What's new

What would a series loss in New Zealand mean for India's Test team?

Shoaib88

Tape Ball Star
Joined
Feb 3, 2019
Runs
863
As we all know, India has been a number 1 ranked test side for a while now- and look to stay that way for some time. The way Indian team has dominated some sides in recent times has drawn the comparison between them and Aussies of 2000's and Windies of 1980's.

However, many have doubted such comparisons by pointing out Indian dominance has either been at home or against weak oppositions in away matches. The evidence, and the real test for Indian team, is their performance in SENA countries. India has lost the series in South Africa and got demolished in England. India did manage to create history by winning the series in Australia but that was Australia without their stalwarts David Warner and Smith- Yes win is a win but we all know how much impact these two guys have in australian team.

So the real question I would like to come to is, would the performances by Indian test team be really be comparable to those of Aussies in 2000's and Windies in 1980s if India loses the series in New Zealand and Australia by 2020 end and therefore in all SENA countries with the "current dominating Indian test squad".
 
As we all know, India has been a number 1 ranked test side for a while now- and look to stay that way for some time. The way Indian team has dominated some sides in recent times has drawn the comparison between them and Aussies of 2000's and Windies of 1980's.

However, many have doubted such comparisons by pointing out Indian dominance has either been at home or against weak oppositions in away matches. The evidence, and the real test for Indian team, is their performance in SENA countries. India has lost the series in South Africa and got demolished in England. India did manage to create history by winning the series in Australia but that was Australia without their stalwarts David Warner and Smith- Yes win is a win but we all know how much impact these two guys have in australian team.

So the real question I would like to come to is, would the performances by Indian test team be really be comparable to those of Aussies in 2000's and Windies in 1980s if India loses the series in New Zealand and Australia by 2020 end and therefore in all SENA countries with the "current dominating Indian test squad".

Let me flip the question the other way around for you & others- IF India beat/draw NZ in NZ, will this Indian team become equivalent to the all time greatest teams or will the forum collectively pull down that performance saying XYZ wasn't playing or wasn't in top form or even saying that NZ team is aging together? :)

Personally I think the teams are evenly matched with India having a slight edge on current form. Will be an interesting contest.
 
Let me flip the question the other way around for you & others- IF India beat/draw NZ in NZ, will this Indian team become equivalent to the all time greatest teams or will the forum collectively pull down that performance saying XYZ wasn't playing or wasn't in top form or even saying that NZ team is aging together? :)

Personally I think the teams are evenly matched with India having a slight edge on current form. Will be an interesting contest.

Ok, I think I should have made this clear. If India wins test series in all SENA nations then yes, definitely, India's dominance would be considered on the same level as that of Aussies in 2000's and Windies in 1980's.
 
Ok, I think I should have made this clear. If India wins test series in all SENA nations then yes, definitely, India's dominance would be considered on the same level as that of Aussies in 2000's and Windies in 1980's.

If that's the case, the Aussie team of 2000s never beat Pakistan in Pakistan (as they last toured in the late 90s) - so should we say they were never the best?
 
If that's the case, the Aussie team of 2000s never beat Pakistan in Pakistan (as they last toured in the late 90s) - so should we say they were never the best?

Not touring is another case, Australia didn't lose in Pakistan like India have lost in England and South Africa and will probably also lose in New Zealand
 
I wouldn't rate them at par with Australia or WI team of the past. But if we win in NZ we will close the gap further, next set of away tours are important to be at par or even better than Australia and WI we need to win the next series in SENA.
 
I don't think that anybody is under the delusion that this Indian team ranks under the best ever - best among the current lot, yes but not the best ever. Personally think their current lineup doesn't even match their Sehwag - Tendulkar - Dravid- Laxman lineup of the 2000s.

But that doesn't mean one should undercut their performance - they gave a tough fight to both England & SA & won in Australia (they can play only who is in front of them, it wasn't their fault Smith/Warner weren't playing). Plus they might have a slight edge over NZ too, considering Williamson/ Taylor's form.
 
It'd obviously prove once and forever that their win against the mighty bangladesh was a fluke.
 
I think India will win the series 1-0 or 2-0.

Aus and India are clearly the top two teams in the world. India's batting and bowling is far better than ours.
 
INDIA lost in SA and ENG because no other batsman other than KOHLI performed. The moment they did, India won in AUS. To win NZ tour other batters have to step it up a notch.
 
INDIA lost in SA and ENG because no other batsman other than KOHLI performed. The moment they did, India won in AUS. To win NZ tour other batters have to step it up a notch.

Good point, India shouldn't be compared to GOAT teams if they rely on just one batsman.
 
It would mark the downfall of the team

cuz in no way should india lose against new zealand.
new zealand would do well to even draw a game against india.

taylor and latham are the only proper batsman in form for nz,
unless lockie gets fit and blasts away india in tandem with wagner, there is no chance for new zealand
 
INDIA lost in SA and ENG because no other batsman other than KOHLI performed. The moment they did, India won in AUS. To win NZ tour other batters have to step it up a notch.

they lost becaue of vijay and rahul,

the moment agrawal, a proper opener came, india won.

india should not persist with rohit sharma, who is a flat track bully, shreyad iyer should be given a chance
 
I think India will win the series 1-0 or 2-0.

Aus and India are clearly the top two teams in the world. India's batting and bowling is far better than ours.

Indian batting is extremely susceptible to left hand fast bowlers who can bring ball in. Series will depend on Boult. If our batting can tackle him we should win
 
Good point, India shouldn't be compared to GOAT teams if they rely on just one batsman.

It's bit of a weird situation though. india absolutely demolishes and annihilates every team at home. Could easily be the greatest home bully of all time. But yes they do need an away series win in n.z and especially englsnd to cement their legacy as a GOAT team. Australia of 2000 and W.I od 80s are ahead. Graeme Smith's team is on par now with the current indian side. India need to win a series of atleast draw vs England and n.z to separate themselves from Graeme Smith's saffers.
 
Honestly. Don't care if we are comparable with those sides. Even if we win i won't compare them because Australian team holds the record for consecutive wins. Not once but twice. Both times their 16 test win streak was ended by India with a win.
 
It won’t mean anything if India lose. They are still a top team, losing series can happen. That won’t undo all the things they have achieved in tests under Kohli up until now. I see India winning anyway so this won’t be a debate.
 
If India loose not deserve to call no-1 test team anymore

Problem is all other teams are bad, so being called #1 is not a big thing even after the loss.. issue is comparisons are always been Wind of 80s and Aus of 2000s and we are not comparable to them.
 
How? We defeated Sl 3-0 in Sl, we don't lose a test in Windies too unlike some other teams..

So how is it HTB?

Sri Lanka aren't even that good and the pitch conditions in Sri Lanka are not even that different to India so it's not much of a challenge.

West Indies are not that good either. We beat them 2 years ago too.

You lost in South Africa 2-1, 4-1 in England, and won 2-1 against a depleted Aussie side. So if you lose against NZ then it will mean you're a HTB.
 
It’ll prove again that test cricket is a ridiculous form of cricket and that teams can only win at home plus it will shut one big mouth that thinks kohli is the best test captain of this decade.
 
Sri Lanka aren't even that good and the pitch conditions in Sri Lanka are not even that different to India so it's not much of a challenge.

West Indies are not that good either. We beat them 2 years ago too.

You lost in South Africa 2-1, 4-1 in England, and won 2-1 against a depleted Aussie side. So if you lose against NZ then it will mean you're a HTB.

So who isn’t HTB then?

Australia failed to win in India and BD
Pakistan failed everywhere except Eng
NZ got destroyed in Aus and India
SA were thrashed in India and SL
England win away in SL(weak side) but couldn’t win in familiar conditions such as NZ, SA. They haven’t even won series in WI off late despite WI being weak side.

India competed well in SA and series could’ve won if it wasn’t for AB masterclass. England series score line might suggest one sided contest, but India competed very well.


Every team is struggling in unfamiliar conditions. At least India competes well and even manages to win odd games here and there, which other teams couldn’t do.

There is a reason why India is # 1 cause every other teams just couldn’t dominate at home or try to minimize the loss at away.
 
As we all know, India has been a number 1 ranked test side for a while now- and look to stay that way for some time. The way Indian team has dominated some sides in recent times has drawn the comparison between them and Aussies of 2000's and Windies of 1980's.

However, many have doubted such comparisons by pointing out Indian dominance has either been at home or against weak oppositions in away matches. The evidence, and the real test for Indian team, is their performance in SENA countries. India has lost the series in South Africa and got demolished in England. India did manage to create history by winning the series in Australia but that was Australia without their stalwarts David Warner and Smith- Yes win is a win but we all know how much impact these two guys have in australian team.

So the real question I would like to come to is, would the performances by Indian test team be really be comparable to those of Aussies in 2000's and Windies in 1980s if India loses the series in New Zealand and Australia by 2020 end and therefore in all SENA countries with the "current dominating Indian test squad".

With respect, you are missing the point completely.

Asia's Greatest Ever Test team, Imran Khan's Pakistan, lost one series (by a margin of 1-0, in Australia) between February 1985 and May 1993.

One series.

And in that time they drew 3 series against the best team of all time, Viv Richards' West Indies team.

Test cricket is a bit like boxing. It doesn't matter how many Mexican Roadsweepers you knock out with a big punch, your status is based upon remaining unbeaten, and upon showing an ability to turn lost causes into draws.

This India team:

Lost their previous series in New Zealand.

Lost 2-1 in South Africa in January 2018

Lost 4-1 in England in Summer 2018.

Beat an understrength Australia 2-1 away in 2018-19.

Basically the win in Australia was all that could be asked of them and was as impressive as Sri Lanka's win in South Africa the following month.

But it remains India's only achievement.

India remain a Nothing Team, who:

1. Lost a series in South Africa 2-1 in 2018 just one year before Sri Lanka won there 2-0.
2. Lost a series in England 4-1 in 2018 just a month after Pakistan drew there 1-1.

India's period of ascendancy cannot be counted for a single day prior to winning in Australia, because they had just lost two major away series.

Bumrah is an excellent prospect, but India is an old team and an old team which has lost multiple away series.

They need to put together at least 5 years unbeaten around the world in Test series before they can claim to be anything special.
 
India lost in South Africa 2-1, also lost 4-1 in England, they are still #1. As long as they stay unbeaten at home, they will remain #1.
 
With respect, you are missing the point completely.

Asia's Greatest Ever Test team, Imran Khan's Pakistan, lost one series (by a margin of 1-0, in Australia) between February 1985 and May 1993.

One series.

And in that time they drew 3 series against the best team of all time, Viv Richards' West Indies team.

Test cricket is a bit like boxing. It doesn't matter how many Mexican Roadsweepers you knock out with a big punch, your status is based upon remaining unbeaten, and upon showing an ability to turn lost causes into draws.

This India team:

Lost their previous series in New Zealand.

Lost 2-1 in South Africa in January 2018

Lost 4-1 in England in Summer 2018.

Beat an understrength Australia 2-1 away in 2018-19.

Basically the win in Australia was all that could be asked of them and was as impressive as Sri Lanka's win in South Africa the following month.

But it remains India's only achievement.

India remain a Nothing Team, who:

1. Lost a series in South Africa 2-1 in 2018 just one year before Sri Lanka won there 2-0.
2. Lost a series in England 4-1 in 2018 just a month after Pakistan drew there 1-1.

India's period of ascendancy cannot be counted for a single day prior to winning in Australia, because they had just lost two major away series.

Bumrah is an excellent prospect, but India is an old team and an old team which has lost multiple away series.

They need to put together at least 5 years unbeaten around the world in Test series before they can claim to be anything special.

lol as long as india keep crushing teams at home. They will be rated as one of the GOAT teams of all time. No other team can crush opposition at home like india. India lost to englsnd due to poor selection. Won't happen next time.

Soth african team that india lost to were a good side themselves. No shame in losing to a team that had devilliers, rabada, ngidi, steyn and amla. Had they lost the toss then you would be looking at a 3 0 india series win there. Same cannot be said about other teams right now as there is no guarantee they will win even after winning the toss. Against india that's an automatic loss based on Virat's record home and away.

India only need to remain unbeaten and dominant at home for the next 3 years and win a few away series here and there to claim the GOAT title.

imran's pakistan lost to Sri Lanka and had a grand total of like 14 wins. They were overrated. Not even close to india of 2006- 2011 who would actually beat most so called GOAT teams.
 
overall test wins is what matters anyway. No one gives a Damn about home or away wins. The number of wins is what matters. Whether you dominate at home or away makes no difference. I would take losses in all SENA tours as long as india crushes them all at home which they will as usual anyway. But now we can't say for sure they csnt win away because their bowling is probably the best in the world.

Australia are favourites to win in australia vs india but it's a close bet. If bunrah is anywhere close to his best post injury and shami remains fit, australia are in serious trouble. Not to mention India now have fantastic openers in Mayank and Shaw who will be drafted in. Shaw a very good player of short ball.
 
It would mean that we're still an average team in SENA and that win in Australia was down to them missing W&S (full credits for cashing in though) . But still comfortably the best team in the world as the rankings suggest and GOAT Asian Test team.
 
It would mean that we're still an average team in SENA and that win in Australia was down to them missing W&S (full credits for cashing in though) . But still comfortably the best team in the world as the rankings suggest and GOAT Asian Test team.
GOAT Asian team
GOAT home bullies of all time
GOATest team ever if they vanquish australia again and also a win in n.z
 
30 wins in 32 at home. get out of here. that is unreal. Only west indies of 80's are superior. Australia of 2000 don't count. Cheaters shouldn't be Included. So many rubbish decisions went in their favour.
 
30 wins in 32 at home. get out of here. that is unreal. Only west indies of 80's are superior. Australia of 2000 don't count. Cheaters shouldn't be Included. So many rubbish decisions went in their favour.

Alright you are getting carried away here.
 
30 wins in 32 at home. get out of here. that is unreal. Only west indies of 80's are superior. Australia of 2000 don't count. Cheaters shouldn't be Included. So many rubbish decisions went in their favour.

I’m sorry, but a team which lost 7 out of 10 away Tests in 2018 is just a complete nonentity. India has no claim to be anything special. They might be marginally the best team in a very weak era, but that’s all.

The West Indian team lost one series - by 1 wicket - between 1976 and 1995.

The great Aussie team lost one series between 1995 and 2005.

India lost two series in 2018 alone!

Come back to me when India goes ten years with only one series defeat, then we can talk!
 
I’m sorry, but a team which lost 7 out of 10 away Tests in 2018 is just a complete nonentity. India has no claim to be anything special. They might be marginally the best team in a very weak era, but that’s all.

The West Indian team lost one series - by 1 wicket - between 1976 and 1995.

The great Aussie team lost one series between 1995 and 2005.

India lost two series in 2018 alone!

Come back to me when India goes ten years with only one series defeat, then we can talk!

weak era rofl get outta here. lol if anything 90s and 80s were the weakest wra of all time. post 2000 was the beginning of a strong era.

Australia's dominance was riddled with biased decisions that went in their favour, dirty tactics like 2008 series vs india. Not to mention there was no drs available at the time, no no ball umpires. Lots of overstepping calls being ignored.

They can call themselves GOAT but in truth they are scummy cheats. West Indies of 80s are a GOAT level team albeit in a terribly weak era.
 
weak era rofl get outta here. lol if anything 90s and 80s were the weakest wra of all time. post 2000 was the beginning of a strong era.

Australia's dominance was riddled with biased decisions that went in their favour, dirty tactics like 2008 series vs india. Not to mention there was no drs available at the time, no no ball umpires. Lots of overstepping calls being ignored.

They can call themselves GOAT but in truth they are scummy cheats. West Indies of 80s are a GOAT level team albeit in a terribly weak era.

I do like your posts, but your comparison of eras is absurd.

Today the three least bad pace bowling all-rounders in Test cricket are Ben Stokes, Mitchell Marsh and Colin de Grandhomme.

The 1970’s had Botham, Imran, Kapil Dev, Procter, Tony Greig and Eddie Barlow!

The 1980’s saw the addition of Clive Rice.

The deterioration in quality in the 21st century is just stunning.

The same is true of pace bowling.

If you consider 1984 alone, the West Indies off the top of my head had Holding, Roberts, Garner, Walsh, Clarke, Stephenson, Moseley and Estwick who would all be one of the world’s three best bowlers now.

Basically in 1984 Barbados could have put out an eleven vastly stronger than the whole world could in 2019.
 
I do like your posts, but your comparison of eras is absurd.

Today the three least bad pace bowling all-rounders in Test cricket are Ben Stokes, Mitchell Marsh and Colin de Grandhomme.

The 1970’s had Botham, Imran, Kapil Dev, Procter, Tony Greig and Eddie Barlow!

The 1980’s saw the addition of Clive Rice.

The deterioration in quality in the 21st century is just stunning.

The same is true of pace bowling.

If you consider 1984 alone, the West Indies off the top of my head had Holding, Roberts, Garner, Walsh, Clarke, Stephenson, Moseley and Estwick who would all be one of the world’s three best bowlers now.

Basically in 1984 Barbados could have put out an eleven vastly stronger than the whole world could in 2019.

I can't speak for 1970. But 1980 had some of the lousiest bowing UNIT one could see. I say UNIT because many teams hardly had one good bowler. Most of the support bowlers were average to below average. Also even the top bowlers were not express bowlers. Almost all the fast bowlers exclusively belonged to West INdies. Rest of the teams had rubbish UNIT. All Windies had to do against India was seeing off Kapil Dev. West indies hardly faced any challenge from any side.
 
That would mean that this Indian side may be the best Asian side in history, but not a potential ATG side.

Anyway, Indian test team has added some spice to world test cricket by trying to win all tests and not simply trying to avoid losses. This approach will result in some losses which could have been avoided, but it will also result in many wins. Credit to Kohli here.
 
That would mean that this Indian side may be the best Asian side in history, but not a potential ATG side.

Anyway, Indian test team has added some spice to world test cricket by trying to win all tests and not simply trying to avoid losses. This approach will result in some losses which could have been avoided, but it will also result in many wins. Credit to Kohli here.

Your first part of the post is text book approach of Ganguly. He woudl win a test and try to draw the remaining. Dhoni tried the same in England after winning the first test. He dropped a bowler and played 7 batsmen. It backfired big time. Kohli is definitely different on that aspect.
 
Your first part of the post is text book approach of Ganguly. He woudl win a test and try to draw the remaining. Dhoni tried the same in England after winning the first test. He dropped a bowler and played 7 batsmen. It backfired big time. Kohli is definitely different on that aspect.

I always liked Aus aproach of trying to win most tests. I like Kohli trying to do the same. It makes it fun to watch. Some draws are also fun to watch, but most draws are boring. Giving up wins most of the times to avoid loss makes it even worse.
 
I can't speak for 1970. But 1980 had some of the lousiest bowing UNIT one could see. I say UNIT because many teams hardly had one good bowler. Most of the support bowlers were average to below average. Also even the top bowlers were not express bowlers. Almost all the fast bowlers exclusively belonged to West INdies. Rest of the teams had rubbish UNIT. All Windies had to do against India was seeing off Kapil Dev. West indies hardly faced any challenge from any side.

1981 Aussie pace attack:
Lillee
Alderman
Lawson

1989 Aussie pace attack
Alderman
Lawson
Hughes
Reid

1981 Pakistan pace attack
Imran Khan
Sarfraz Nawaz
Sikander Bakht

1989 Pakistan pace attack
Wasim Akram
Waqar Younis
Aaqib Javed
Imran Khan

England 1981 pace attack
Ian Botham
Bob Willis
Graham Dilley

England 1989 pace attack
Devon Malcolm
Angus Fraser
Neil Foster
Graham Dilley

Just because India only had one good bowler doesn’t mean everyone else was as poverty stricken!

The 1970’s and 1980’s were far stronger decades than today.
 
1981 Aussie pace attack:
Lillee
Alderman
Lawson

1989 Aussie pace attack
Alderman
Lawson
Hughes
Reid

1981 Pakistan pace attack
Imran Khan
Sarfraz Nawaz
Sikander Bakht

1989 Pakistan pace attack
Wasim Akram
Waqar Younis
Aaqib Javed
Imran Khan

England 1981 pace attack
Ian Botham
Bob Willis
Graham Dilley

England 1989 pace attack
Devon Malcolm
Angus Fraser
Neil Foster
Graham Dilley

Just because India only had one good bowler doesn’t mean everyone else was as poverty stricken!

The 1970’s and 1980’s were far stronger decades than today.

lots of rules favoured bowlers back then mate. unlimited bouncers, less protection for batsmen, poor gears. There were no tapes to watch and game plan for specific bowlers. nutriton was backwards. strength and conditioning programs were of novice level.
It's difficult to compare era's. There were only 3 good teams back then which includes pakistam.

rest were mediocre. Now we have 4 ish if you include n.z.
More importantly bowlers have it real tough these days. Lots of rules are against them and yet we still see great under 25 averaging bowlers. So current era is as good if not better in my opinion.
 
I’m sorry, but a team which lost 7 out of 10 away Tests in 2018 is just a complete nonentity. India has no claim to be anything special. They might be marginally the best team in a very weak era, but that’s all.

The West Indian team lost one series - by 1 wicket - between 1976 and 1995.

The great Aussie team lost one series between 1995 and 2005.

India lost two series in 2018 alone!

Come back to me when India goes ten years with only one series defeat, then we can talk!

The Aussie team of 95-05 lost at least 2 series - both in India in 98 and 01. IIRC, it lost a couple more to SL and SA.
 
I’m sorry, but a team which lost 7 out of 10 away Tests in 2018 is just a complete nonentity. India has no claim to be anything special. They might be marginally the best team in a very weak era, but that’s all.

The West Indian team lost one series - by 1 wicket - between 1976 and 1995.

The great Aussie team lost one series between 1995 and 2005.

India lost two series in 2018 alone!

Come back to me when India goes ten years with only one series defeat, then we can talk!

Why lie? Australia lost in India in 1998 and 2001.
 
Why lie? Australia lost in India in 1998 and 2001.

Those losses don’t count as the real Australia didn’t turn up in those series. Ponting was out of form and Warne had lost his touch for a while.
 
Last edited:
The Aussie team of 95-05 lost at least 2 series - both in India in 98 and 01. IIRC, it lost a couple more to SL and SA.

Great Aus team lost ,

1998 test series in Ind
1999 test series in SL
2001 test series in Ind
1996 test series with just one test in Ind
2005 test series in Eng

So they did lose lot more than 1 test series, but they were aggresive and tried to win as many tests as possible. None of the gun teams are able to dominate away conditions totally if opposition is also full strenth. It's just unrealistic.

Memorable series win of Aus team in India came due to key Indian players missing and Aus getting green pitch in one test. Pakistan was able to win a test in WI again great t eam due to key WI players missing and many rookies playing for WI. India was able to win series in Aus due to two key batsmen from Aus missing.

Clearly, you have to get something going on your side otherwise it will be mighty hard to beat a good home team in their home conditions. Eng caught India with too many pasengers and won a series. They had to play well to win, but with good Indian team it would have been unrealistic to expect Eng to win in India.

With full strenth Aus team, I will back Aus to win against India right now.
 
INDIA lost in SA and ENG because no other batsman other than KOHLI performed. The moment they did, India won in AUS. To win NZ tour other batters have to step it up a notch.

Sounds like you will be slaughtered by fellow indian fans for stating the truth.

Indias losses in both countries was due to the luck of not winning important tosses wasnt it?
 
Great Aus team lost ,

1998 test series in Ind
1999 test series in SL
2001 test series in Ind
1996 test series with just one test in Ind
2005 test series in Eng

So they did lose lot more than 1 test series, but they were aggresive and tried to win as many tests as possible. None of the gun teams are able to dominate away conditions totally if opposition is also full strenth. It's just unrealistic.

Memorable series win of Aus team in India came due to key Indian players missing and Aus getting green pitch in one test. Pakistan was able to win a test in WI again great t eam due to key WI players missing and many rookies playing for WI. India was able to win series in Aus due to two key batsmen from Aus missing.

Clearly, you have to get something going on your side otherwise it will be mighty hard to beat a good home team in their home conditions. Eng caught India with too many pasengers and won a series. They had to play well to win, but with good Indian team it would have been unrealistic to expect Eng to win in India.

With full strenth Aus team, I will back Aus to win against India right now.

That series was washed due to rain but credit where credit's due.
 
Great Aus team lost ,

1998 test series in Ind
1999 test series in SL
2001 test series in Ind
1996 test series with just one test in Ind
2005 test series in Eng

So they did lose lot more than 1 test series, but they were aggresive and tried to win as many tests as possible. None of the gun teams are able to dominate away conditions totally if opposition is also full strenth. It's just unrealistic.

Memorable series win of Aus team in India came due to key Indian players missing and Aus getting green pitch in one test. Pakistan was able to win a test in WI again great t eam due to key WI players missing and many rookies playing for WI. India was able to win series in Aus due to two key batsmen from Aus missing.

Clearly, you have to get something going on your side otherwise it will be mighty hard to beat a good home team in their home conditions. Eng caught India with too many pasengers and won a series. They had to play well to win, but with good Indian team it would have been unrealistic to expect Eng to win in India.

With full strenth Aus team, I will back Aus to win against India right now.
good post. Australia were incredibly lucky several times and only managed to beat weakened top teams away from home devoid of their star players. It's a joke. You cant really compare era's. But the truth is that 80s and 90s were weak eras. People don't like to hear it but that's the truth.

I do agree australia are favourites in australia to beat even this mighty indian side. But if there is one team that can beat them apart from a resurgent south africa, it's india. I mentioned saffers because they play on similar tracks at home so they will be familiar with the bounce factor.
 
Sounds like you will be slaughtered by fellow indian fans for stating the truth.

Indias losses in both countries was due to the luck of not winning important tosses wasnt it?

Toss did play a big role though. Losing 7 out of the 8 tosses was never going to help. But we could have won despite of that , if he had half decent test batters instead of Dhawan, Rahul, Vijay etc.
 
Toss did play a big role though. Losing 7 out of the 8 tosses was never going to help. But we could have won despite of that , if he had half decent test batters instead of Dhawan, Rahul, Vijay etc.

yea but when it comes to Asian teams, missing key players won't matter apparently. People here in general have this inferiority complex when it comes to their own kind lol. Don't know why.

if a SENA nation missed key players then everyone on PP would vehemently proclaim that the series loss at home was due to them missing those said key players. Conversely when Asian teams missed several key players like Mayank, Shaw, rahane, bhuvi, bumrah who have all either missed games due to injury or werent picked for some of the games in the away tours of s.africa, England or when pakistan missed key players for the n.z series, posters here will completely ignore those factors that contribute to a loss.

hypocrites if you ask me.
 
With respect, you are missing the point completely.

Asia's Greatest Ever Test team, Imran Khan's Pakistan, lost one series (by a margin of 1-0, in Australia) between February 1985 and May 1993.

One series.

And in that time they drew 3 series against the best team of all time, Viv Richards' West Indies team.

Test cricket is a bit like boxing. It doesn't matter how many Mexican Roadsweepers you knock out with a big punch, your status is based upon remaining unbeaten, and upon showing an ability to turn lost causes into draws.

This India team:

Lost their previous series in New Zealand.

Lost 2-1 in South Africa in January 2018

Lost 4-1 in England in Summer 2018.

Beat an understrength Australia 2-1 away in 2018-19.

Basically the win in Australia was all that could be asked of them and was as impressive as Sri Lanka's win in South Africa the following month.

But it remains India's only achievement.

India remain a Nothing Team, who:

1. Lost a series in South Africa 2-1 in 2018 just one year before Sri Lanka won there 2-0.
2. Lost a series in England 4-1 in 2018 just a month after Pakistan drew there 1-1.

India's period of ascendancy cannot be counted for a single day prior to winning in Australia, because they had just lost two major away series.

Bumrah is an excellent prospect, but India is an old team and an old team which has lost multiple away series.

They need to put together at least 5 years unbeaten around the world in Test series before they can claim to be anything special.

I don't know how I am missing the point when this is exactly the point I was trying to make lol. I completely agree with everything you said in this post except for the first line
 
Sounds like you will be slaughtered by fellow indian fans for stating the truth.

Indias losses in both countries was due to the luck of not winning important tosses wasnt it?

The only match where I believe toss really mattered was the 2nd ENG test, rest all were winnable if the indian batsmen bar Kohli weren't so inept.
 
Not many touring teams succeed in NZ. The Indians came close last time and they have an even better squad this ttime around. I think it would be huge if they manage to win the series down there.
 
It is good to see this forum turn into cheerleaders for us from time to time. As the new Daniel Bryan would say, "FICKLE!"
 
I don't know how I am missing the point when this is exactly the point I was trying to make lol. I completely agree with everything you said in this post except for the first line
You have just proved my point about old timers (like me) going past their use-by date.

You made a perfectly sensible post, which I completely misunderstood, and then I accused you of what I’d actually done.

I’m really sorry!
 
You have just proved my point about old timers (like me) going past their use-by date.

You made a perfectly sensible post, which I completely misunderstood, and then I accused you of what I’d actually done.

I’m really sorry!

Lol, all good brother. Btw, how old are you?
 
Nothing really.

When you have a tour of New Zealand sandwiched between tour of Australia, the New Zealand is basically a warmup.

If India beats New Zealand but loses in Australia, the Australia defeat will stand out and define their year and vice versa.

It is similar to teams playing in UAE/Pakistan before or after playing in India. The results in the UAE and Pakistan hold no value because of the Indian series.

In 2012, England were whitewashed in the UAE but won in India. That year was remembered for the win in India rather than the loss in the UAE.

If the opposite would have happened, i.e. winning in UAE and losing in India, then the Indian defeat would have been the one to grab the headlines.
 
Nothing really.

When you have a tour of New Zealand sandwiched between tour of Australia, the New Zealand is basically a warmup.

If India beats New Zealand but loses in Australia, the Australia defeat will stand out and define their year and vice versa.

It is similar to teams playing in UAE/Pakistan before or after playing in India. The results in the UAE and Pakistan hold no value because of the Indian series.

In 2012, England were whitewashed in the UAE but won in India. That year was remembered for the win in India rather than the loss in the UAE.

If the opposite would have happened, i.e. winning in UAE and losing in India, then the Indian defeat would have been the one to grab the headlines.
Good comments, but I’m not sure that they answer the question.

I think India will win in New Zealand. But the question was “what does it mean if they lose?”

And the answer is, it means that they go back to square one, as a team of flat track bullies whose last four major series overseas included 3 defeats and 1 victory against an under-strength opponent.

India has to win this series, because they will be almost as big a laughing stock as Pakistan if they lose.
 
1 victory against an under-strength opponent.

Smith and Warner were missing but most Indians including me don't care about that though. It will count in the record books as series victory in Australia, under-strength or not .. just like how nobody mentions that the only reason Eng won the Ashes in 2005 was because Mcgrath wasn't available for 2 crucial test matches.
 
Good comments, but I’m not sure that they answer the question.

I think India will win in New Zealand. But the question was “what does it mean if they lose?”

And the answer is, it means that they go back to square one, as a team of flat track bullies whose last four major series overseas included 3 defeats and 1 victory against an under-strength opponent.

India has to win this series, because they will be almost as big a laughing stock as Pakistan if they lose.

I wouldn't say India would become a laughing stock but it will definitely prove that India is HTB and minnow bashers.
 
Smith and Warner were missing but most Indians including me don't care about that though. It will count in the record books as series victory in Australia, under-strength or not .. just like how nobody mentions that the only reason Eng won the Ashes in 2005 was because Mcgrath wasn't available for 2 crucial test matches.

This is exactly what I said in my first post: A win is a win, but the point I was trying to make was that current India won't leave a legacy like Aussies in 2000s or windies in 1980s unless they can win test series in SENA countries and can defeat full strength Aussie team (in late 2020).
 
This is exactly what I said in my first post: A win is a win, but the point I was trying to make was that current India won't leave a legacy like Aussies in 2000s or windies in 1980s unless they can win test series in SENA countries and can defeat full strength Aussie team (in late 2020).

We can poke holes in Aussie legacy as well. Aussies lost in India 2001. Did they beat a full strength India team in the 2004 series? Tendulkar was injured and missing in that series with tennis elbow.
 
We can poke holes in Aussie legacy as well. Aussies lost in India 2001. Did they beat a full strength India team in the 2004 series? Tendulkar was injured and missing in that series with tennis elbow.

Conditions only applied for Team India only.

Classic case of shifting goal post to suit their agenda.
 
We can poke holes in Aussie legacy as well. Aussies lost in India 2001. Did they beat a full strength India team in the 2004 series? Tendulkar was injured and missing in that series with tennis elbow.
And that’s why I don’t rank those Aussies in the all-time Top Three. Close, but not quite there.

I think the three greatest sides, in order, were:

West Indies 1976-95
South Africa 1967-?
Australia 1948

The defeats of the Taylor/Waugh team tarnished their legacy.
 
And that’s why I don’t rank those Aussies in the all-time Top Three. Close, but not quite there.

I think the three greatest sides, in order, were:

West Indies 1976-95
South Africa 1967-?
Australia 1948

The defeats of the Taylor/Waugh team tarnished their legacy.

Australia in 1948 was GOAT team when cricket was a 2 nation sport? Lol
 
And that’s why I don’t rank those Aussies in the all-time Top Three. Close, but not quite there.

I think the three greatest sides, in order, were:

West Indies 1976-95
South Africa 1967-?
Australia 1948

The defeats of the Taylor/Waugh team tarnished their legacy.

all teams prior to 1980 should be discarded.

was an extremely weak era with 2 - 4 major teams.

no drs. different rules. bouncers were unlimited. bowling friendly era. You can't compare era's anyway.
 
India lost zaheer khan not once but twice during OZ tour. He was the leading bowler for India at that time. They also lost him in England once. But inspite of his absence India won at Perth, Adelaide Oval. Stop giving excuses for absence of players. India lost Bumrah, Bhuvi as well in England. Lost Prithvi shaw right at the last minute. Prithvi shaw absolutely bashed the opposition in the tour match then got injured. India was stuck with 2 out of form openers.
 
India lost zaheer khan not once but twice during OZ tour. He was the leading bowler for India at that time. They also lost him in England once. But inspite of his absence India won at Perth, Adelaide Oval. Stop giving excuses for absence of players. India lost Bumrah, Bhuvi as well in England. Lost Prithvi shaw right at the last minute. Prithvi shaw absolutely bashed the opposition in the tour match then got injured. India was stuck with 2 out of form openers.

Except Bumrah was there in England.
 
He missed only 2 matches still India had a chance to win.

Don't you think it disturbs the combination? As it is India lost all the 5 tosses. Despite all that atleast in 2 tests India was in winning position before Curran snatching it away thanks to a dropped catch by Dhawan in one of the innings. India was well on course to win and took curran for granted.
 
Don't you think it disturbs the combination? As it is India lost all the 5 tosses. Despite all that atleast in 2 tests India was in winning position before Curran snatching it away thanks to a dropped catch by Dhawan in one of the innings. India was well on course to win and took curran for granted.

India should improve their catching and Remove Kohli from the slips he is the worst slip catcher I have seen,he picks one and then drops three.
If they don't improve their catches it may cost series,I hope it's not.
 
With respect, you are missing the point completely.

Asia's Greatest Ever Test team, Imran Khan's Pakistan, lost one series (by a margin of 1-0, in Australia) between February 1985 and May 1993.

One series.

And in that time they drew 3 series against the best team of all time, Viv Richards' West Indies team.

Test cricket is a bit like boxing. It doesn't matter how many Mexican Roadsweepers you knock out with a big punch, your status is based upon remaining unbeaten, and upon showing an ability to turn lost causes into draws.

This India team:

Lost their previous series in New Zealand.

Lost 2-1 in South Africa in January 2018

Lost 4-1 in England in Summer 2018.

Beat an understrength Australia 2-1 away in 2018-19.

Basically the win in Australia was all that could be asked of them and was as impressive as Sri Lanka's win in South Africa the following month.

But it remains India's only achievement.

India remain a Nothing Team, who:

1. Lost a series in South Africa 2-1 in 2018 just one year before Sri Lanka won there 2-0.
2. Lost a series in England 4-1 in 2018 just a month after Pakistan drew there 1-1.

India's period of ascendancy cannot be counted for a single day prior to winning in Australia, because they had just lost two major away series.

Bumrah is an excellent prospect, but India is an old team and an old team which has lost multiple away series.

They need to put together at least 5 years unbeaten around the world in Test series before they can claim to be anything special.

Again with that Windies series, If India's 2-1 win Aus is not counted, than Pak's drawn series cannot be counted because of Viv and Marshall not playing.. so there again you can't have different logic.
 
Last edited:
Again with that Windies series, If India's 2-1 win Aus is not counted, than Pak's drawn series cannot be counted because of Viv and Marshall not playing.. so there again you can't have different logic.

yes and Australia's 2004 win vs weakened india.

2012 loss to England should be removed.

AUSTRALIA beating a weakened pakistan in early 2000.

All of then shouldn't count. Even most gr3st teams can only win away when the opposition is either declining or weak or in a rebuilding phase.
 
Back
Top