Which 2 teams were the closest rivals for Test supremacy in a single era?

[Harsh Thakor]

Here I am listing in order the list of two teams who were closest together in strength contesting for position of supremacy in test cricket.


1.South Africa -Australia-1993-1994


Two successive series were drawn with ebb and flow rarely seen.Both teams had the edge on home soil but opponents spectacularly rallied back .The Proteas ressurected like a Phoenix from the Ashes to defend a paltry target of 117 runs a in the 2nd test of the 1993-94 series in Australia.Australia similarly ressurected itself to win the 2nd test in South Africa and save the 3rd.South Africa had better firepower and all rounders but the Aussies were more talented with the likes of Waugh Brothers and Border.



2.South Africa-Australia 2008-09

The results of successive series testified the evaluation.South Africa winning 2-1 in Australia and vice versa in South Africa .Morally 3-3.Australia weakened without Mcrath or Warne but still competitive.South Africa posssed a deadly attack with Steyn and Morkel and a great allrounder in Kallis.Mitchelle Johnson was a trumpcard for Australia and the late Simon Hughes.





3.West Indies-Pakistan - 1986-1988

Pakistan had the better batting line up and more diverse bowling attack.The Calypsos averted defeat by the very skin of their teeth..The series should have been won 2-0 by Pakistan instead of being 1-1,but for bad umpiring in the 1st test which denied Pakistan a spectacular victory.





4.South Africa-Australia - 1997-1998

Australia won 2 series by margin of one test in this period but it could well have gone the other way in South Africa and should have been 1-1 in Australia.The Proteas had more allrounder and batting depth but the Kangaroos had more match winners.A spectcale witnessing players like Cronje,Donald,Kirsten,Pollock and Cullinan against the likes of Waugh brothers,Ponting,Mcgrath and Warne.






5.West Indies-Australia -1960-61

Best series ever.West Indies had better batting but Australia had a better bowling attack.Arguably the captaincy of Benaud clinched the issue for the Aussies.




6.West Indies-Pakistan 1977-79

Pakistan had the better batting line up and more allrounders.The Calypsos shad a more deadly bowling attack.The series should have been drawn 1-1.,but for bad umpiring in the 1st test which denied Pakistan a spectacular victory.What a spectacle witnessing the likes of Majid, Zaheer, Asif, Mushtaq ,Raja and Imran confronting Viv,Greenidge,Lloyd,Roberts and Croft.




7.India-South Africa 2010-11

2 evenly matched sides fought a war of attrition in the deciding test which was drawn.the ebb and flow reminded you of the waters of the river Ganges .India had more competitive batting while the Proteaes had more deadly bowling.

 

[Heisenberg111]

West Indies-Pakistan rivalry in the 1980's was great followed by the Australia-India rivalry in the early to mid 2000's

 

[Harsh Thakor]

West Indies-Pakistan rivalry in the 1980's was great followed by the Australia-India rivalry in the early to mid 2000's

South Africa -Australia?Remember how closely fought?Agree with your choice but feel the contest of Proteas with the Kangaroos may have superseded West Indies-Pak.

 

[Bilal7]

The legendary tussle of Pakistan and the West Indies during the 80s (a couple of series played during the late 70s and early 90s are also included) immediately comes to mind. That was an actual era, the rest on your list are just individual series.

The greatest Asian team versus the greatest team of all. Legendary players participating; drama and nail-biting cricket galore.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

The legendary tussle of Pakistan and the West Indies during the 80s (a couple of series played during the late 70s and early 90s are also included) immediately comes to mind. That was an actual era, the rest on your list are just individual series.

You have a valid point but why not Australia-South Africa?Remember how close in the 1990s and in the late 2000's?Do see 1993-1998 and 2008-14.Not eras?

 

[Harsh Thakor]

[MENTION=79064]MMHS[/MENTION] [MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION] [MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION] [MENTION=133512]AB_Fan[/MENTION] [MENTION=65183]freelance_cricketer[/MENTION] Please contribute here

 

[Harsh Thakor]

[MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION] please come here also [MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION]

 

[Harsh Thakor]

[MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION] please contribute here

 

[wrongun]

Good list.

I guess it depends how you judge "close together in strength". The WI/Pak rivalry in the Imran era is just incredible, 3 drawn series across locations. But really the WI were far stronger on paper, with just Imran performing herculean feats of cricket & leadership to drag a weaker (overall) team up to match them.

The Oz/SA rivalry across the 90s was epic. With SA almost having moral victory early on with being so strong vs us even after being out of Tests so long. By the end I'd argue Oz had slowly ground their way on top. With the main difference being simply Warne. Both very strong teams in every other regard but one had an atg spinner.

I'd also nominate Oz/WI from about 1990/2000. They played SIX series across this period, home & away with NO series ever having a margin of more than 1 Test either way. Considering these were 5 & 4 Test series, it is remarkable.

During that period Oz slowly managed to threaten the WI at first, winning some live rubbers & harbouring the desire to go one step further. WI were hanging on to their title of Kings. Curtly & Courtney at their peak during the beginning years, then becoming ageing giants of the game who could still tear a game apart when roused to battle. WI handed over batting from Richards & Richardson to Lara & support acts like Hooper & Adams & Chanders.

There were games & series decided on knife edges- like the closest ever victory in Test cricket, Adelaide oval '93 where McDermott was given out caught behind off Walsh for a ONE run WI victory. Controversial call too. Oz SO close to toppling the WI from world cricket's perch but the old masters hang on.

It would be 2 more years before Oz finally climbed to the top. Even then series remained brutally fought & on a knife edge. A one Test margin across 5 tests saw Oz hang on the the Frank Worrel trophy & return series in WI in 2000 saw Lara at the peak of his powers vs S Waugh at his bat their sides to a 2:2 draw in the Caribbean.

The battles across the series... Ambrose v Taylor, Ambrose v Waugh, McGrath vs Lara, Warne v Chanderpaul, Warne v Lara & Richardson, Walsh & Bishop vs Slater & Taylor...

Probably a series worth mentioning alongside these others.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Please contribute here Ab_Fan [MENTION=79064]MMHS[/MENTION]

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Good list.

I guess it depends how you judge "close together in strength". The WI/Pak rivalry in the Imran era is just incredible, 3 drawn series across locations. But really the WI were far stronger on paper, with just Imran performing herculean feats of cricket & leadership to drag a weaker (overall) team up to match them.

The Oz/SA rivalry across the 90s was epic. With SA almost having moral victory early on with being so strong vs us even after being out of Tests so long. By the end I'd argue Oz had slowly ground their way on top. With the main difference being simply Warne. Both very strong teams in every other regard but one had an atg spinner.

I'd also nominate Oz/WI from about 1990/2000. They played SIX series across this period, home & away with NO series ever having a margin of more than 1 Test either way. Considering these were 5 & 4 Test series, it is remarkable.

During that period Oz slowly managed to threaten the WI at first, winning some live rubbers & harbouring the desire to go one step further. WI were hanging on to their title of Kings. Curtly & Courtney at their peak during the beginning years, then becoming ageing giants of the game who could still tear a game apart when roused to battle. WI handed over batting from Richards & Richardson to Lara & support acts like Hooper & Adams & Chanders.

There were games & series decided on knife edges- like the closest ever victory in Test cricket, Adelaide oval '93 where McDermott was given out caught behind off Walsh for a ONE run WI victory. Controversial call too. Oz SO close to toppling the WI from world cricket's perch but the old masters hang on.

It would be 2 more years before Oz finally climbed to the top. Even then series remained brutally fought & on a knife edge. A one Test margin across 5 tests saw Oz hang on the the Frank Worrel trophy & return series in WI in 2000 saw Lara at the peak of his powers vs S Waugh at his bat their sides to a 2:2 draw in the Caribbean.

The battles across the series... Ambrose v Taylor, Ambrose v Waugh, McGrath vs Lara, Warne v Chanderpaul, Warne v Lara & Richardson, Walsh & Bishop vs Slater & Taylor...

Probably a series worth mentioning alongside these others.

Great analysis. appreciate

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Please come here Ab_Fan

 

[Harsh Thakor]

[MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION] please participate here

 

[Buffet]

Which 2 teams were the closest rivals for Test supremacy in a single era?

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



I don't think the list put here is really about closet rivals for test supremacy in a single era. The era should be 5-10 years and teams should be really competing for the best team of the era.

Most listed by OP is not really a good example of teams competing for test supremacy.

For genuine test supremacy competition, you need to have two teams having a somewhat comparable overall record in 5-7 years. Just having close-fought series hardly makes them comparable.

For example, Ind-Aus have many close-fought series in the last 25 years, but rarely they were competing for test supremacy in any given 5 years of time.

 

[szrana007]

Which 2 teams were the closest rivals for Test supremacy in a single era?

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



I don't think the list put here is really about closet rivals for test supremacy in a single era. The era should be 5-10 years and teams should be really competing for the best team of the era.

Most listed by OP is not really a good example of teams competing for test supremacy.

For genuine test supremacy competition, you need to have two teams having a somewhat comparable overall record in 5-7 years. Just having close-fought series hardly makes them comparable.

For example, Ind-Aus have many close-fought series in the last 25 years, but rarely they were competing for test supremacy in any given 5 years of time.

Pak/WI were competing for the unofficial world test championship in the late 80's and early 90's. And, they were easily the best 2 teams of that period.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Which 2 teams were the closest rivals for Test supremacy in a single era?

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



I don't think the list put here is really about closet rivals for test supremacy in a single era. The era should be 5-10 years and teams should be really competing for the best team of the era.

Most listed by OP is not really a good example of teams competing for test supremacy.

For genuine test supremacy competition, you need to have two teams having a somewhat comparable overall record in 5-7 years. Just having close-fought series hardly makes them comparable.

For example, Ind-Aus have many close-fought series in the last 25 years, but rarely they were competing for test supremacy in any given 5 years of time.

Never South Africa-Australia rivalry? Remember intensity in the 1990s and from 2009-2014

 

[Buffet]

Pak/WI were competing for the unofficial world test championship in the late 80's and early 90's. And, they were easily the best 2 teams of that period.

They were surely the best two teams, but the gap was too wide between the great WI team and Pakistan in the late 80s. There was no competition for test supremacy in the late 80s. Great WI team era was done with the retirement of Viv.

Here is late 80s,
.


19 wins in 30 odd tests were simply too far ahead of other teams in the late 80s. Pakistan was better than the rest due to not losing many tests even if they did not win many. The great WI team was in a different class.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

They were surely the best two teams, but the gap was too wide between the great WI team and Pakistan in the late 80s. There was no competition for test supremacy in the late 80s. Great WI team era was done with the retirement of Viv.

Here is late 80s,
.
View attachment 107655

19 wins in 30 odd tests were simply too far ahead of other teams in the late 80s. Pakistan was better than the rest due to not losing many tests even if they did not win many. The great WI team was in a different class.

What about South Africa-Australia?

 

[Buffet]

What about South Africa-Australia?

Which period? You can't have just 1-2 series between teams in 1-2 years if you are going to talk about test supremacy.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

Wi of the 1980s were atleast three levels ahead of any other team in that era, was there ever any doubt who was the best team of 1980s?
Pakistan beating west indies(away) in one match where Marshall and Viv didn't play is same as india beating aus without smith Warner. If you rate one highly you have to rate the other one too.

Similarly Aus of early 2000s was ahead of any other team, no competition.

I think there was some competition between Sa and eng in early 2000s for 2 to 3 years but still it wasn't that close tbh.

 

[Buffet]

Wi of the 1980s were atleast three levels ahead of any other team in that era, was there ever any doubt who was the best team of 1980s?
Pakistan beating west indies(away) in one match where Marshall and Viv didn't play is same as india beating aus without smith Warner. If you rate one highly you have to rate the other one too.

Similarly Aus of early 2000s was ahead of any other team, no competition.

I think there was some competition between Sa and eng in early 2000s for 2 to 3 years but still it wasn't that close tbh.

There was good competition in the early 90s. Pakistan had a good team. WI declined, but still a good team. Aus was starting to develop as a good team.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

There was good competition in the early 90s. Pakistan had a good team. WI declined, but still a good team. Aus was starting to develop as a good team.

Yes if you talk about 90s then I agree, Pakistan was a top team at that time and Windies weren't the force they once used to be, same goes for Aus who were just beginning their journey towards greatness.

 

[Ab Fan]

In last 20 years, it is between Australia, South Africa and India.

 

[Buffet]

Yes if you talk about 90s then I agree, Pakistan was a top team at that time and Windies weren't the force they once used to be, same goes for Aus who were just beginning their journey towards greatness.

I was talking only about the early 90s.


WI and even Pakistan declined too much in the second half of the 90s. SA and Aus were the two top test sides in the second half of the 90s by some margin.

 

[Buffet]

In last 20 years, it is between Australia, South Africa and India.

That's too long a period. Teams change a lot in 20 years.

 

[Ab Fan]

That's too long a period. Teams change a lot in 20 years.

1998-99 - Aus/SA
2007-08 - Aus/SA
2009-10- SA/Ind
2012-13- SA/Eng
2015- SA/Ind
2020- Aus/Ind

This tells me that in last 20 years, the top three are :- Australia, South Africa and India.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

I was talking only about the early 90s. .

Yeah i know that, so was I.

 

[Napa]

The legendary tussle of Pakistan and the West Indies during the 80s (a couple of series played during the late 70s and early 90s are also included) immediately comes to mind. That was an actual era, the rest on your list are just individual series.

The greatest Asian team versus the greatest team of all. Legendary players participating; drama and nail-biting cricket galore.

What legendary tussle? The records in the 1980s of these two teams were very different.

WI was an ATG team in the 1980s, they won 14 series, lost 1 and drew 5. Their only series defeat was at the beginning of 1980 when they lost a Test in NZ by 1 wicket. Their W/L ratio was 14.

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/records/team/series_results.html?class=1;id=4;type=team

Pakistan was a very good team in the 1980s, but not comparable to WI. Pakistan won 11 series, lost 5 and drew 7. Their W/L ratio was 2.2.

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/records/team/series_results.html?class=1;id=7;type=team

WI was ranked #1 for 104 months, while Pakistan was ranked #1 for for 2 months.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICC_Test_Championship#Historical_rankings

 

[szrana007]

What legendary tussle?
The records in the 1980s of these two teams were very different.

WI was an ATG team in the 1980s, they won 14 series, lost 1 and drew 5. Their only series defeat was at the beginning of 1980 when they lost a Test in NZ by 1 wicket. Their W/L ratio was 14.

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/records/team/series_results.html?class=1;id=4;type=team

Pakistan was a very good team in the 1980s, but not comparable to WI. Pakistan won 11 series, lost 5 and drew 7. Their W/L ratio was 2.2.

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/records/team/series_results.html?class=1;id=7;type=team

WI was ranked #1 for 104 months, while Pakistan was ranked #1 for for 2 months.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICC_Test_Championship#Historical_rankings

Maybe he was talking about Pakistan fighting tooth and nail with the Windies to have 3 drawn series in 1986, 1988 and 1990/91, when all the other teams were being destroyed by WI.

 

[Napa]

Maybe he was talking about Pakistan fighting tooth and nail with the Windies to have 3 drawn series in 1986, 1988 and 1990/91, when all the other teams were being destroyed by WI.

1. The OP wrote "Test supremacy" which I took to mean the battle to be the #1 team. The WI were the #1 team of the 1980s by quite a margin. The second place was a close fight between Australia and Pakistan. They played 5 series in the 1980s with the home side emerging victorious every time.

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/records/team/series_results.html?class=1;id=2;type=team

2. WI weren't really "destroying" all other teams. They drew a series each in Australia, India and NZ.

3.If the OP meant a really close fought series for a side that was destroying everybody else, nothing quite beats the drama of the Australia in India series of 2001. Picture this:
i) Australia on a 15-0-0 run of Tests.
ii) After the India series, the Aussies follow up with series wins against SA and Eng (both home and away) and against WI and Pakistan. No team in history ever had such domination. The WI of the 1980s didn't come close.
iii) In the India series, Australia wins the first Test and gets India to follow on in the second Test. The rest is history.

 

[szrana007]

1. The OP wrote "Test supremacy" which I took to mean the battle to be the #1 team. The WI were the #1 team of the 1980s by quite a margin.
The second place was a close fight between Australia and Pakistan.
They played 5 series in the 1980s with the home side emerging victorious every time.

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/records/team/series_results.html?class=1;id=2;type=team

2. WI weren't really "destroying" all other teams. They drew a series each in Australia, India and NZ.

3.If the OP meant a really close fought series for a side that was destroying everybody else, nothing quite beats the drama of the Australia in India series of 2001. Picture this:
i) Australia on a 15-0-0 run of Tests.
ii) After the India series, the Aussies follow up with series wins against SA and Eng (both home and away) and against WI and Pakistan. No team in history ever had such domination. The WI of the 1980s didn't come close.
iii) In the India series, Australia wins the first Test and gets India to follow on in the second Test. The rest is history.

Not close at all. Just look at their W/L ratios.

Pakistan's W/L ratio = 1.77
Australia's W/L ratio = 0.87

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...1980;spanval1=span;template=results;type=team

Pakistan was clearly the 2nd best side of the 80's.

Infact NZL is the 3rd best team of the 80's ( W/L ratio of 1.13), Australia come at 4th spot.

 

[Napa]

Not close at all. Just look at their W/L ratios.

Pakistan's W/L ratio = 1.77
Australia's W/L ratio = 0.87

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...1980;spanval1=span;template=results;type=team

Pakistan was clearly the 2nd best side of the 80's.

Infact NZL is the 3rd best team of the 80's ( W/L ratio of 1.13), Australia come at 4th spot.

Fair enough, but be consistent. Don't use head to head series results for comparing WI and Pakistan, and then turn around and reject the same for Pakistan and Australia. If you are going to use W/L ratios for Pakistan and Australia, do the same for WI and Pakistan.

 

[szrana007]

There was good competition in the early 90s. Pakistan had a good team. WI declined, but still a good team. Aus was starting to develop as a good team.

Looking at the W/L ratios, Pakistan was the best Test team in the early 90's.

Pakistan's W/L ratio = 2.5 (from 1 Jan 1990- 31 Dec 1994)

Australia's W/L ratio = 2.2 (from 1 Jan 1990-31 Dec 1994)

West Indies W/L ratio = 2.0 ( from 1 Jan 1990- 31 Dec 1994)

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...1990;spanval1=span;template=results;type=team

So Pak,Aus and WI were all closely matched but Pakistan was the best of them all.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

I still think 2nd .They lost in 1990 in Australia and West Indies in 1993.Also drawn rubber st home against West Indies.Not as good as they were in 1988 .

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Looking at the W/L ratios, Pakistan was the best Test team in the early 90's.

Pakistan's W/L ratio = 2.5 (from 1 Jan 1990- 31 Dec 1994)

Australia's W/L ratio = 2.2 (from 1 Jan 1990-31 Dec 1994)

West Indies W/L ratio = 2.0 ( from 1 Jan 1990- 31 Dec 1994)

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...1990;spanval1=span;template=results;type=team

So Pak,Aus and WI were all closely matched but Pakistan was the best of them all.

I still rate Pakistan 2nd best as they were beaten in West Indies in 1993 and Australia in 1990 and could only draw a rubber at home in 1990 against West Indies.Better in 1987-88 .West Indies twice beat Australia too.

 

[wrongun]

Not close at all. Just look at their W/L ratios.

Pakistan's W/L ratio = 1.77
Australia's W/L ratio = 0.87

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...1980;spanval1=span;template=results;type=team

Pakistan was clearly the 2nd best side of the 80's.

Infact NZL is the 3rd best team of the 80's ( W/L ratio of 1.13), Australia come at 4th spot.

That's fair enough. Australian cricket in the early to mid 80s was one of our weakest ever periods. Only in the late 80s did it start to turn, but we still weren't dominating (we'd lose to WI still & to Pakistan away).

Slowly started to improve with the '87 WC win & the weak era really only ended with the '89 Ashes & the emergence of a young Taylor, S Waugh & Healy to join forces with stalwarts Border, Boon & Jones into a formidable lineup.

 

[szrana007]

That's fair enough. Australian cricket in the early to mid 80s was one of our weakest ever periods. Only in the late 80s did it start to turn, but we still weren't dominating (we'd lose to WI still & to Pakistan away).

Slowly started to improve with the '87 WC win & the weak era really only ended with the '89 Ashes & the emergence of a young Taylor, S Waugh & Healy to join forces with stalwarts Border, Boon & Jones into a formidable lineup.

You are right, but even in the early 90's ( from 1990-1994), Pakistan were better than Australia. WI and Pak were the top 2 teams in early 90's, while Australia were 3rd.

Australia only became the no.1 team in 1995 after beating WI in the Caribbean.

 

[subshakerz]

The closest rivalry was Australia and SA in the late 90s.

In 93-94, they drew series against each other and were roughly even. Though South Africa's conservative streak was visible then.

In the next round they faced each other in 97/98, Australia were already no.1 having beaten West Indies and the fight was over who is the real no.1 in the world. SA by that point, with a decent middle order and Donald/Pollock, were their closest competitor for no.1 and after Aussie had the best record in the 90s.

Both of Australia's victories home and away were tough ones, with SA putting up a decent fight but not making it. Warne and brilliance of the Waugh twins were the big differences between the two sides.

By the time they met again in 2001/2002, Australia were stronger and SA were without a peak Donald and lost easily.

 

[Heisenberg111]

The closest rivalry was Australia and SA in the late 90s.

In 93-94, they drew series against each other and were roughly even. Though South Africa's conservative streak was visible then.

In the next round they faced each other in 97/98, Australia were already no.1 having beaten West Indies and the fight was over who is the real no.1 in the world. SA by that point, with a decent middle order and Donald/Pollock, were their closest competitor for no.1 and after Aussie had the best record in the 90s.

Both of Australia's victories home and away were tough ones,
with SA putting up a decent fight but not making it. Warne and brilliance of the Waugh twins were the big differences between the two sides.

By the time they met again in 2001/2002, Australia were stronger and SA were without a peak Donald and lost easily.

Aus won the first two tests in the away series in South Africa in 1997, SA were only able to win the dead rubber of that series. At home later in the year Aus took a 1-0 lead early in the series and never looked like surrendering it and won the series 1-0.

 

[subshakerz]

The closest rivalry was Australia and SA in the late 90s.

In 93-94, they drew series against each other and were roughly even. Though South Africa's conservative streak was visible then. Neither team was yet in the clearing for no.1

In the next round they faced each other in 97/98, Australia were already no.1 having beaten West Indies and the fight was over who is the real no.1 in the world. SA by that point, with a decent middle order and Donald/Pollock, were their closest competitor for no.1 and after Aussie had the best record in the 90s.

Both of Australia's victories home and away were tough ones, with SA putting up a decent fight but not making it. Warne and brilliance of the Waugh twins were the big differences between the two sides.

By the time they met again in 2001/2002, Australia were stronger and SA were without a peak Donald and lost easily.

 

[Bilal7]

What legendary tussle? The records in the 1980s of these two teams were very different.

WI was an ATG team in the 1980s, they won 14 series, lost 1 and drew 5. Their only series defeat was at the beginning of 1980 when they lost a Test in NZ by 1 wicket. Their W/L ratio was 14.

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/records/team/series_results.html?class=1;id=4;type=team

Pakistan was a very good team in the 1980s, but not comparable to WI. Pakistan won 11 series, lost 5 and drew 7. Their W/L ratio was 2.2.

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/records/team/series_results.html?class=1;id=7;type=team

WI was ranked #1 for 104 months, while Pakistan was ranked #1 for for 2 months.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICC_Test_Championship#Historical_rankings

Go do your homework yourself. Pakistan was the clear #2 side in the ~80s and the “legendary tussles” I was referring to were the several drawn series between the greatest test side of all time and the greatest Asian test side of all time.

West Indies were the better team but if any team could have beaten them, it was Imran’s Pakistan. That is why that rivalry was fantastic.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Go do your homework yourself. Pakistan was the clear #2 side in the ~80s and the “legendary tussles” I was referring to were the several drawn series between the greatest test side of all time and the greatest Asian test side of all time.

West Indies were the better team but if any team could have beaten them, it was Imran’s Pakistan. That is why that rivalry was fantastic.

Agree Pakistan almost equal.Great team and rivalry.

 

[Ab Fan]

Aus won the first two tests in the away series in South Africa in 1997, SA were only able to win the dead rubber of that series. At home later in the year Aus took a 1-0 lead early in the series and never looked like surrendering it and won the series 1-0.

SA's batting was a little weak in 90s compared to Aussies even though they had two ATGs, Donald and Pollock and actually both were at their peak during that time.

 

[Buffet]

The closest rivalry was Australia and SA in the late 90s.

In 93-94, they drew series against each other and were roughly even. Though South Africa's conservative streak was visible then. Neither team was yet in the clearing for no.1

In the next round they faced each other in 97/98, Australia were already no.1 having beaten West Indies and the fight was over who is the real no.1 in the world. SA by that point, with a decent middle order and Donald/Pollock, were their closest competitor for no.1 and after Aussie had the best record in the 90s.

Both of Australia's victories home and away were tough ones, with SA putting up a decent fight but not making it. Warne and brilliance of the Waugh twins were the big differences between the two sides.

By the time they met again in 2001/2002, Australia were stronger and SA were without a peak Donald and lost easily.

SA had the highest W/L in the second half of the 90s, but the team really lacked gun batsmen. The performance was due to Donald and Pollock in the later half of the 90s.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

The closest rivalry was Australia and SA in the late 90s.

In 93-94, they drew series against each other and were roughly even. Though South Africa's conservative streak was visible then. Neither team was yet in the clearing for no.1

In the next round they faced each other in 97/98, Australia were already no.1 having beaten West Indies and the fight was over who is the real no.1 in the world. SA by that point, with a decent middle order and Donald/Pollock, were their closest competitor for no.1 and after Aussie had the best record in the 90s.

Both of Australia's victories home and away were tough ones, with SA putting up a decent fight but not making it. Warne and brilliance of the Waugh twins were the big differences between the two sides.

By the time they met again in 2001/2002, Australia were stronger and SA were without a peak Donald and lost easily.

Totally agree. Analytical.How was my list?

 

[Napa]

Agree Pakistan almost equal.Great team and rivalry.

You consider a series W/L ratio of 14 for WI and 2.2 for Pakistan to be "almost equal"? And 104 months as #1 compares to 2 months as #1? Good for you!

Drawing against the WI team of the 1980s was no biggie, Aus, India and NZ also all drew series with WI. However, WI was far ahead of all other teams, there was no "almost equal".

 

[szrana007]

You consider a series W/L ratio of 14 for WI and 2.2 for Pakistan to be "almost equal"? And 104 months as #1 compares to 2 months as #1? Good for you!

Drawing against the WI team of the 1980s was no biggie, Aus, India and NZ also all drew series with WI. However, WI was far ahead of all other teams, there was no "almost equal".

No other team apart from Pakistan drew a series in the Caribbean though. Pakistan drew in 1988, and Pakistan was the only team to avoid a series defeat and draw a series in the Caribbean from 1976-1994. Only team to win a Test match in the West Indies in the 80's.

That sums up the magnitude of Pakistan's achievement.

 

[Heisenberg111]

No other team apart from Pakistan drew a series in the Caribbean though. Pakistan drew in 1988, and Pakistan was the only team to avoid a series defeat and draw a series in the Caribbean from 1976-1994. Only team to win a Test match in the West Indies in the 80's.

That sums up the magnitude of Pakistan's achievement.

Yup, was a fantastic achievement by Pak to draw the series in the West Indies in 1987/88.

 

[Napa]

No other team apart from Pakistan drew a series in the Caribbean though. Pakistan drew in 1988, and Pakistan was the only team to avoid a series defeat and draw a series in the Caribbean from 1976-1994. Only team to win a Test match in the West Indies in the 80's.

That sums up the magnitude of Pakistan's achievement.

No doubt drawing in WI was a great achievement, however the 1988 WI team was not the peak 1980s WI which had whitewashed England 10-0. Holding and Garner were gone. In the Test that Pakistan won at Georgetown by scoring 435 in the first innings, Marshall also didn't play.

https://www.espncricinfo.com/series...ies-vs-pakistan-1st-test-63481/full-scorecard

WI was a team in transition with their future good pacers Ambrose and Walsh both still raw, they averaged 52.14 and 57.50 in that series.

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...s=1;template=results;type=bowling;view=series

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...s=1;template=results;type=bowling;view=series

So Pakistan drew the series by beating WI in a Test in which Marshall, Garner and Holding were all missing. When Marshall returned, he took 6/47 and WI beat Pakistan by an innings. This series hardly qualifies as a "legendary tussle".

Once their new bowlers Ambrose and Walsh found their feet, the WI had another 10 good years. The 1988 team was a team in transition with the departure of Garner and Holding and Marshall missing the only Test they lost.

 

[wrongun]

SA's batting was a little weak in 90s compared to Aussies even though they had two ATGs, Donald and Pollock and actually both were at their peak during that time.

A little weak on top end quality (especially considering S Waugh was in his peak years), but they batted long to make up for it. All those allrounders- Kallis, McMillan, Klusener, Pollock... they just kept coming. Even their tail could bat with guys like Symcox being handy enough.

 

[wrongun]

You are right, but even in the early 90's ( from 1990-1994), Pakistan were better than Australia. WI and Pak were the top 2 teams in early 90's, while Australia were 3rd.

Australia only became the no.1 team in 1995 after beating WI in the Caribbean.

Yes they probably were, that was peak Wasim/Waqar from memory. Imran still an outstanding bat, Miandad, young Inzy, Sohail. They did shade early 90s Australia on sheer bowling strike power.

It's just that's the era I think of Oz going from not much good, to a "good" Test side. But yeah, probably #3 or so but climbing higher once Warne started to produce around 93 onward & Pakistan couldn't fully replace Imran & Javed's high quality.

 

[subshakerz]

Pakistan post Imran were supposed to be contenders for no.1 but team disunity and lack of consistent captains robbed them of momentum. They lost badly in the West Indies in 93 and even when Australia lost to Pakistan in 94 away, they looked like a better team and generally dominated Pakistan in all three tests despite losing 1-0.

 

[Buffet]

Pakistan post Imran were supposed to be contenders for no.1 but team disunity and lack of consistent captains robbed them of momentum. They lost badly in the West Indies in 93 and even when Australia lost to Pakistan in 94 away, they looked like a better team and generally dominated Pakistan in all three tests despite losing 1-0.

Pakistan had some good players in the 90s, but the team pretty much went downhill. Output was less than what you expect if you see the players in the team.

 

[moghul]

Both in 1977 and 1988, Pak-Wi were very closely matched team , but I would say even closer in 1977.

In 1977 Pakistan batting was one of the best in the world, with players like Majid, Zaheer, Asif, Mushtaq, Sadiq had extensive experience of county cricket and facing the best bowlers including West Indian and South Africans and they also had Wasim Raja.

Majid, one of the all time great batsman against genuine fast bowling was at his peak in those days .
Bowling was potent with Imran, Sarfraz, Asif Masood, Inti and Mushtaq, as was in 1988 with IK, Wasim, Qadir and Iqbal Qasim.

Pakistan had weaker batting in 1988 compared to their line in1977

West Indies had great bowling and batting lineup both in 1977 and 1988 but 1988 one was even better with Marshal and Ambrose at their best .

So I would say Pak team with its best ever batting line up created the closest rivalry again WI in 1977.

 

[street cricketer]

Both in 1977 and 1988, Pak-Wi were very closely matched team , but I would say even closer in 1977.

In 1977 Pakistan batting was one of the best in the world, with players like Majid, Zaheer, Asif, Mushtaq, Sadiq had extensive experience of county cricket and facing the best bowlers including West Indian and South Africans and they also had Wasim Raja.

Majid, one of the all time great batsman against genuine fast bowling was at his peak in those days .
Bowling was potent with Imran, Sarfraz, Asif Masood, Inti and Mushtaq, as was in 1988 with IK, Wasim, Qadir and Iqbal Qasim.

Pakistan had weaker batting in 1988 compared to their line in1977

West Indies had great bowling and batting lineup both in 1977 and 1988 but 1988 one was even better with Marshal and Ambrose at their best .

So I would say Pak team with its best ever batting line up created the closest rivalry again WI in 1977.

It was Ambrose's debut series lol..

 

[Harsh Thakor]

It was Ambrose's debut series lol..

Did not Pakistan Morally beat West Indies in 1988 unlike in 1977 when you consider umpiring? Also was bowling attack not better with Wasim and Qadir?

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Both in 1977 and 1988, Pak-Wi were very closely matched team , but I would say even closer in 1977.

In 1977 Pakistan batting was one of the best in the world, with players like Majid, Zaheer, Asif, Mushtaq, Sadiq had extensive experience of county cricket and facing the best bowlers including West Indian and South Africans and they also had Wasim Raja.

Majid, one of the all time great batsman against genuine fast bowling was at his peak in those days .
Bowling was potent with Imran, Sarfraz, Asif Masood, Inti and Mushtaq, as was in 1988 with IK, Wasim, Qadir and Iqbal Qasim.

Pakistan had weaker batting in 1988 compared to their line in1977

West Indies had great bowling and batting lineup both in 1977 and 1988 but 1988 one was even better with Marshal and Ambrose at their best .

So I would say Pak team with its best ever batting line up created the closest rivalry again WI in 1977.

I still think Pakistan was arguably even better in 1998 than West Indies with the likes of Wasim and Qadir in the bowling attack and Imran as a leader?Bad umpiring cost them the series.Thus closer in 1988?

 

[street cricketer]

Did not Pakistan Morally beat West Indies in 1988 unlike in 1977 when you consider umpiring? Also was bowling attack not better with Wasim and Qadir?

Yes but the West Indies ethically won the series because they had the bulk of their legendary fast bowling quartet retired and Marshall and Viv missed a part of the series through injury.

 

[Napa]

Did not Pakistan Morally beat West Indies in 1988 unlike in 1977 when you consider umpiring? Also was bowling attack not better with Wasim and Qadir?

Don’t go there. Australian, Indian, English and other players have a lot more to say about umpiring in Pakistan. Just remember that prior to the introduction of neutral umpires Miandad averaged 78 at home and 39 away. Nor was this the norm with Gavaskar averaging more away than at home.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

No doubt drawing in WI was a great achievement, however the 1988 WI team was not the peak 1980s WI which had whitewashed England 10-0. Holding and Garner were gone. In the Test that Pakistan won at Georgetown by scoring 435 in the first innings, Marshall also didn't play.
.

Viv Richards did'nt play that much too, so it was pretty much windies B

 

[Gilly]

Looking at the W/L ratios, Pakistan was the best Test team in the early 90's.

Pakistan's W/L ratio = 2.5 (from 1 Jan 1990- 31 Dec 1994)

Australia's W/L ratio = 2.2 (from 1 Jan 1990-31 Dec 1994)

West Indies W/L ratio = 2.0 ( from 1 Jan 1990- 31 Dec 1994)

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...1990;spanval1=span;template=results;type=team

So Pak,Aus and WI were all closely matched but Pakistan was the best of them all.

Now I'm not saying you have cherry picked a moment in time where Pakistan had 8 wins against NZ and Zim but if you look at the teams WI, PAK, ENG, AUS against each other then the picture changes quite a bit.

 

[wrongun]

Now I'm not saying you have cherry picked a moment in time where Pakistan had 8 wins against NZ and Zim but if you look at the teams WI, PAK, ENG, AUS against each other then the picture changes quite a bit.

I haven't researched it but that period is roughly the golden run of Waqars peak (one of the greatest peaks in the game) + Wasims peak years (he went a good bit longer) & includes a goodly dose of Imran + Javed before they retire at the end(ish).

There's no doubt Pakistan's attack was better than anyone else in the world in that 4-5 year stretch. Oz had Warne on the up but pace attack nowhere near that good. Windies had Curtly, Courtney & a decent support act of quicks but no spinner worth the name.

Pakistans batting wasn't the best but in that 1990-1994 period you could make an argument Pakistan was the best allround attack. The best allround Test team has to take 20 wickets. Was their batting also string enough... maybe. In some conditions. It was arguably as good or better than the WI lineup of the period but I'd argue Oz was stronger... but we'd dropped S Waugh & Jones by 1991 & 92 respectively so we weren't as stable as we think... S Waugh came back a year or so later in his greatest form but Jones wasn't seen again.

Great discussion.

 

[Napa]

It was Ambrose's debut series lol..

In which he averaged 52 per wicket.

I haven't researched it but that period is roughly the golden run of Waqars peak (one of the greatest peaks in the game) + Wasims peak years (he went a good bit longer) & includes a goodly dose of Imran + Javed before they retire at the end(ish).

There's no doubt Pakistan's attack was better than anyone else in the world in that 4-5 year stretch. Oz had Warne on the up but pace attack nowhere near that good. Windies had Curtly, Courtney & a decent support act of quicks but no spinner worth the name.

Pakistans batting wasn't the best but in that 1990-1994 period you could make an argument Pakistan was the best allround attack. The best allround Test team has to take 20 wickets. Was their batting also string enough... maybe. In some conditions. It was arguably as good or better than the WI lineup of the period but I'd argue Oz was stronger... but we'd dropped S Waugh & Jones by 1991 & 92 respectively so we weren't as stable as we think... S Waugh came back a year or so later in his greatest form but Jones wasn't seen again.

Great discussion.

Definitely cherry picked stats, if you move forward by a year then Pakistan’s W/L ratio falls to #5.

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...1991;spanval1=span;template=results;type=team

 

[Heisenberg111]

In which he averaged 52 per wicket.



Definitely cherry picked stats, if you move forward by a year then Pakistan’s W/L ratio falls to #5.

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...1991;spanval1=span;template=results;type=team

Everyone knows that post 1994, Pakistan became a highly inconsistent team, so including till 1994 makes sense. They started losing alot at home post 1994 due to various reasons, I won't go into detail here.

Anyways, Pakistan's best ever period in Test cricket is from 1982-1994.

 

[Gilly]

I haven't researched it but that period is roughly the golden run of Waqars peak (one of the greatest peaks in the game) + Wasims peak years (he went a good bit longer) & includes a goodly dose of Imran + Javed before they retire at the end(ish).

There's no doubt Pakistan's attack was better than anyone else in the world in that 4-5 year stretch. Oz had Warne on the up but pace attack nowhere near that good. Windies had Curtly, Courtney & a decent support act of quicks but no spinner worth the name.

Pakistans batting wasn't the best but in that 1990-1994 period you could make an argument Pakistan was the best allround attack. The best allround Test team has to take 20 wickets. Was their batting also string enough... maybe. In some conditions. It was arguably as good or better than the WI lineup of the period but I'd argue Oz was stronger... but we'd dropped S Waugh & Jones by 1991 & 92 respectively so we weren't as stable as we think... S Waugh came back a year or so later in his greatest form but Jones wasn't seen again.

Great discussion.

Waqar in that period averaged 34 against australia and averaged 14 against NZ and Zim.

anyway its not even close Ambrose was by far the standout bowler in that period.

 

[szrana007]

In which he averaged 52 per wicket.



Definitely cherry picked stats, if you move forward by a year then Pakistan’s W/L ratio falls to #5.

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...1991;spanval1=span;template=results;type=team

We were talking about early 90's and Pak,WI and Aus were quite close in the early 90's as Buffet mentioned. So I thought I should post the records from the early 90's (from 1990-1994).

Infact, you are the one doing the cherry picking here by taking stats from 1991-1995, by removing the year 1990 and including 1995, when by 1995 Australia were already the no.1 side in the world, when they won in the Caribbean.

And in any case the year 1995 belongs in the second half of the 90's, early 90's mean the first half of the 90's which is from 1990-1994.

 

[szrana007]

No doubt drawing in WI was a great achievement, however the 1988 WI team was not the peak 1980s WI which had whitewashed England 10-0. Holding and Garner were gone. In the Test that Pakistan won at Georgetown by scoring 435 in the first innings, Marshall also didn't play.

https://www.espncricinfo.com/series...ies-vs-pakistan-1st-test-63481/full-scorecard

WI was a team in transition with their future good pacers Ambrose and Walsh both still raw, they averaged 52.14 and 57.50 in that series.

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...s=1;template=results;type=bowling;view=series

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...s=1;template=results;type=bowling;view=series

So Pakistan drew the series by beating WI in a Test in which Marshall, Garner and Holding were all missing. When Marshall returned, he took 6/47 and WI beat Pakistan by an innings. This series hardly qualifies as a "legendary tussle".

Once their new bowlers Ambrose and Walsh found their feet, the WI had another 10 good years. The 1988 team was a team in transition with the departure of Garner and Holding and Marshall missing the only Test they lost.

Viv and Marshall played in the 2nd and the 3rd tests of that series but Pakistan still came close to winning both those tests, and were only robbed because of the umpiring in the 3rd test. Otherwise, Pak would have won the series 2-0, which would have made Pakistan the Unofficial World Test Champions.

So thats not a valid excuse at all. Pakistan played great cricket in that series against an ATG outfit and came close to beating them in their backyard, when every other team was getting destroyed in the Caribbean. That deserves alot of praise and admiration.

 

[Heisenberg111]

I haven't researched it but that period is roughly the golden run of Waqars peak (one of the greatest peaks in the game) + Wasims peak years (he went a good bit longer) & includes a goodly dose of Imran + Javed before they retire at the end(ish).

There's no doubt Pakistan's attack was better than anyone else in the world in that 4-5 year stretch. Oz had Warne on the up but pace attack nowhere near that good. Windies had Curtly, Courtney & a decent support act of quicks but no spinner worth the name.

Pakistans batting wasn't the best but in that 1990-1994 period you could make an argument Pakistan was the best allround attack. The best allround Test team has to take 20 wickets. Was their batting also string enough... maybe. In some conditions. It was arguably as good or better than the WI lineup of the period but I'd argue Oz was stronger... but we'd dropped S Waugh & Jones by 1991 & 92 respectively so we weren't as stable as we think... S Waugh came back a year or so later in his greatest form but Jones wasn't seen again.

Great discussion.

Australia lost to Pakistan in 1994, that tells me that they were below Pakistan at that time, but ofcourse by the next year in 1995, all the Salim Malik fixing saga and bribery scandals meant Pakistan went downhill, while Australia rose to be the best side in the world by beating the West Indies.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Australia lost to Pakistan in 1994, that tells me that they were below Pakistan at that time, but ofcourse by the next year in 1995, all the Salim Malik fixing saga and bribery scandals meant Pakistan went downhill, while Australia rose to be the best side in the world by beating the West Indies.

However Australia were the better team and could or almost won the series 3-0.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Viv and Marshall played in the 2nd and the 3rd tests of that series but Pakistan still came close to winning both those tests, and were only robbed because of the umpiring in the 3rd test. Otherwise, Pak would have won the series 2-0, which would have made Pakistan the Unofficial World Test Champions.

So thats not a valid excuse at all. Pakistan played great cricket in that series against an ATG outfit and came close to beating them in their backyard, when every other team was getting destroyed in the Caribbean. That deserves a lot of praise and admiration.

Absolutely correct.Morally they wee unofficial test champions.However West Indies resurrected in England in 1988 to win 4-0 and to win 3-1 in Australia,to come close to Lloyd's invincibles.Pak may not have beaten that West Indies team .Pakistan afterall lost in Australia in 1989-90 and in West Indies in 1993. Still I rate Pakistan basically 2nd to West Indies.Imran himself ranked the Calypsos at no 1 in 1989.

 

[szrana007]

Now I'm not saying you have cherry picked a moment in time where Pakistan had 8 wins against NZ and Zim but if you look at the teams WI, PAK, ENG, AUS against each other then the picture changes quite a bit.

Pakistan won 9 series and only lost 2 series from 1990-1994. They beat every team they played in a series in this period apart from the West Indies. But then again West Indies didn't lose any series from 1990-1994 and were the best side in the world. Pakistan were no.2, while Australia were 3rd.

But obviously W/L ratios will tell you that Pakistan were the best side from 1990-1994, when they clearly weren't, and I wanted to point that out.

The historical ICC test rankings in 1994 also put West Indies as 1st, Pakistan 2nd and Australia 3rd.

https://web.archive.org/web/2013032...ket.com/match_zone/test_ranking.php?year=1994

 

[Napa]

It was Ambrose's debut series lol..

Viv and Marshall played in the 2nd and the 3rd tests of that series but Pakistan still came close to winning both those tests, and were only robbed because of the umpiring in the 3rd test. Otherwise, Pak would have won the series 2-0, which would have made Pakistan the Unofficial World Test Champions.

So thats not a valid excuse at all. Pakistan played great cricket in that series against an ATG outfit and came close to beating them in their backyard, when every other team was getting destroyed in the Caribbean. That deserves alot of praise and admiration.

1. Don’t complain about umpiring before you read what players from other countries have to say.

2. WI was not ATG anymore after the departure of Holding and Garner.

I’m out.

 

[szrana007]

1. Don’t complain about umpiring before you read what players from other countries have to say.

2. WI was not ATG anymore after the departure of Holding and Garner.

I’m out.

How was WI not an ATG outfit back then? They still destroyed Australia in Australia and England in England and didn't lose a Test series for 7 more years after 1988.

That is a phenomenal record which only an ATG side can boast of, doesn't matter if Holding and Garner retired. They were replaced by better bowlers in Ambrose and Walsh.

 

[street cricketer]

How was WI not an ATG outfit back then? They still destroyed Australia in Australia and England in England and didn't lose a Test series for 7 more years after 1988.

That is a phenomenal record which only an ATG side can boast of, doesn't matter if Holding and Garner retired. They were replaced by better bowlers in Ambrose and Walsh.

Walsh wasn't of the same class.

 

[szrana007]

Walsh wasn't of the same class.

Walsh and Holding are comparable imo. Also Amby was better than Garner.

 

[street cricketer]

Walsh and Holding are comparable imo. Also Amby was better than Garner.

Nah. I doubt many West Indians would rate Walsh above Holding.

Ambrose was probably better than all of them except Marshall. I mean he is arguably among the top 5 best pacers ever in test cricket history.

 

[Napa]

How was WI not an ATG outfit back then? They still destroyed Australia in Australia and England in England and didn't lose a Test series for 7 more years after 1988.

That is a phenomenal record which only an ATG side can boast of, doesn't matter if Holding and Garner retired. They were replaced by better bowlers in Ambrose and Walsh.

Nah. I doubt many West Indians would rate Walsh above Holding.

Ambrose was probably better than all of them except Marshall. I mean he is arguably among the top 5 best pacers ever in test cricket history.

1. Yes, Ambrose was there, but it was his first series and he averaged 52. Over his career this average fell to 20.99. The next two times Pakistan visited WI, he averaged 23.11 and 19.90. Obviously in 1988 he was too new to be any good.

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...s=1;template=results;type=bowling;view=series

The ATG WI bowling attack was Marshall, Holding and Garner. Ambrose and Walsh in the 1988 series were nowhere close to the quality of Holding and Garner. The ATG WI team was notable for its bowling, and 2 of the 3 main bowlers were gone.

2. The ATG team that had beaten England 5-0 in England, and Australia 3-1 in Australia also had Lloyd who averaged 51, and 50.85 in those series. He was gone by the 1988 series.

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/records/team/series_results.html?class=1;id=4;type=team

https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/e...s=1;template=results;type=batting;view=series

3. The bowlers from the ATG team were missing, the batsmen were missing. Brian Lara had not yet arrived.

4. Before the 1988 series, the WI had just drawn series in Pakistan, NZ and India.

5. It was very creditable for Pakistan to draw the series, but WI was a team in transition at that time. They again became a great team as Ambrose and Walsh came up to speed and Lara was added.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

[MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION]. Please come here

 

[wrongun]

Waqar in that period averaged 34 against australia and averaged 14 against NZ and Zim.

anyway its not even close Ambrose was by far the standout bowler in that period.

You're being a bit weird about acknowldging Waqar in that 5 year run.. He also averaged 18 & 20 home & away v the WI who were still an excellent batting unit & #1 in the world at that time. During the same period he also averaged 25 vs England. The Oz stats you are quoting include his 3rd, 4th & 5th career tests & his first away tour so not quite as bad as you make out. Considering it also included a match winning prformance (7fer) and averafe of 25 at home vs Oz.

Considering Pakistan also had Mushtaq Ahmed going well in that era, it was a great attack. WI was also excellent but lacked a spinner. Wasim & Waqar vs Walsh & Amby- toss a coin at worst, could argue either way. I'd argue the Pakistan duo more destructive but Amby is my favourite bowler.

 

[wrongun]

Australia lost to Pakistan in 1994, that tells me that they were below Pakistan at that time, but ofcourse by the next year in 1995, all the Salim Malik fixing saga and bribery scandals meant Pakistan went downhill, while Australia rose to be the best side in the world by beating the West Indies.

Nonsense, we lost in Pakistan & won at home vs Pakistan in that era. No conclusion can therefore be drawn about superiority. I'd probably concede 1990-1992 to Pakistan... '93/'94 the toss of a coin or either side on their day and certainly Oz wins at home also...

Good series between Oz & Pak around that era though. Oz winning 1:0 at home in 1990 (Pakistan drawing 2 games at the slightly slower & more familiar tracks in Sydney & the old version of Adelaide);

Pakistan taking a close series at home in '94 by one of the narrowest ever test wins, 1 wicket (Healy famously missing a stumping off Warne to lose the game by byes), with 2 drawn Tests also.

So the margins of victory are close at home in both cases- neither crushing the other. Inconclusive.

By '95, the pendulum had shifted.