India [326 & 70/2] beat Australia [195 & 200] by 8 wickets to win 2nd Test [1-1]

[Romali_rotti]

So yes. This Australian attack is a great great attack. But it is not the best ever Aussie attack and certainly using Warne and Border’s words as evidence isn’t the best strategy in this case.

THIS!!!

That attack of:

Mcgrath,
Warne,
Gillespie,
Lee

was unbeatable, matter of fact, I don't think they have lost a test series when all 4 of them played the whole series, that itself is an unbeatable achievement.

Mcgrath would choke you, Warne would put you in a web, if you survive the above 2, then Gillespie will come in and bowl at a Mcgrath line with a quicker speed, if you survive that then you have the 150K plus constant thunderbolts from Lee. Only a matter of time before the opposition was on their knees.

The new Australian kids are great and very talented, also very likeable unlike Mcgrath and Co, however no way they are in the same class as Mcgrath and co.

 

[Slog]

THIS!!!

That attack of:

Mcgrath,
Warne,
Gillespie,
Lee

was unbeatable, matter of fact, I don't think they have lost a test series when all 4 of them played the whole series, that itself is an unbeatable achievement.

Mcgrath would choke you, Warne would put you in a web, if you survive the above 2, then Gillespie will come in and bowl at a Mcgrath line with a quicker speed, if you survive that then you have the 150K plus constant thunderbolts from Lee. Only a matter of time before the opposition was on their knees.

The new Australian kids are great and very talented, also very likeable unlike Mcgrath and Co, however no way they are in the same class as Mcgrath and co.

Cummins would take Brett Lee’s place but the others won’t Eventhough they are good in their own right

People forget Gillespie had amazing line and length and his pace was 143-148kph most days

 

[Slog]

You are a product of your time. Different eras. If t20 din't exist, current Aussie team would have adapted and prioritized tests instead of having to split their focus across various formats.

Current Aussie lineup is very good in their Condtions. They can outbat old Aussies side. They also have a better bowling attack overall.

Old Aussie side never faced bowling of this standard. The few times they did they struggled. Like vs n.z when they had bond. Nearly beat Australia in Australia.

Peak West Indies with Ambrose and Walsh used to beat Australia too.
Hell that Aussie side even struggled vs India's average bowling in 2000 era.
Lots of close games. Besides some of the pitches they batted on was a farce.

On spicy pitches Australia always had problems. Lost to frame Smith's team as well when Smith just started to hit his peak. Steyn was still young.

Lolwut. Current Aussie lineup which includes Burns, Head, Wade and unproven Green would outbat Hayden, Langer, Martyn, Clarke etc? Lmao what are you smoking man.

As a unit, the current Aussie bowling attack can be compared to the 2000s Aussie bowling attack even if the current one is inferior esp outisde australia. But the current Aussie batting lineup doesn’t even enter in the same conversation as the 2000s Aussie batting lineup. The fact that you are still trying to make that case is making you look like a laughing stock.

Anyways this is the last I’ll be discussing on this topic. You can keep with your delusions since it makes you feel better it seems.

 

[Thunderbolt14]

Cummins would take Brett Lee’s place but the others won’t Eventhough they are good in their own right

People forget Gillespie had amazing line and length and his pace was 143-148kph most days

Would Cummins take Brett Lee’s place? I feel Lee had a very specific role as the out and out express bowler, whereas Cummins’ role is already being fulfilled by McGrath. I don’t think you can get a more perfect attack than that. Maybe Cummins over Gillespie though?

 

[tyron_woodley]

Lolwut. Current Aussie lineup which includes Burns, Head, Wade and unproven Green would outbat Hayden, Langer, Martyn, Clarke etc? Lmao what are you smoking man.

As a unit, the current Aussie bowling attack can be compared to the 2000s Aussie bowling attack even if the current one is inferior esp outisde australia. But the current Aussie batting lineup doesn’t even enter in the same conversation as the 2000s Aussie batting lineup. The fact that you are still trying to make that case is making you look like a laughing stock.

Anyways this is the last I’ll be discussing on this topic. You can keep with your delusions since it makes you feel better it seems.

All you are doing is conjecture. You are failing to accept the fact that cricket has changed. T20 has made a difference.

Australia have to split their focus across formats. Should this team focus entirely on tests and odi whilst prioritizing tests, they are more than capable of beating old Aussies who struggled vs bonds new Zealand, lost to South Africa when saffers had a good bowling lineup.

Current batting is still quality. They were made to look poor by quality bowling. The same bowling could trouble Aussies of 2000 who had problems with agarkar, harbhjan of all people at times.

 

[tyron_woodley]

Would Cummins take Brett Lee’s place? I feel Lee had a very specific role as the out and out express bowler, whereas Cummins’ role is already being fulfilled by McGrath. I don’t think you can get a more perfect attack than that. Maybe Cummins over Gillespie though?

If you are nostalgic then no. But if you are objective then yes he would take Gillespie's place and Starc comfortably displaces or Hazelwood displaces Lee.

 

[tyron_woodley]

Australia back then had the opportunity to game plan for tests nowadays with franchizee cricket, T20 World cups, champions trophy games, shield circket, test cricket its hard to even play practice games before a major test series. There is no time. Aussies and co have to prepare for 3, different formats. That's why era comparison is pointless.

Players from this era would have adapted differently to compete with players from 2000.

 

[Slog]

All you are doing is conjecture. You are failing to accept the fact that cricket has changed. T20 has made a difference.

Australia have to split their focus across formats. Should this team focus entirely on tests and odi whilst prioritizing tests, they are more than capable of beating old Aussies who struggled vs bonds new Zealand, lost to South Africa when saffers had a good bowling lineup.

Current batting is still quality. They were made to look poor by quality bowling. The same bowling could trouble Aussies of 2000 who had problems with agarkar, harbhjan of all people at times.

You’re accusing me of conjecture where you are engaging in the textbook definition of conjecture. Pretty rich lol

The current Aussie batting lineup is trash. Everyone knows that including you deep down I’m sure. Move on.

 

[tyron_woodley]

You’re accusing me of conjecture where you are engaging in the textbook definition of conjecture. Pretty rich lol

The current Aussie batting lineup is trash. Everyone knows that including you deep down I’m sure. Move on.

It's not. They have put out huge totals vs many teams. They might put up a big total vs India next game but yes India are missing players.

I am saying you can't compare eras. Different setups altogether.

Lot of the current players play t20 and odi along with test plus franchize cricket. Their focus isn't entirely on tests as it isn't the utmost priority. They are more than capable of challenging old Aussie team that struggled vs quality attacks themselves on spicy pitches.

We don't know what would happen. Lubu Smith green Warner etc are all quality players. Head actually performed vs England.

They just faced some good bowling.

 

[Srtfan]

@tyron woodley 38 year old retire McGrath ipl performance >> peak Cummins ipl performance.

 

[Srtfan]

In ipl
McGrath- match 14 , wickets 12 ,Eco-6.61
Cummins- match 30 ,wickets 29, eco- 8.1

 

[tyron_woodley]

In ipl
McGrath- match 14 , wickets 12 ,Eco-6.61
Cummins- match 30 ,wickets 29, eco- 8.1

Who cares about IPl performance though? It's not international cricket. It's a good competition but players from Australia tend to take it less seriously. It's hard to judge their abilities as most treat it like a holiday because they want to conserve their energy for Australia.

 

[tyron_woodley]

2003 Australia vs India was on absolute flat Pattas pancake.

Current Aussie batsmen would post huge totals.

I have seen prime tendu and co get all out for 89 etc twice vs n.z in spicy pitches. Don't be silly. Don't be nostalgic.

Unless they have played each other you can't really judge their ability. Besides it really depends on what the players prioritize. Back then tests was seen as top priority. Now there is equal weightage given to all formats.

Players make more money via T20 etc.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

Warner is “way better” than Langer?

Lol ab tu zyada hogaya.

As I said. Look at the state of you

Warner is definitely a better batsman than Langer in Australian conditions.
Its not even close.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

Lol sure.

The current Aussie lineup will get rolled over innings after innings by the 2000s Aussie attack. The same won’t happen othrr way around

Look at the state of you. Claiming current Aussie lineup is better or even comparable to 2000s lineup in order to feel good about India’s win lol. Where is this insecurity even coming from?

The aussies batting lineup of 2000s was definitely better but saying that this lineup will get rolled over is just pure gibberish.

Steve Smith is twice the batsman Ricky Ponting was and i dont think you need an explanation for this.
Warner in aussies condition is an ATG.

Labuschagne hasn't done well this series but this doesn't mean that he isn't good, look at how he played in england, on potential he is the best young test batsman in the world even ahead of Babar.

All others are mediocre, i"ll give you that.
But they won't roll over, that's utter nonsense.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

Cummins would take Brett Lee’s place but the others won’t Eventhough they are good in their own right

People forget Gillespie had amazing line and length and his pace was 143-148kph most days

Yet again, you are letting nostalgia cloud your judgement.
Pat cummins is twice the bowler Gillespie was at any stage of his career. You know that.
Secondly what matters is how Cummins is performing at this stage, his stats are as good(even better) than Mcgrath which means he is performing on the same level as mcgrath did,
Mcgrath will obviously be rated higher than him coz cummins is halfway into his career but there's no doubt that his performance is as good as pigeon.

As for Lee, lol.
His role in the team was to remove all the pressure from the opposition by bowling half volleys at 150.
Starc has a much better record than him amd would easily get into that team ahead of him. Lee was a poor man's starc in all formats of the game.

Combined bowling attack:
Mcgrath
Cummins
Warne
Starc

Combined batting:
Hayden
Warner
Ponting
Smith
Labu(on potential he is better than martyn)
Clarke
Gilchrist

 

[tyron_woodley]

The aussies batting lineup of 2000s was definitely better but saying that this lineup will get rolled over is just pure gibberish.

Steve Smith is twice the batsman Ricky Ponting was and i dont think you need an explanation for this.
Warner in aussies condition is an ATG.

Labuschagne hasn't done well this series but this doesn't mean that he isn't good, look at how he played in england, on potential he is the best young test batsman in the world even ahead of Babar.

All others are mediocre, i"ll give you that.
But they won't roll over, that's utter nonsense.

Green is quality. I have seen Sachi Bhai and co get Rolle south for under 99 4 times in 2 tests vs n.z.

I have seen potting get wrecked on spicy pitches.

Lot of their records are vastly overrated by playing on flat dead wickets vs port subcontinent bowlers.

 

[tyron_woodley]

Yet again, you are letting nostalgia cloud your judgement.
Pat cummins is twice the bowler Gillespie was at any stage of his career. You know that.
Secondly what matters is how Cummins is performing at this stage, his stats are as good(even better) than Mcgrath which means he is performing on the same level as mcgrath did,
Mcgrath will obviously be rated higher than him coz cummins is halfway into his career but there's no doubt that his performance is as good as pigeon.

As for Lee, lol.
His role in the team was to remove all the pressure from the opposition by bowling half volleys at 150.
Starc has a much better record than him amd would easily get into that team ahead of him. Lee was a poor man's starc in all formats of the game.

Combined bowling attack:
Mcgrath
Cummins
Warne
Starc

Combined batting:
Hayden
Warner
Ponting
Smith
Labu(on potential he is better than martyn)
Clarke
Gilchrist

Add green in there too. This is what I said too.
Everything I have said so far is true. Been right almost every time. I have no doubt this team would give the prime Aussies of 2000 a run for their money. Current bowling as a whole is better.

Nostalgia needs to die. Perish. Move on. People are far too emotional when it comes to past era's.

10 years from now we will probably see someone like Gill and green break records and then people will stay NhA Smith and Kohli were better ROFL.

Same story.

 

[Last Monetarist]

Steve Smith is twice the batsman Ricky Ponting was and i dont think you need an explanation for this.

Pat cummins is twice the bowler Gillespie was at any stage of his career. You know that.
Secondly what matters is how Cummins is performing at this stage, his stats are as good(even better) than Mcgrath which means he is performing on the same level as mcgrath did,
Mcgrath will obviously be rated higher than him coz cummins is halfway into his career but there's no doubt that his performance is as good as pigeon.

Absolute statements such as the above are gibberish too.

I grant you that we are prone to nostalgia, but it works both ways with recency bias.

 

[Rightarmfast]

Gillespie was a very good bowler but a bit too hit and miss. A lot of plays and misses and great as part of the attack but not someone who influenced a match/series by himself. I'd take Hazlewood or even Starc over him.

You sure can take Hazelwood or Starc over Gillespie. However, you wouldn't be going with the best option in that case. The only reason Gillespie was not the lead bowler of Australia during those times was because of a certain bowler called Mcgrath, who happens to be an absolute all time great. Any other era, any other team, he would be the main strike bowlers.
Not to mention he used to bowl close to 150k's!

 

[viveks]

Cummins, Hazlewood > Gillespie. Starc > Lee

 

[MP2011]

These newbies!

 

[MP2011]

Smith twice the batsman Ponting was!
Cummins greater than Dizzy!
Green better than Martyn!
Labu better than Clarke!

Have now read it all.

 

[Mesozoic]

Smith twice the batsman Ponting was!
Cummins greater than Dizzy!
Green better than Martyn!
Labu better than Clarke!

Have now read it all.

Yeah. Don't know why some posters are trying so hard here.

This already is a brilliant win as it is and one of the best if not the best of our Test cricket history. Don't understand the need to degrade that Oz team and overhype this one.

 

[MP2011]

Yeah. Don't know why some posters are trying so hard here.

This already is a brilliant win as it is and one of the best if not the best of our Test cricket history. Don't understand the need to degrade that Oz team and overhype this one.

True. This is an excellent win for us especially considering the state we were in after last test.

People degrading that Australian team haven't even watched that team or followed them and are just passing verdicts on them.

This Australian team is nowhere near that Australian team and no amount of hyping this team will do any good. There have been far better Australian teams than this one, let alone that Australian team of '00s.

Will any resident Australian comment on it?

 

[MP2011]

Yeah. Don't know why some posters are trying so hard here.

This already is a brilliant win as it is and one of the best if not the best of our Test cricket history. Don't understand the need to degrade that Oz team and overhype this one.

Also in order to hype this Indian team, these newbies are degrading someone like Tendulkar. Lol, he scored runs only on flat beds. What does that man know about scoring runs on minefields?

 

[tyron_woodley]

Smith twice the batsman Ponting was!
Cummins greater than Dizzy!
Green better than Martyn!
Labu better than Clarke!

Have now read it all.

Flat Pattas made them look way better than they are. You want me to post stats of how tendu and co fared in new Zealand vs Simon Doull etc?

 

[tyron_woodley]

Also in order to hype this Indian team, these newbies are degrading someone like Tendulkar. Lol, he scored runs only on flat beds. What does that man know about scoring runs on minefields?

He scored in a lot of places but he also failed. At the end of their careers you can judge the current team.

Current Australia are more than capable of beating up punters team at home Condtions. Their bowling is superior.

Batting is not much inferior in Aussie Condtions.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

Smith twice the batsman Ponting was!
Cummins greater than Dizzy!
Green better than Martyn!
Labu better than Clarke!

Have now read it all.

Yeah. Don't know why some posters are trying so hard here.

This already is a brilliant win as it is and one of the best if not the best of our Test cricket history. Don't understand the need to degrade that Oz team and overhype this one.

You sure can take Hazelwood or Starc over Gillespie. However, you wouldn't be going with the best option in that case. The only reason Gillespie was not the lead bowler of Australia during those times was because of a certain bowler called Mcgrath, who happens to be an absolute all time great. Any other era, any other team, he would be the main strike bowlers.
Not to mention he used to bowl close to 150k's!

Cummins Definitely a better bowler than Gillespie and its not even close.
An avg of 21 vs an avg of 26 , and before you say that its not just about plain averages ,Cummins beats Gillespie not just on avg but also on career rating trend and his performance away from home is also better.
As i said Nostalgia is clouding your judgement .
[MENTION=95477]Rightarmfast[/MENTION] we saw how Gillespie lead the team in absence of Mcgrath in ashes 2005. Do you remember?
The presence of Mcgrath helped gillespie and not the other way round.

Labuschagne is the best young batsman in the world we cant really predict how his career will progress but as of now his performances are definitely on par with Martyn .

Smith being better than Ponting is not even debatable.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

Absolute statements such as the above are gibberish too.

I grant you that we are prone to nostalgia, but it works both ways with recency bias.

No they arent, they are backed by facts.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

Add green in there too. This is what I said too.

Same story.

Green has shown nothing at test level , he won’t even get ahead of symonds let alone clarke.
Let him secure his place in the team first

 

[Slog]

Yet again, you are letting nostalgia cloud your judgement.
Pat cummins is twice the bowler Gillespie was at any stage of his career. You know that.
Secondly what matters is how Cummins is performing at this stage, his stats are as good(even better) than Mcgrath which means he is performing on the same level as mcgrath did,
Mcgrath will obviously be rated higher than him coz cummins is halfway into his career but there's no doubt that his performance is as good as pigeon.

As for Lee, lol.
His role in the team was to remove all the pressure from the opposition by bowling half volleys at 150.
Starc has a much better record than him amd would easily get into that team ahead of him. Lee was a poor man's starc in all formats of the game.

Combined bowling attack:
Mcgrath
Cummins
Warne
Starc

Combined batting:
Hayden
Warner
Ponting
Smith
Labu(on potential he is better than martyn)
Clarke
Gilchrist

You wrote this whole pointless essay but it seems you never even read my post. I clearly said Cummins is better than Lee and will take his place.

Also it’s hilarious how you guys are using potential of Labushagne and Green (lolol) to put them over Martyn and Clarke. Sharam karo thori.

 

[MP2011]

Sharam karo thori.

These newbies have no sharam.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

You wrote this whole pointless essay but it seems you never even read my post. I clearly said Cummins is better than Lee and will take his place.

Also it’s hilarious how you guys are using potential of Labushagne and Green (lolol) to put them over Martyn and Clarke. Sharam karo thori.

I never said anything about Green, he doesnt even have a secure place in this team.

 

[Slog]

Yeah. Don't know why some posters are trying so hard here.

This already is a brilliant win as it is and one of the best if not the best of our Test cricket history. Don't understand the need to degrade that Oz team and overhype this one.

I am just scratching my head and for the longest time thought it was a troll job. Like how can Green (who just made his debut) be already be better than Martyn. And even Labushagne be better than Clarke? Labushagne has been good but he’s also been a bit overhyped and one of the reasons for that is the overall poor state of the Aussie batting lineup. There’s also a few other gems

also current Aussie bowling lineup is ATG level but I don’t think it’s gonna reach 2000s level purely because of warne. But even if you are being generous and say both bowling attacks are equivalent, surely you can’t claim that current Aussie batting lineup will destroy 2000s bowling line up.

I’m baffled as to why these things are being said. And first time ever I’ve seen a veteran of few tests being claimed to be better than a great of the game based on potential. I guess Shubham Gill can be considered better than Gavaskar already..

 

[Srtfan]

Steve waugh xi vs current

Hayden > warner
Langer > nobody
Ponting < < smith
Martyn > labu
Steve waugh >>>>>> nobody
Mark Waugh > wade
Gilly >>>>>>> paine
Warne >>>> lyon
Lee < strac
Gillespie = hazalwood
McGrath = Cummins

Ponting xi vs current
Hayden > warner
Langer > nobody
Ponting << smith
Martyn > labu
Clarke >> nobody
Hussey >>> wade
Gilly >>>>>> paine
Warne >>>>>>> lyon
Lee < strac
Gillespie = hazalwood
McGrath = McGrath

 

[Slog]

I never said anything about Green, he doesnt even have a secure place in this team.

Your buddy here did say that who youve been supporting

But I guess Labushagne has surpassed Clarke in your book already since you didn’t say that?

 

[Slog]

Steve waugh xi vs current

Hayden > warner
Langer > nobody
Ponting < < smith
Martyn > labu
Steve waugh >>>>>> nobody
Mark Waugh > wade
Gilly >>>>>>> paine
Warne >>>> lyon
Lee < strac
Gillespie = hazalwood
McGrath = Cummins

Ponting xi vs current
Hayden > warner
Langer > nobody
Ponting << smith
Martyn > labu
Clarke >> nobody
Hussey >>> wade
Gilly >>>>>> paine
Warne >>>>>>> lyon
Lee < strac
Gillespie = hazalwood
McGrath = McGrath

Smith doesn’t come at number 3 to compete with ponting. Also Lee’s replacement will be Cummins

Combined Lineup would be:

1. Hayden
2. Langer (Warner if you want 2 aggressive but usually for team combination you would go with a Langer type second batsman. But it could be either)
3. Ponting
4. Smith
5. Clarke
6. Martyn / Waugh / Hussey
7. Gil Christ
8. Warne
9. Cummins
10. Gillespie
11. McGrath

If you really want current team representation you could include Hazelwood instead of Gillespie but honestly Hazelwood’s direct competition would be McGrath and he will never win that battle

 

[Slog]

These newbies have no sharam.

Well atleast they are equal oppprtunity offenders. They were trashing Aussie 2000s team the whole thread so I thought it was some sort of saltiness (which doesn’t even make sense in context of thread and win). But in last few posts they’ve trashed Tendulkar, Dravid etc too so gotta applaud consistency. It’s bad opinion not saltiness haha

 

[Slog]

Anyways gotta say Michael Clarke is really underrated here if people are claiming that Labushagne has already surpassed him...

Not that 49+ is a bad average to begin with but I’ve seen him score some of the gutsiest away centuries I’ve ever seen in India, South Africa when the Australian backs were against the wall.

His end to the career (late 2014 and 2015 Ashes) was disappointing while suffering from a chronic back injury with no solution so may be that’s clouded jusdgement here.

 

[Mesozoic]

But even if you are being generous and say both bowling attacks are equivalent, surely you can’t claim that current Aussie batting lineup will destroy 2000s bowling line up.

Currently their middle order is one of the weakest in their history. Head , Wade, Green , Paine lol.

Not saying they're duds they are still pretty decent but are no match to Clarke, Hussey, Symonds/Waugh, Gilchrist.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

Your buddy here did say that who youve been supporting

But I guess Labushagne has surpassed Clarke in your book already since you didn’t say that?

Green has shown nothing at test level , he won’t even get ahead of symonds let alone clarke.
Let him secure his place in the team first

This was my post on green, never supported tyron he overhypes players.

Secondly, Martyn vs Labu is debatable.
If we compare any player who is not even halfway through his career to a retired player he will always fall short even though he might go on to become a GOAT.Thats why Labu being on par with Martyn (based on potential and current performances) was a logical assertion.

Lets wait for a couple of years and then we will get a good enough sample space to discuss Labu vs Martyn and i am damn sure i will have the last laugh.

 

[Slog]

This was my post on green, never supported tyron he overhypes players.

Secondly, Martyn vs Labu is debatable.
If we compare any player who is not even halfway through his career to a retired player he will always fall short even though he might go on to become a GOAT.Thats why Labu being on par with Martyn (based on potential and current performances) was a logical assertion.

Lets wait for a couple of years and then we will get a good enough sample space to discuss Labu vs Martyn and i am damn sure i will have the last laugh.

The comparisons being made originally were Labu vs Clarke and Green vs Martyn. You can’t keep shifting goal posts suit* your argument.

And yes Labushagne despite a great start to his career has a long way to go in his career to be called equivalent to Martyn. You aren’t realizing he hasn’t gone on many tough asian tours which asides from being potential stats destroyers can be career derailers.

Besides, you saying Steve Smith is twice the batsman Ponting ever was tells me all I need to know about your opinions so your ‘logical assertions’ don’t hold much weight. Smith being better than Ponting. Yes perhaps. Twice the batsman? Lolwut.

 

[Slog]

Currently their middle order is one of the weakest in their history. Head , Wade, Green , Paine lol.

Not saying they're duds they are still pretty decent but are no match to Clarke, Hussey, Symonds/Waugh, Gilchrist.

Yes I am legit baffled as to how you can even claim they are remotely comparable batting lineups let alone say current one is much better...

Like I don’t agree with you (because wel it jsut isn’t if you say current Aussie bowling lineup is better than 2000s bowling but I would say you can make some points with merit on the whole. But the assertion that current batting lineup is better is laughable.

Anyways. I’m out. Have a head ache due to the
Bafflement.

 

[MP2011]

Smith is not better than Ponting, let alone 2 times over.

 

[tyron_woodley]

Smith is not better than Ponting, let alone 2 times over.

Smith is way better everywhere.
Punter has a terrible record in India.

Smith is just more clutch and a better batsman overall. No debate there.

 

[tyron_woodley]

Judge these players at the end of their careers. Then see who will be laughing.

 

[tyron_woodley]

Smith doesn’t come at number 3 to compete with ponting. Also Lee’s replacement will be Cummins

Combined Lineup would be:

1. Hayden
2. Langer (Warner if you want 2 aggressive but usually for team combination you would go with a Langer type second batsman. But it could be either)
3. Ponting
4. Smith
5. Clarke
6. Martyn / Waugh / Hussey
7. Gil Christ
8. Warne
9. Cummins
10. Gillespie
11. McGrath

If you really want current team representation you could include Hazelwood instead of Gillespie but honestly Hazelwood’s direct competition would be McGrath and he will never win that battle

What you are failing to understand is that current players are just as good in Aussie Condtions. Current bowling attack is superior overall.

Batting maybe inferior but you are severely underestimating how good they are in home Condtions. They have brutally smashed every team including ATG NZ side at home and away.

Old Aussies had serious issues with quality pace bowling and I only saw them dominate on flat Pattas.

South Africa minced them when they had a good bowling attack in 2008.

Weaker new Zealand drew with them at their den in 2001.

Not to mention teams don't prirotize tests like they used. They play all 3 formats so it's much harder to specialise.

All these players are capable of performing in tests if they are fully focused on prioritizing tests as the main format.

There are just way too many alternative pathways to create an income stream via T20.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

The comparisons being made originally were Labu vs Clarke and Green vs Martyn. You can’t keep shifting goal posts suit* your argument.

And yes Labushagne despite a great start to his career has a long way to go in his career to be called equivalent to Martyn. You aren’t realizing he hasn’t gone on many tough asian tours which asides from being potential stats destroyers can be career derailers.

Besides, you saying Steve Smith is twice the batsman Ponting ever was tells me all I need to know about your opinions so your ‘logical assertions’ don’t hold much weight. Smith being better than Ponting. Yes perhaps. Twice the batsman? Lolwut.

Again, i am not shilfting goalposts.
If you look at my post i clearly mentioned that Labu will play at Martyn's expense not Clarke.

Secondly , i think you are sane enough to know that saying a batsman is twice as good as other means that he is comfortably better than the latter.

Ab ye mat kehna ki ponting avgs 52 . 52*2=104 , and smith avgs only 64, so how is he twice the batsman ?

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

Great Strategy mate :
Lets put Ponting ahead of Smith(despite all facts being against it) so that you can indirectly put Sachin ahead of Smith.
The only flaw in this strategy is that anyone with a working brain can see right through it

 

[sindhiboy]

Yes, currently, aus have the best bowling attack. But they are nowhere near early 2000 aus attack.

But consider this, south african bowlers outbowled aus when aus toured south africa in 2018. Indian pacers comfortably outbowled aus pace trio in 2018.
The ashes is the only series where aus bowlers triumphed the oppositions bowlers
When all 3 click, they can be the most lethal in the world. They just need to be more consistent.

 

[tyron_woodley]

Yes, currently, aus have the best bowling attack. But they are nowhere near early 2000 aus attack.

But consider this, south african bowlers outbowled aus when aus toured south africa in 2018. Indian pacers comfortably outbowled aus pace trio in 2018.
The ashes is the only series where aus bowlers triumphed the oppositions bowlers
When all 3 click, they can be the most lethal in the world. They just need to be more consistent.

Because indian bowling is better? Duh.

Full strength indian bowling is on par or better than Aussies currently.

Suffers 2018 is also up there. One of their best ever attacks.

They would trouble the Aussies of 2000 era alot on spicy pitches. The boys in 2000 era excelled in flat pattas but they dint dominate on spicy pitches.

I have no doubt the modern era bowling attacks would cause a lot of headaches for peak Aussies of 2000 era who feasted on slow subcontinent bowlers and poor English bowlers in Australia.

 

[Rightarmfast]

Cummins Definitely a better bowler than Gillespie and its not even close.
An avg of 21 vs an avg of 26 , and before you say that its not just about plain averages ,Cummins beats Gillespie not just on avg but also on career rating trend and his performance away from home is also better.
As i said Nostalgia is clouding your judgement .
[MENTION=95477]Rightarmfast[/MENTION] we saw how Gillespie lead the team in absence of Mcgrath in ashes 2005. Do you remember?
The presence of Mcgrath helped gillespie and not the other way round.

Labuschagne is the best young batsman in the world we cant really predict how his career will progress but as of now his performances are definitely on par with Martyn .

Smith being better than Ponting is not even debatable.

I spoke about Hazelwood and Starc against Gillespie. Did not speak about CUmmins. I would say even Starc is somewhat close to Gillespie in performance.
about the 2005 series, Gillespie was in his peak during 97-2001ish. He was not the same I would say post 2000.

 

[avihash]

The same batting line up belted pakistan in the last series scoring 550+ in each match (both were innings defeat).

LOL.

Also, whatever happened to smith the all conquering force & second coming of bradman ?
Is he behind clarke & martin now ? lol.

 

[wrongun]

Would Cummins take Brett Lee’s place? I feel Lee had a very specific role as the out and out express bowler, whereas Cummins’ role is already being fulfilled by McGrath. I don’t think you can get a more perfect attack than that. Maybe Cummins over Gillespie though?

Gillespie & Cummins both around 145k would be enough speed. Cummins would be picked over both- he's a generational talent.

 

[tyron_woodley]

Gillespie & Cummins both around 145k would be enough speed. Cummins would be picked over both- he's a generational talent.

There ya go. The great Australian here himself says he is a generational talent.

Lol at all the clowns here disrespecting this powerful Aussie side.

The same Australian side belted everyone else at home including a series draw in England which Aussies should have won.

 

[sindhiboy]

Because indian bowling is better? Duh.

Full strength indian bowling is on par or better than Aussies currently.

Suffers 2018 is also up there. One of their best ever attacks.

They would trouble the Aussies of 2000 era alot on spicy pitches. The boys in 2000 era excelled in flat pattas but they dint dominate on spicy pitches.

I have no doubt the modern era bowling attacks would cause a lot of headaches for peak Aussies of 2000 era who feasted on slow subcontinent bowlers and poor English bowlers in Australia.

Indian bowlers are consistent. Starc can take 23 wickets in 3 tests in sri lanka and be thrashed on a green seamer in south Africa the next day. His inconsistency is very extreme.
How can a bowler be successful on flat wickets but struggle on swing and Seam friendly ones?

But yes, Australian pitches in the nostalgic Era of 90s and 2000s were roads.
Until l 2017(btw, the 2017 ashes is one of the most boring series I have watched. Flat roads with no contest between the teams).

it's funny watching Tom moody on ESPN cricinfo YouTube videos complaining how peak aus team would destroy current Indian bowling

 

[sindhiboy]

The same batting line up belted pakistan in the last series scoring 550+ in each match (both were innings defeat).

LOL.

Also, whatever happened to smith the all conquering force & second coming of bradman ?
Is he behind clarke & martin now ? lol.

It's because that pitch was a road

 

[tyron_woodley]

Indian bowlers are consistent. Starc can take 23 wickets in 3 tests in sri lanka and be thrashed on a green seamer in south Africa the next day. His inconsistency is very extreme.
How can a bowler be successful on flat wickets but struggle on swing and Seam friendly ones?

But yes, Australian pitches in the nostalgic Era of 90s and 2000s were roads.
Until l 2017(btw, the 2017 ashes is one of the most boring series I have watched. Flat roads with no contest between the teams).

it's funny watching Tom moody on ESPN cricinfo YouTube videos complaining how peak aus team would destroy current Indian bowling

Lol yea right. Bhaji, Kumble, Zak and agarkar etc did reasonably well vs the so called greats in their primes on roads.

Bumrah would absolutely make several of them his bunnies. Shami and Ishant are all far better bowlers than India's 2000 era bowlers.

I am not saying Aussies can't dominate them but it will be very hard to say as current attack can hurt them. On roads? Our bowlers are capable of bowling good bouncers. So I am not sure it will be easy at all. Moody is an idiot anyway. He is biased dumb clown that spews absolute rubbish.

 

[tyron_woodley]

Indian bowlers are consistent. Starc can take 23 wickets in 3 tests in sri lanka and be thrashed on a green seamer in south Africa the next day. His inconsistency is very extreme.
How can a bowler be successful on flat wickets but struggle on swing and Seam friendly ones?

But yes, Australian pitches in the nostalgic Era of 90s and 2000s were roads.
Until l 2017(btw, the 2017 ashes is one of the most boring series I have watched. Flat roads with no contest between the teams).

it's funny watching Tom moody on ESPN cricinfo YouTube videos complaining how peak aus team would destroy current Indian bowling

Make no mistake if Ganguly's team had current bowling attack they would certainly be favorites.
Sick of seeing this reverse jinx rubbish. This Indian attack at full strength is top class.

 

[Joseph Gomes]

Smith is not better than Ponting, let alone 2 times over.

Twice is far too low, three times would be better. Smith dominated India in India and England in England, two of the top teams in current era. Ponting was average in England and a tailender in India.

 

[Romali_rotti]

There ya go. The great Australian here himself says he is a generational talent.

Lol at all the clowns here disrespecting this powerful Aussie side.

The same Australian side belted everyone else at home including a series draw in England which Aussies should have won.

Dude,

No one is bagging Cummins, the lad is great, however this Aus side wont be able to hold a candle against the Aussie side that won 16 test matches in a row...

 

[avihash]

It's because that pitch was a road

Yeah, it was a road till aus batted.

Became a mine field later on.

Same in 2nd test.

 

[avihash]

Dude,

No one is bagging Cummins, the lad is great, however this Aus side wont be able to hold a candle against the Aussie side that won 16 test matches in a row...

THAT Aussie side is not required at the moment, the current one is good enough to whoop every other side at home.

If not for India, you would still be singing peans for queen smith and his crew.

 

[tyron_woodley]

Dude,

No one is bagging Cummins, the lad is great, however this Aus side wont be able to hold a candle against the Aussie side that won 16 test matches in a row...

In Australian Condtions they would.

 

[tyron_woodley]

THAT Aussie side is not required at the moment, the current one is good enough to whoop every other side at home.

If not for India, you would still be singing peans for queen smith and his crew.

Correct. Modern era is the true GOAt era of bowling.

Every team almost has 2 superstar bowler's plus good support bowlers barring Pakistan.

 

[tyron_woodley]

Correct. Modern era is the true GOAt era of bowling.

Every team almost has 2 superstar bowler's plus good support bowlers barring Pakistan.

Pakistan also is very strong at home. So is banglesh. These 2 have regressed a bit. Lanka too but everyone else goat level bowling.

Pakistan is getting stronger again though

 

[Robert]

Correct. Modern era is the true GOAt era of bowling.

Every team almost has 2 superstar bowler's plus good support bowlers barring Pakistan.

England don't. WI don't. SL don't.

 

[tyron_woodley]

England don't. WI don't. SL don't.

England has Archer. He will be there ATG. Wood is a great support bowler. Broad and Andy are all time greats.

West Indies is a joke but even they have a good attack. Gabriel Roach etc. You might want to check Roach's numbers.

Their batting sucks. Bowling does.t

Sri Lanka have regressed but they never had any to begin with apart from maybe vaas.

 

[Romali_rotti]

If not for India, you would still be singing peans for queen smith and his crew.

Umm I am Indian... Indian cricket supporter... Too many young guys here don't really know much about the great Australian sides of the late 90s to mid 2000s...

 

[Robert]

England has Archer. He will be there ATG. Wood is a great support bowler. Broad and Andy are all time greats.

West Indies is a joke but even they have a good attack. Gabriel Roach etc. You might want to check Roach's numbers.

Their batting sucks. Bowling does.t

Sri Lanka have regressed but they never had any to begin with apart from maybe vaas.

I wouldn’t call Anderson and Broad ATG. Their overseas records are not good. Compare their records with Snow and Willis.

Archer has a very long way to go, and Wood is in his thirties.

I wouldn’t put any of these guys even in the best England XI I have seen, let alone all time.

 

[tyron_woodley]

I wouldn’t call Anderson and Broad ATG. Their overseas records are not good. Compare their records with Snow and Willis.

Archer has a very long way to go, and Wood is in his thirties.

I wouldn’t put any of these guys even in the best England XI I have seen, let alone all time.

Form is temporary class is permanent. I can tell how good a player is going to be based on his skillset. Archer has the qualities to be an ATG. Broad and Andy are legit GOATs in seaming conditions.

Reminds me of Shane bond. You knew Shane bond was an ATG talent when he burst onto the scene. Archer is similar. He may not be as good as bond but he is an elite top tier talent.

Point is most top teams have world class bowling attacks. There is quality everywhere. Good depth as well.

It's a really wonderful bowling GOAT era.

Snow and Willis man, that's a totally different era. Different ruleset and game altogether.

 

[Robert]

Form is temporary class is permanent. I can tell how good a player is going to be based on his skillset. Archer has the qualities to be an ATG. Broad and Andy are legit GOATs in seaming conditions.

Reminds me of Shane bond. You knew Shane bond was an ATG talent when he burst onto the scene. Archer is similar. He may not be as good as bond but he is an elite top tier talent.

Point is most top teams have world class bowling attacks. There is quality everywhere. Good depth as well.

It's a really wonderful bowling GOAT era.

Snow and Willis man, that's a totally different era. Different ruleset and game altogether.

The Laws are basically the same. Batting armour is better, though batters get hit more often because the armour gives them a false sense of security. Batting techniques are looser due to the influence of ODI cricket. Tailenders didn't get bounced due to the old "Fast Bowler's Union". Ground fielding standards are higher.

Based on who I have actually seen play for England with my own eyes:

Boycott
Gooch (c)
Gower
Pietersen
Thorpe
Botham
Knott (w)
Gough
Caddick
Willis
Underwood

If it's a spin wicket I'll take out Caddick and get Swann instead.

 

[Slog]

Great Strategy mate :
Lets put Ponting ahead of Smith(despite all facts being against it) so that you can indirectly put Sachin ahead of Smith.
The only flaw in this strategy is that anyone with a working brain can see right through it

If you are saying I am clamining this then you surely are living in some conspiracy land. Sachin isn’t remotely in my thoughts and I don’t know why so insecure

 

[Slog]

In Australian Condtions they would.

That australia conditions would go years without losing in several conditions. This one shells a lot of tests.

This current team doesn’t even have a real sample set so I don’t know where you claims are coming from

This is a talented side with a great bowling attack, an overall mediocre batting lineup with few exceptions. They will shell tests regularly

 

[Ab Fan]

That australia conditions would go years without losing in several conditions. This one shells a lot of tests.

This current team doesn’t even have a real sample set so I don’t know where you claims are coming from

This is a talented side with a great bowling attack, an overall mediocre batting lineup with few exceptions. They will shell tests regularly

They didn't shell any against Pak and NZ though, the latter is ranked no.1 team now mathematically.

The guy in my avatar also toured Australia last time but lost 0-4

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

Tests are more important. Kohli priorities all 3. Hence he can't focus specifically on tests alone. Kohli is better than tendu in odi's.

Tendu slightly ahead in tests. But Kohli Playa T20 as well. It affects his workload and hence his overall performance.

Had he been playing just tests and odi like tendu, he would be well ahead of tendu.

To me tests are more important but players prirotize all 3 formats so they need to be weighted accordingly.

Kohli if he sacrifices t20 like Smith then he would be on par with him in tests comfortably. That's how good he is. Tendu was no where near Smith.

So Sachin with almost 16000 runs in 200 tests is slightly ahead of Kohli with 7300 runs in 87 matches? And your rest of the post is just

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

So so proud of this team.Our win in 2018 was demeaned by posters here because of absence of Smith and Labusachne.But here we missed Kohli,Ishant,Shami,Bhuvi and even Umesh in 2nd innings.To win from there shows why India is truly top team.Can you imagine Aus winning in India without Smith,Cummins and Lyon?

Some posters are still salty here.Lovely

Smith and Warner not Smith and Labu lol. We have won 1 test in this series and it is not the first time we have won a test in Australia. We have done it before also. The point was to win this or at least retain this series with both Warner and Smith playing for Australia. Asterisk is still there. Winning 1 match may be equal to a series win for you but not others.

 

[Rajdeep]

Smith and Warner not Smith and Labu lol. We have won 1 test in this series and it is not the first time we have won a test in Australia. We have done it before also. The point was to win this or at least retain this series with both Warner and Smith playing for Australia. Asterisk is still there. Winning 1 match may be equal to a series win for you but not others.

Its not about just winning one test though. After getting humiliated for 36, without regular captain who also happens to be the best player in the side, without Shami who is also 2nd best bowler in the team, losing the toss, most umpire call went against us and against all these odds we still pull a victory and beat them in their own den. You need to be an extremely bitter person to still add an asterisk just because Warner was not playing. But then again, nothing surprise us about you anymore.

 

[Mesozoic]

Smith and Warner not Smith and Labu lol. We have won 1 test in this series and it is not the first time we have won a test in Australia. We have done it before also. The point was to win this or at least retain this series with both Warner and Smith playing for Australia. Asterisk is still there. Winning 1 match may be equal to a series win for you but not others.

Keep crying.

We won it without our best batsman and 2/3rds of our pace attack. What asterix are you talking about?

Imagine Australia playing without Smith, Cummins and Lyon winning a Test in India after losing the toss. You and your ilk would have been singing praises for them like no tomorrow. Just because it's India, all these "But but but no Warner (" type lame excuses come to the fore in order to cope with the pain .