T20 final lol I showed how India beat the crap out of Australia in 2007 semi ifnal you said 'It is just T20". How can a team that lost to bowling of RP Singh, Sreesanth, Harbhajan, Irfan would survive against Bumrah. If you are strictly talking about T20, that Australian side would get even worse pasting than 2007 pasting.

I'm talking about odi, t20 didn't exist back then.

This is kohli's score against sri lanka 24 of 32, 14 of 19, 20 of 18, all this against current sri Lankan attack.

Rohit himself probed to be nothing more then a 10 over pp basher and becomes a walking wicket the moment 10 overs pass.

2024 India played with almost everyone besides bumrah and a few pacers.

They had Gill, Kohli, Rohit, Pant, Sheryas, axar patel, Dube, Kuldeep, siraj etc etc and they got bundled out for 138 208 and 230.

This team is utter rubbish and it exposed why t20 wc occurred and how much rohit firing agaisnt the rubbish of stark, Kohli firing in the final and contributions by Pant, Dube, axar patel and bumrah carried.

But that was t20 were one off performances from one batter and one bowler per game can happen and occur.

In odi the team got exposed without bumrah and shami and even shami is getting aged now.

You wish to take 2024 versions against 2003 versions in odi? And you back them to win when their batting will collapse even worse then what sri lanka achieved? Have you lost it?

This is my issue, the moment you said I'd take this 2024 team and put them agaisnt Australia.

And them every argument pertaining to current vs past when it's clear as day current 2024 Australia would get shot into oblivion.

This is not 2015 starc vs 2003 pointing. In the same way 2011 Australia would get drubbed by 2013-2019 India.

Idkw you're putting this weird narrative and weird spin acting like the likes of steve smith, Sachin, starc, rohit and kohli are immortal and perpetually stuck in 2014, 2003, 2007 etc etc.

Mcgrath getting smacked fir 3 sixes is not the same mcgrath who took 4-8 lol.

Again versions, 2024 India is getting washed by 2003 Australia. 2024 got washed by sri lanka despite being at full batting strength but missing some pacers.

 

[jnaveen1980]

I'm talking about odi, t20 didn't exist back then.

This is kohli's score against sri lanka 24 of 32, 14 of 19, 20 of 18, all this against current sri Lankan attack.

Rohit himself probed to be nothing more then a 10 over pp basher and becomes a walking wicket the moment 10 overs pass.

2024 India played with almost everyone besides bumrah and a few pacers.

They had Gill, Kohli, Rohit, Pant, Sheryas, axar patel, Dube, Kuldeep, siraj etc etc and they got bundled out for 138 208 and 230.

This team is utter rubbish and it exposed why t20 wc occurred and how much rohit firing agaisnt the rubbish of stark, Kohli firing in the final and contributions by Pant, Dube, axar patel and bumrah carried.

But that was t20 were one off performances from one batter and one bowler per game can happen and occur.

In odi the team got exposed without bumrah and shami and even shami is getting aged now.

You wish to take 2024 versions against 2003 versions in odi? And you back them to win when their batting will collapse even worse then what sri lanka achieved? Have you lost it?

This is my issue, the moment you said I'd take this 2024 team and put them agaisnt Australia.

And them every argument pertaining to current vs past when it's clear as day current 2024 Australia would get shot into oblivion.

This is not 2015 starc vs 2003 pointing. In the same way 2011 Australia would get drubbed by 2013-2019 India.

Idkw you're putting this weird narrative and weird spin acting like the likes of steve smith, Sachin, starc, rohit and kohli are immortal and perpetually stuck in 2014, 2003, 2007 etc etc.

Mcgrath getting smacked fir 3 sixes is not the same mcgrath who took 4-8 lol.

Again versions, 2024 India is getting washed by 2003 Australia. 2024 got washed by sri lanka despite being at full batting strength but missing some pacers.

India decimated 10 oppositions in 2023 world cup in a row. Also look at the surfaces we played in T20. Hardly any high scoring venues. Only place where batting was easier India pummelled Australia. Look at India's bowling. I am sorry you are totally out of depth about Indian cricket. Sorry to say. I have observed every inch of Indian cricket. India never had 4 or 5 good wicket taking bowlers in the same side. LOok how they defended low total against England. How they destroyed teams with their bowling. Even in the final Kohli dropped a sitter in the first ball of Bumrah. Still reduced them to 40/3. But light took effect at Ahmedabad and batting got easier and easier. As a unit i would take this in a heart beat with a couple of changes. That unit was useless in restricting opposition. With 2 new balls that bowling unit of India would concede 400 runs regularly.

 

[mominsaigol]

India decimated 10 oppositions in 2023 world cup in a row. Also look at the surfaces we played in T20. Hardly any high scoring venues. Only place where batting was easier India pummelled Australia. Look at India's bowling. I am sorry you are totally out of depth about Indian cricket. Sorry to say. I have observed every inch of Indian cricket. India never had 4 or 5 good wicket taking bowlers in the same side. LOok how they defended low total against England. How they destroyed teams with their bowling. Even in the final Kohli dropped a sitter in the first ball of Bumrah. Still reduced them to 40/3. But light took effect at Ahmedabad and batting got easier and easier. As a unit i would take this in a heart beat with a couple of changes. That unit was useless in restricting opposition. With 2 new balls that bowling unit of India would concede 400 runs regularly.

Again WHAT DOES 2023 HAVE ANYTJING TO DO WITH 2024? Amd what does 2023 teams have anything to do with 2003 Australia? Weird false equivalence.

2023 had India playing in their home den on their own road pitches that they had most experience playing on.

Your squad at 90% strength that got drubbed by a side that isn't even playing CT is taking on classic Australia.

Idc what you've observed and which lens you've observed it from, you received a drubbing and a brutal axe by sri lanka deapite being at full batting strength and you plan to take this lineup with the inclusion of bunrah and shami to take on classic Australia.

Unless you curate the pitch, if it takes place anywhere overseas especially in aussie home turf this side is getting bullied into oblivion.

As I said you've lost it if you think dube is getting you out of this one. Also it's not about observing Indian cricket. It has nothing to do with 2024 India vs other teams.

Also the whole out of depth thing, You've already conceded on 2003 washing 2024 Australia. You're losing pretty much all of your stranglehold and are relying on self assurance. Don't worry, keep relying on it and patting yourself. I'm sure it helped againat sri lanka

 

[jnaveen1980]

Again WHAT DOES 2023 HAVE ANYTJING TO DO WITH 2024? Amd what does 2023 teams have anything to do with 2003 Australia? Weird false equivalence.

2023 had India playing in their home den on their own road pitches that they had most experience playing on.

Your squad at 90% strength that got drubbed by a side that isn't even playing CT is taking on classic Australia.

Idc what you've observed and which lens you've observed it from, you received a drubbing and a brutal axe by sri lanka deapite being at full batting strength and you plan to take this lineup with the inclusion of bunrah and shami to take on classic Australia.

Unless you curate the pitch, if it takes place anywhere overseas especially in aussie home turf this side is getting bullied into oblivion.

As I said you've lost it if you think dube is getting you out of this one. Also it's not about observing Indian cricket. It has nothing to do with 2024 India vs other teams.

Also the whole out of depth thing, You've already conceded on 2003 washing 2024 Australia. You're losing pretty much all of your stranglehold and are relying on self assurance. Don't worry, keep relying on it and patting yourself. I'm sure it helped againat sri lanka

Australia getting whitewashed by Newzealand in 2005 makes them vulnerable against other sides in a different era?

 

[mominsaigol]

Australia getting whitewashed by Newzealand in 2005 makes them vulnerable against other sides in a different era?

2005 has nothing to do with 2003

 

[jnaveen1980]

I can go all night with arguments. I remember every series from the 2000s. who sucked when. what the weakness of the opposition was. Why many teams could not compete against Aussies. why some teams could compete against them. THey had their own weaknesses. They were not invincibles. THey had champion mentality ever since Alan Border took over Australian side. Even poor Australian side would compete always. That was a great side with ATG players. But they were not going to walk all over every side in every era. That is unprovable based on few logical connection.

 

[jnaveen1980]

2005 has nothing to do with 2003

What is with 2003. In 2003 , in West Indies Australia won 4-3 in ODI series. They lost 3 matches. THey didn't exactly run over West Indies.