India's overseas Test record since the infamous 0-8

[Shutdown Corner]

I was curious what their exact record was in England/Australia/South Africa/New Zealand, and looked it up. It stands at 5 wins, 16 losses, and 6 draws. But if you take out the 2-1 series win in Australia since Smith and Warner were banned it drops to an even more shocking 3 wins, 15 losses, and 5 draws.

A 1-5 W/L ratio is surely not what most would expect. So this indicates that the NZ tour wasn't an anomaly in terms of results.

But as the tours of South Africa and England showed, India competed in almost all of the games.

So the question is, does a 5-16 (or 3-15) record agree with India's status or fan expectations?

 

[Junaids]

I was curious what their exact record was in England/Australia/South Africa/New Zealand, and looked it up. It stands at 5 wins, 16 losses, and 6 draws. But if you take out the 2-1 series win in Australia since Smith and Warner were banned it drops to an even more shocking 3 wins, 15 losses, and 5 draws.

A 1-5 W/L ratio is surely not what most would expect. So this indicates that the NZ tour wasn't an anomaly in terms of results.

But as the tours of South Africa and England showed, India competed in almost all of the games.

So the question is, does a 5-16 (or 3-15) record agree with India's status or fan expectations?

And to compare with Pakistan’s GOAT Asian team against its four major opponents, away

In India W1 D4 L0
In England W3 D6 L1
In West Indies W1 D1 L1
In Australia W0 D2 L1

With 2 points for a win and 1 for a draw:
Pakistan P21 W5 D13 L3, 23 points
India P27 W5 D6 L16, 16 points

With 3 points for a win and 1 for a draw:
Pakistan P21 W5 D13 L3, 28 points
India P27 W5 D6 L16, 21 points.

Both scoring systems are roughly correct: Pakistan 1985-92 were basically more than 50% superior to the modern Indian team.

And India haven’t had to play anyone anywhere near as good as the West Indians!

 

[Ab Fan]

And to compare with Pakistan’s GOAT Asian team against its four major opponents, away

In India W1 D4 L0
In England W3 D6 L1
In West Indies W1 D1 L1
In Australia W0 D2 L1

With 2 points for a win and 1 for a draw:
Pakistan P21 W5 D13 L3, 23 points
India P27 W5 D6 L16, 16 points

With 3 points for a win and 1 for a draw:
Pakistan P21 W5 D13 L3, 28 points
India P27 W5 D6 L16, 21 points.

Both scoring systems are roughly correct: Pakistan 1985-92 were basically more than 50% superior to the modern Indian team.

And India haven’t had to play anyone anywhere near as good as the West Indians!

Wasn't Nz a bigger opponent than India in 80s? Compare away with NZ then.

 

[Junaids]

Wasn't Nz a bigger opponent than India in 80s? Compare away with NZ then.

OK

Pakistan P18 W4 D11 L3, 19 points
India P27 W5 D6 L16, 16 points.

The gap is even more massive. Pakistan are 3 points clear of India with a whopping 9 matches in hand!

This week’s events have really just highlighted how vastly superior the 1985-92 Pakistanis were compared with the modern Indians. The gulf in achievement is gigantic.

 

[Ab Fan]

OK

Pakistan P18 W4 D11 L3, 19 points
India P27 W5 D6 L16, 16 points.

The gap is even more massive. Pakistan are 3 points clear of India with a whopping 9 matches in hand!

This week’s events have really just highlighted how vastly superior the 1985-92 Pakistanis were compared with the modern Indians. The gulf in achievement is gigantic.

How about 3 points for a win as you stated earlier?

 

[Junaids]

I was curious what their exact record was in England/Australia/South Africa/New Zealand, and looked it up. It stands at 5 wins, 16 losses, and 6 draws. But if you take out the 2-1 series win in Australia since Smith and Warner were banned it drops to an even more shocking 3 wins, 15 losses, and 5 draws.

A 1-5 W/L ratio is surely not what most would expect. So this indicates that the NZ tour wasn't an anomaly in terms of results.

But as the tours of South Africa and England showed, India competed in almost all of the games.

So the question is, does a 5-16 (or 3-15) record agree with India's status or fan expectations?

Wasn't Nz a bigger opponent than India in 80s? Compare away with NZ then.

How about 3 points for a win as you stated earlier?

Pakistan P18 W4 D11 L3 23 points
India P27 W5 D6 L16 21 points.

However you slice it, the Pakistanis come out far ahead of Kohli’s India.

 

[Robert]

Dear oh dear, #1India does lose a lot of tests overseas.

 

[Ab Fan]

Pakistan P18 W4 D11 L3 23 points
India P27 W5 D6 L16 21 points.

However you slice it, the Pakistanis come out far ahead of Kohli’s India.

Away from home in alien conditions only.

At home against the same opponents, Kohli's India are miles ahead and also against Sri Lanka.

 

[Junaids]

Away from home in alien conditions only.

At home against the same opponents, Kohli's India are miles ahead and also against Sri Lanka.

That’s my point.

Imran’s Pakistan lost THREE away Tests out of 18 in SENA and against the GOAT West Indians.

Kohli’s rabble has lost SIXTEEN!

If I were an India supporter I’d be embarrassed.

 

[Walawalkar]

That’s my point.

Imran’s Pakistan lost THREE away Tests out of 18 in SENA and against the GOAT West Indians.

Kohli’s rabble has lost SIXTEEN!

If I were an India supporter I’d be embarrassed.

Why you comparing two test team by how many test they have lost and not by no of wins.. Jus because it suit your agenda

 

[Hawkeye]

That’s my point.

Imran’s Pakistan lost THREE away Tests out of 18 in SENA and against the GOAT West Indians.

Kohli’s rabble has lost SIXTEEN!

If I were an India supporter I’d be embarrassed.

Honestly there's no comparison at all.

It's shameful and shows extreme bias when someone dares to compare any IND team with the GOAT Asian Test team Imran Khan had.

Hope [MENTION=139595]Ab Fan[/MENTION] and [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] can stop their daily comparisons now.

 

[Buffet]

That’s my point.

Imran’s Pakistan lost THREE away Tests ..

How many Imran's Pakistan won?

 

[Mamoon]

Honestly there's no comparison at all.

It's shameful and shows extreme bias when someone dares to compare any IND team with the GOAT Asian Test team Imran Khan had.

Hope [MENTION=139595]Ab Fan[/MENTION] and [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] can stop their daily comparisons now.

Of course there is no comparison. Imran’s GOAT team only won 3 matches outside Asia, and less overall matches than Misbah’s Pakistan (grand total of 14).

It is ridiculous to compare them to a team that has 33 out of 55 Tests and have been number 1 for 4 years.

 

[Mamoon]

How many Imran's Pakistan won?

Please don’t ask tough questions.

Winning matches at home or winning matches away from home do not matter. The only thing that matters is not losing matches away from home.

As long as you do not lose away from home, you can be the GOAT team with 14 Test wins and only 3 outside Asia.

 

[Monsee]

Why you comparing two test team by how many test they have lost and not by no of wins.. Jus because it suit your agenda

Really, you had to go there despite seeing India having won only 1 more with Pakistan having played 9 less matches as well? Which ever way you look at it, Pakistan comes on top considering their record against the All Time GOAT WIs team.

Way to analyze the posts!

 

[Monsee]

Such a shameful troll arguing losing bundles of matches is not awful, winning less (in an era of nothing but draws) is the area to point out as a weakness!

 

[Buffet]

Please don’t ask tough questions.

Winning matches at home or winning matches away from home do not matter. The only thing that matters is not losing matches away from home.

As long as you do not lose away from home, you can be the GOAT team with 14 Test wins and only 3 outside Asia.

Logic is flawed one to take loss and ignore wins. If we start looking this way then IK's team was better than Ponting's team because IK's team lost 3 tests in SENA, but Ponting's team lost 5 teats in SC.

I have not watched entire career of IK's team, but if peak rating of team was 110 points then it's hardly a great team when talking about across era's. It's simply an above average team. Peak is not everything, but even if you consistentny maintain 110 points you will struggle to get ranked 1 in most era's forget about coming among the top acrcoss eras.

I don't think Kohli's team is gun team either. It's a very good team, that's about it.

 

[Mamoon]

Logic is flawed one to take loss and ignore wins. If we start looking this way then IK's team was better than Ponting's team because IK's team lost 3 tests in SENA, but Ponting's team lost 5 teats in SC.

I have not watched entire career of IK's team, but if peak rating of team was 110 points then it's hardly a great team when talking about across era's. It's simply an above average team. Peak is not everything, but even if you consistentny maintain 110 points you will struggle to get ranked 1 in most era's forget about coming among the top acrcoss eras.

I don't think Kohli's team is gun team either. It's a very good team, that's about it.

People can come up with all the excuses, justifications and gymnastics, but the bottom-line is that Imran’s Pakistan were not particularly good at winning matches.

Kohli’s India is a clearly superior winning machine. Winning matches in an era of results is easier, but then losing matches is also easier.

The rate at which India loses Tests is actually quite comparable to the rate at which Imran’s Pakistan lost Tests.

Imran defenders will only talk about outside Asia matches because they have nothing else to show for, since it is practically impossible to prove a team as the GOAT with only 14 Test wins in total, and a loss in Sri Lanka - the worst team of the 1980s by a massive distance.

 

[Monsee]

Pakistan P18 W4 D11 L3
India P27 W5 D6 L16

In which universe are we even debating that Pak having won 4 in 18 matches is less of an achievement and somehow India by winning 1 more tests (having played 9 more than Pak)...are infintely better?

This despite having lost 16 matches, that is frickin shameful for a good/great team in only 27 games!

 

[Heisenberg111]

I just looked at team's records from 1986-1994. Pakistan won 2 series in England, 2 in New Zealand and 1 series in India in that period. Also drew a series in the West Indies. Pakistan's W/L ratio is great too (2.44) slightly behind West Indies's W/L ratio of 2.69.

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...1986;spanval1=span;template=results;type=team

 

[Heisenberg111]

People can come up with all the excuses, justifications and gymnastics, but the bottom-line is that Imran’s Pakistan were not particularly good at winning matches.

Kohli’s India is a clearly superior winning machine. Winning matches in an era of results is easier, but then losing matches is also easier.

The rate at which India loses Tests is actually quite comparable to the rate at which Imran’s Pakistan lost Tests.

Imran defenders will only talk about outside Asia matches because they have nothing else to show for, since it is practically impossible to prove a team as the GOAT with only 14 Test wins in total, and a loss in Sri Lanka - the worst team of the 1980s by a massive distance.

Imran may have won 14 matches but Miandad also has the same number of wins in the same period. Of course he only captained Pakistan, when Imran wasn't available.

 

[Monsee]

I just looked at team's records from 1986-1994. Pakistan won 2 series in England, 2 in New Zealand and 1 series in India in that period. Also drew a series in the West Indies. Pakistan's W/L ratio is great too (2.44) slightly behind West Indies's W/L ratio of 2.69.

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...1986;spanval1=span;template=results;type=team

But But But all those draws, and that awfully low Team Peak Rating, that gives us all that we need to look at; who cares if their performance was quite close to the GOAT WIs team?

Now if the shoe was on the other foot, we do know how stats are not everything, those ratings are just that when India is the team, right?

 

[Buffet]

People can come up with all the excuses, justifications and gymnastics, but the bottom-line is that Imran’s Pakistan were not particularly good at winning matches.

Kohli’s India is a clearly superior winning machine. Winning matches in an era of results is easier, but then losing matches is also easier.

You had more draws in earlier era , so not winning lots of tests was acceptable. But it allowed teams to not lose lots of test as well as if they were not poor teams. One set of posters are focusing only on not losing and you are focusing only on winning. I don't think it tells a lot about teams when your timeframe is decades apart.

 

[szrana]

I just looked at team's records from 1986-1994. Pakistan won 2 series in England, 2 in New Zealand and 1 series in India in that period. Also drew a series in the West Indies. Pakistan's W/L ratio is great too (2.44) slightly behind West Indies's W/L ratio of 2.69.

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...1986;spanval1=span;template=results;type=team

Good post. Pak team of the late 80's and early 90's was a great one, which went toe to toe with the West Indies.

 

[Monsee]

And to bust a certain troll's claims of Pak losing to the worst team of 1980's by a massive margin, here is the team, you decide:

Wettimuny, Mahanama, Gurusinha, de Silva, Ranatunga, Mendis, Ratnayeke, De Mel...those are so well known, I didn't even have to put their full names there for anyone who is from that era or followed them. Only 3 names in that team that are not well respected and well known members. Wonder where that worst team of 1980's by a massive margin came from?

 

[Buffet]

And to bust a certain troll's claims of Pak losing to the worst team of 1980's by a massive margin, here is the team, you decide:

Wettimuny, Mahanama, Gurusinha, de Silva, Ranatunga, Mendis, Ratnayeke, De Mel...those are so well known, I didn't even have to put their full names there for anyone who is from that era or followed them. Only 3 names in that team that are not well respected and well known members. Wonder where that worst team of 1980's by a massive margin came from?

What are you going to call a team having W/L of 0.1 in entire decade? Especially when 2nd worst result was manifold better.



I personally don't think that one test can make or break any team's record. Yes, it's harder to lose a test compared to shorter format for a better team, but it can happen.

I am not going to read much into Pakistan losing to SL.

 

[Titan24]

How many Imran's Pakistan won?

Wouldnt you have taken drawn series by India against Eng, SA and NZ in recent times?

Being as good as other team in their home is much superior rather than being no 1 team only to manifest that despite the ranking team wasnt good enough to compete with other top teams at home.

I would any day take the status of being as good as Aus, Eng, SA and now a days NZ as well in their home conditions.

 

[szrana]

And to bust a certain troll's claims of Pak losing to the worst team of 1980's by a massive margin, here is the team, you decide:

Wettimuny, Mahanama, Gurusinha, de Silva, Ranatunga, Mendis, Ratnayeke, De Mel...those are so well known, I didn't even have to put their full names there for anyone who is from that era or followed them. Only 3 names in that team that are not well respected and well known members. Wonder where that worst team of 1980's by a massive margin came from?

India also lost a series to the same Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka were such a poor side that they also drew tests in Australia.

 

[Buffet]

Wouldnt you have taken drawn series by India against Eng, SA and NZ in recent times?

I will take 2-2 massively over 0-0. All drawn series are not same for me. If you are asking if drawing series would be preferable for a team in all away venues, then again I will take 2 series wins and 2 series losses as comapred to drawing all series as long as all away teams are good teams. What I am trying to say is that W/L is also not a perfect measure for me. 25 win and 25 losses is massively better in away conditions than 2 wins and 2 losses with others being draw. None of these conditions applies to Kohli's team because they have lost more than they have won.



Many posters are simply making it black and white. There are many layers of grey when it comes to preference and doing it across era is very hard.

 

[Mamoon]

[/B]

Imran may have won 14 matches but Miandad also has the same number of wins in the same period. Of course he only captained Pakistan, when Imran wasn't available.

Which only proves how overrated Imran was as a captain. Miandad won the same number of Tests in less number of matches, but Imran and his cult-followers will have you believe that the mighty Khan was sent from the heavens.

 

[RedwoodOriginal]

It's obvious this Indian team is nowhere near GOAT level. If they were they would have won in England and New Zealand. But their performances in both those countries showed they couldn't even compete. Even in South Africa they did not win the series. And while winning in Australia is indeed a great achievement that nobody can take away from them we all know the score-line could have been vastly if Smith and Warner were playing.

 

[subbu]

You had more draws in earlier era , so not winning lots of tests was acceptable. But it allowed teams to not lose lots of test as well as if they were not poor teams. One set of posters are focusing only on not losing and you are focusing only on winning. I don't think it tells a lot about teams when your timeframe is decades apart.

True 80s ... Mainly draw oriented era

Look at the stats of ordinary Indian team in 80s

In Aus, WI, Eng, NZl conditions

Played 24 won 3 lost 8 Draw 13

 

[subbu]

Look at the record of Indian team in SENA 80s


Indian team between 2006 to 2011 has best record

Series win in England, New Zealand

Drawn series in South Africa 1-1

2-1 loss in Australia

No1. Ranking till 2011 England series

2

 

[Heisenberg111]

Look at the record of Indian team in SENA 80s
View attachment 99688

Indian team between 2006 to 2011 has best record

Series win in England, New Zealand

Drawn series in South Africa 1-1

2-1 loss in Australia

No1. Ranking till 2011 England series

2

Pakistan from 86-94 were even better.

2 series wins in England ( 1987 and 1992)
2 series wins in New Zealand ( 1992 and 1993-94)
1 series win in India (1987)
1-1 drawn series in the West Indies (1988)

Add to that, they were unbeaten at home during this period too.

 

[globalcitizen]

Pakistan from 86-94 were even better.

2 series wins in England ( 1987 and 1992)
2 series wins in New Zealand ( 1992 and 1993-94)
1 series win in India (1987)
1-1 drawn series in the West Indies (1988)

Add to that, they were unbeaten at home during this period too.

Ok credit goes to javed miandad and salim Malik for winning away tours in England and New Zealand , because they were captains. So overall Pakistan team was good then

 

[Heisenberg111]

Ok credit goes to javed miandad and salim Malik for winning away tours in England and New Zealand , because they were captains. So overall Pakistan team was good then

Yes, India from 2006-11 was a good side too, but they had 4 captains during that period. Ganguly, Dravid, Kumble and Dhoni. Pakistan from 86-94 had, Imran, Miandad and Salim Malik as captains.

 

[ManFan]

The ONLY notable achievement of India under Kohli has been the series win against Australia. That’s it.

They have been dominant at home but so have others.

Not comparable to Imran’s team unless they step up their game overseas.

What’s frustrating is that they had the opportunity to win in ENG, SA, and NZ if they respected the conditions enough to prepare and Kohli wasn’t an aloof dictator.

 

[Junaids]

How many Imran's Pakistan won?

Good post. Pak team of the late 80's and early 90's was a great one, which went toe to toe with the West Indies.

Which only proves how overrated Imran was as a captain. Miandad won the same number of Tests in less number of matches, but Imran and his cult-followers will have you believe that the mighty Khan was sent from the heavens.

[MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION]

You miss the point completely. Imran Khan’s Pakistan played 9 Tests across 3 series against the GOAT West Indies team and drew all three series 1-1.

That is why that Pakistan team has a legacy as the GOAT Asian team a quarter of a century later while we are laughing at the clownish current Indian team.

I maintain, a 1-0 victory in an away series in England with 4 draws is an immense achievement.

You keep deriding the small number of victories but let’s just compare two apples.

1987: England 0 Pakistan 1 Drawn 4
2018: England 4 India 1 Drawn 0

To me the difference is absolutely immense.

You endlessly deride Imran Khan for losing a Test in Sri Lanka. But Imran Khan learned his lesson and redesigned his team to be almost impossible to beat.

Whereas Kohli has just lost a series in New Zealand in which his team managed to reach the second new ball once in four innings. An almost identical problem to Imran’s in Sri Lanka.

Imran learned his lesson and shortened his tail until he faced the West Indies with Wasim Akram at Number 10 and Abdul Qadir at 11. Which is how they saved the Second Test at Port of Spain with 9 wickets down.

Virat Kohli just doubles down on his mistakes, and repeats them again and loses again. He blames a “lack of positive intent” by his batsmen when the problem was clearly the exact opposite.

 

[sweep_shot]

India are a dominant force when it comes to LOI. They can win anywhere in LOI.

However, Test is different. They can win at home but they generally struggle in SENA countries.

 

[Monsee]

India also lost a series to the same Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka were such a poor side that they also drew tests in Australia.

There won't be a reply from that troll on this although he will continue with the same foolish claim of his, just like the other one his: how Imran started the WC loosing streak by getting himself run out in 92 WC match against India!

Dhatayi aur beghairti ki koi had to hoti hai lol

 

[Pakpak]

There won't be a reply from that troll on this although he will continue with the same foolish claim of his, just like the other one his: how Imran started the WC loosing streak by getting himself run out in 92 WC match against India!

Dhatayi aur beghairti ki koi had to hoti hai lol

Surely he didn't say that? What a moronic thing to say. He has a severe attention seeking syndrome.

 

[Monsee]

Surely he didn't say that? What a moronic thing to say. He has a severe attention seeking syndrome.

Just like the 'Imran's Pak team lost to the worst team of the 80's by some distance'...he has repeated numerous times his totally clownish claim that Imran (in his upside mind) started the losing streak because he could not win the 92 WC match against India and somehow ran himself out!

There has got to be dozen's of posters who have argued with him on that, just like this Lanka one until someone pulled the record of that Lankan team: won series against Pak and India, drawn series against Australia and maybe NZ (?) I already included that squad in this thread, there were literally 8 of some of their most famous players in that team lol

 

[Mamoon]

Just like the 'Imran's Pak team lost to the worst team of the 80's by some distance'...he has repeated numerous times his totally clownish claim that Imran (in his upside mind) started the losing streak because he could not win the 92 WC match against India and somehow ran himself out!

There has got to be dozen's of posters who have argued with him on that, just like this Lanka one until someone pulled the record of that Lankan team: won series against Pak and India, drawn series against Australia and maybe NZ (?) I already included that squad in this thread, there were literally 8 of some of their most famous players in that team lol

So can you explain why the wonderful Sri Lankan team of the 80s with “8 of some of their most famous players” only won 2 Tests in the entire decade, and had by far the worst W/L ratio among all sides?

Surely, there must be a reason why they were incapable of winning matches outside beating a very weak Indian team and the so-called GOAT Asian tigers led by the Mighty Khan?

Surely, there must be a reason why that Sri Lankan team was so unsuccessful when it came to winning matches?

India and Australia were the weakest sides of the decade excluding Sri Lanka, and they had a W/L ratio of 0.6

Which means that even the other weak sides of the decade were still far ahead of Sri Lanka.

The lengths people will go to to prove that Sri Lanka were not the weakest side of the decade is hysterical.

If Imran had somehow managed to beat them, then they would have been a minnow side who managed to beat India. But since Imran also lost to them, the narrative now is that they were a strong side, even though they only won 2 Tests in the entire decade.

It is certainly a mystery why a strong team with 8 of its most famous players won 2 Tests out of 27 matches played, and had a W/L ratio of 0.1

I think this is a mystery case for Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson...

 

[Mamoon]

And apparently, stating a “fact” that Imran started the World Cup losing streak to India by losing to a pathetic side in 1992 is called trolling.

 

[Mamoon]

[MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION]

You miss the point completely. Imran Khan’s Pakistan played 9 Tests across 3 series against the GOAT West Indies team and drew all three series 1-1.

That is why that Pakistan team has a legacy as the GOAT Asian team a quarter of a century later while we are laughing at the clownish current Indian team.

I maintain, a 1-0 victory in an away series in England with 4 draws is an immense achievement.

You keep deriding the small number of victories but let’s just compare two apples.

1987: England 0 Pakistan 1 Drawn 4
2018: England 4 India 1 Drawn 0

To me the difference is absolutely immense.

You endlessly deride Imran Khan for losing a Test in Sri Lanka. But Imran Khan learned his lesson and redesigned his team to be almost impossible to beat.

Whereas Kohli has just lost a series in New Zealand in which his team managed to reach the second new ball once in four innings. An almost identical problem to Imran’s in Sri Lanka.

Imran learned his lesson and shortened his tail until he faced the West Indies with Wasim Akram at Number 10 and Abdul Qadir at 11. Which is how they saved the Second Test at Port of Spain with 9 wickets down.

Virat Kohli just doubles down on his mistakes, and repeats them again and loses again. He blames a “lack of positive intent” by his batsmen when the problem was clearly the exact opposite.

I couldn’t care less about my captain losing 4-1 in England or 2-0 in New Zealand if he can win 33 matches in 55 and takes my team to the top of the Test rankings for 4 years and counting.

Similarly, I find no glory in drawing matches away from home when my captain is just not very good at winning matches altogether, and his fans call his team the GOAT Asian team after ending up with 14 wins in 48 matches.

I would much prefer Pakistan to have a captain like Kohli and a team like India who are ruthless in winning matches, devour every side that comes to Pakistan, get to the top of the rankings and compete no worse than other sides away from home.

Imran’s Pakistan was not a winning machine. It was a “difficult to beat outside Asia” machine, and that is something I do not prefer.

 

[Junaids]

I couldn’t care less about my captain losing 4-1 in England or 2-0 in New Zealand if he can win 33 matches in 55 and takes my team to the top of the Test rankings for 4 years and counting.

Similarly, I find no glory in drawing matches away from home when my captain is just not very good at winning matches altogether, and his fans call his team the GOAT Asian team after ending up with 14 wins in 48 matches.

I would much prefer Pakistan to have a captain like Kohli and a team like India who are ruthless in winning matches, devour every side that comes to Pakistan, get to the top of the rankings and compete no worse than other sides away from home.

Imran’s Pakistan was not a winning machine. It was a “difficult to beat outside Asia” machine, and that is something I do not prefer.

Who won the 2010 football World Cup?

Spain.

And their results in 90 minutes (ie without extra time) were:

0-1 v Switzerland
2-0 v Honduras
2-1 v Chile
1-0 v Portugal
1-0 v Paraguay
1-0 v Germany
0-0 v Netherlands

In seven games they only scored 7 goals. They were the footballing equivalent of Imran Khan’s 1985-92 team: impossible to beat, but not designed to win easy games and lose hard ones.

It’s obvious from some of your comments that you have a visceral dislike of Imran Khan and that you desire at all costs to deny his sporting achievements.

Like many great skippers - Jardine and Maradona spring to mind - he wasn’t a likeable person, but he was superb at what he did.

You endlessly cite the defeat (and drawn series) in Sri Lanka at the start of his second reign. But you seem determined to ignore that that is what made him design a team that even the GOAT Test team could not beat.

 

[Mamoon]

Who won the 2010 football World Cup?

Spain.

And their results in 90 minutes (ie without extra time) were:

0-1 v Switzerland
2-0 v Honduras
2-1 v Chile
1-0 v Portugal
1-0 v Paraguay
1-0 v Germany
0-0 v Netherlands

In seven games they only scored 7 goals. They were the footballing equivalent of Imran Khan’s 1985-92 team: impossible to beat, but not designed to win easy games and lose hard ones.

It’s obvious from some of your comments that you have a visceral dislike of Imran Khan and that you desire at all costs to deny his sporting achievements.

Like many great skippers - Jardine and Maradona spring to mind - he wasn’t a likeable person, but he was superb at what he did.

You endlessly cite the defeat (and drawn series) in Sri Lanka at the start of his second reign. But you seem determined to ignore that that is what made him design a team that even the GOAT Test team could not beat.

False analogy. We are not talking about a World Cup here or a knockout competition.

Besides, we are not talking about goals/runs/wickets here. We are talking about wins.

You are disproving your own point by repeatedly mentioning Spain who won all but 1 match within 90 mins.

Imran Khan’s so-called GOAT Asian side won the “second best Test team in an era where the superior South Africa was banned and Australia and India were in doldrums” Cup.

Kohli’s India is the dominant side of its era. It is embarrassingly superior at home and no less competitive than other sides away from home.

Kohli’s India would smash Imran’s Pakistan, considering Imran’s GOAT Team couldn’t beat a vastly inferior Indian team in 1989 at home.

The 1989 Indian team that managed to not lose to Imran’s GOAT Asian team in Pakistan would get ripped apart by Kohli’s India on Asian pitches.

 

[Titan24]

The 33 wins of Virat being talked about, 15 of them came vs WI, BD and Srl.

 

[Junaids]

False analogy. We are not talking about a World Cup here or a knockout competition.

Besides, we are not talking about goals/runs/wickets here. We are talking about wins.

You are disproving your own point by repeatedly mentioning Spain who won all but 1 match within 90 mins.

Imran Khan’s so-called GOAT Asian side won the “second best Test team in an era where the superior South Africa was banned and Australia and India were in doldrums” Cup.

Kohli’s India is the dominant side of its era. It is embarrassingly superior at home and no less competitive than other sides away from home.

Kohli’s India would smash Imran’s Pakistan, considering Imran’s GOAT Team couldn’t beat a vastly inferior Indian team in 1989 at home.

The 1989 Indian team that managed to not lose to Imran’s GOAT Asian team in Pakistan would get ripped apart by Kohli’s India on Asian pitches.

You know as well as I do that 1989-90 was a mini Transition Period for Pakistan.

Imran Khan was 37 and finished as a bowler, while Waqar Younis was a raw debutant.

Similarly, Abdul Qadir was also finished but Mushtaq Ahmed was raw and didn’t find his feet until the last day of the Adelaide Test.

Meanwhile Saleem Yousuf had passed his use-by date but Moin Khan still was an Under-19.

Imran had to make the transition then because he had the West Indies touring twelve months later. So in effect the India series and the tour of Australia become part of a Brought Forward Transition Period, because Imran couldn’t afford to host the West Indies with novices. It’s why they lost 1-0 in Australia, whereas any other time between 1985 and 1993 they would have comfortably won there.

 

[IMMY69]

The 33 wins of Virat being talked about, 15 of them came vs WI, BD and Srl.

How many against Pakistan?

 

[Titan24]

[SUB][/SUB]

How many against Pakistan?

None.

 

[Titan24]

Juat to add to my post 48. Imran’s oppositions and era was pretty tough as there wasnt as clear a lower tier divide as we see today.

So even we we exclude Srl which was definitely more competitive side than some current lower tiers, still Imran captained Pak is 42 matches against sides like WI, Aus, Eng, Ind and NZ. Which I think is a much tougher feat than playing and winning close to half of your matches against current lower tier teams.

 

[TeamPak95]

This comparison kinda reminds me of LeBron James vs Michael Jordan. LeBron is considered the GOAT because of longevity of maintaining high levels of performance for years (and is still going) + 9 finals trips. Jordan is considered the GOAT because of his clutch gene in late-game situations + being 6 for 6 in the finals.

Imran's team is considered GOAT because of playing more competitive teams (hence drawn games back then were held in higher regard than today) and not losing much to them. Kohli's team is considered GOAT simply because of winning more games, regardless of how good/bad their opponents are.

It's all about perspective here, folks.

 

[Rudi hater]

Pakistan of 80s is way better than current Indian side. People who think India is the greatest side live in a dream world. I said it before and say it again there is no comparison. Afterall, you won't see 80s side failing against an average side like NZ.

 

[Mamoon]

You know as well as I do that 1989-90 was a mini Transition Period for Pakistan.

Imran Khan was 37 and finished as a bowler, while Waqar Younis was a raw debutant.

Similarly, Abdul Qadir was also finished but Mushtaq Ahmed was raw and didn’t find his feet until the last day of the Adelaide Test.

Meanwhile Saleem Yousuf had passed his use-by date but Moin Khan still was an Under-19.

Imran had to make the transition then because he had the West Indies touring twelve months later. So in effect the India series and the tour of Australia become part of a Brought Forward Transition Period, because Imran couldn’t afford to host the West Indies with novices. It’s why they lost 1-0 in Australia, whereas any other time between 1985 and 1993 they would have comfortably won there.

Oh I agree. The 1989 Indian tour took place in a brought forward transition period, and 1986 Sri Lankan series took place in the brought back transition period.

Similarly, this NZ defeat has come in a brought forward transition period for Kohli. He does not want to tour Australia, England and South Africa in 2021-22 with a novice team, so he has bloodied in young players like Shaw, Pant and Gill in the squad as well as an inexperienced opener in Agarwal and middle-order batsman in Vihari.

Moreover, India was without its only quality seam bowling all-rounder in Pandya.

Hence, just like the fake GOAT Asian captain’s failures against Sri Lanka, Australia and India (1989) do not count because of the brought forward and brought back and brought whatever transition periods, the real GOAT Asian captain, with 33 Test wins in 55 matches, should not be held accountable for not winning in NZ because of the brought forward transition period, designed to ensure that India do not go to Australia, England and South Africa in the next couple of years with too many old batsmen.

 

[Monsee]

And apparently, stating a “fact” that Imran started the World Cup losing streak to India by losing to a pathetic side in 1992 is called trolling.

The way you moan (like a girl) on and on, must have stated this a 100 times...it is more like trolling than anything else!

Aagain folks, capture the losing to a pathetic side argument if you must: see the pathetic players in that team: https://www.espncricinfo.com/series...-16th-match-benson-&-hedges-world-cup-1991-92

As for that Lankan team being very weak and all, have you not seen tail enders like Jason Gillipspe, Saqalain etc. scoring 100's/200's, same goes with a solitary match here and there; any team can win on a given day re: Kenya winnings against India twice and India winning against WI in 1983 WC final

Before I get oh this and that achieved by that Indian team, take a look at the scorecard of the series between the two right after the WC: https://www.espncricinfo.com/scores/series/16932/west-indies-in-india-odi-series

 

[Monsee]

You know as well as I do that 1989-90 was a mini Transition Period for Pakistan.

Imran Khan was 37 and finished as a bowler, while Waqar Younis was a raw debutant.

Similarly, Abdul Qadir was also finished but Mushtaq Ahmed was raw and didn’t find his feet until the last day of the Adelaide Test.

Meanwhile Saleem Yousuf had passed his use-by date but Moin Khan still was an Under-19.

Imran had to make the transition then because he had the West Indies touring twelve months later. So in effect the India series and the tour of Australia become part of a Brought Forward Transition Period, because Imran couldn’t afford to host the West Indies with novices. It’s why they lost 1-0 in Australia, whereas any other time between 1985 and 1993 they would have comfortably won there.

That series was decided (as a draw) due the sheer number of dropped catches more than anything: Pakistan must have given Manjrekar 1-2 lives in every single innings he played...the other deciding factor was the weather!

 

[Monsee]

The 33 wins of Virat being talked about, 15 of them came vs WI, BD and Srl.

shhhh, don't bring that in, since none of them is obviously as bad as the two teams that he has been arguing about: Lankan team of 1980's that Pakistan lost against and India team of 1992 WC lol

Each of those teams had 7-9 of their most famous/well known players yet they become pathetic to support someone's ameteur level arguments due to person hate and agendas

 

[Junaids]

I don’t know why do many Pakistani and Indian fans fail to realise that to lose Test series is shameful and destroys your legacy. And the more heavily you lose, the more shameful it is.

Forty months ago, Pakistan was 1-0 down in New Zealand.

At Tea on Day 5 they were 158-1 after 67 overs, chasing a preposterous target of 369. Azhar Ali had scored 58 in 60 overs!

To finish at 230-3 after 97 overs would have been relatively respectable: a 1-0 defeat.

Instead they played like a Kohli team and lost all 9 wickets in the next 25 overs to lose 2-0. Chasing an impossible victory caused a humiliating whitewash.

That’s the kind of nonsense that Kohli teams do. And it needs to stop.