Will India become an average team once their legends retire?

[Dr_Bassim]

I don't get it

Both Mcgrath & Cummins are Australians. How can I as an Indian be biased towards 2 Aussies

Cummins is good but he is nowhere close to Mcgrath.

Mcgrath is simply underrated by NEARLY EVERYONE on this forum be it Indians, Pakisanis or any other nationality.

 

[mominsaigol]

There are some match ups that will work better in era. Some match ups won't go well. Bumrah/Shami/Siraj/Ashwin/Jadeja match up will be a completely different ball game compared to Agarkar/Irfan pathan/Harbhajan/Kumble/Zaheer. Next comes batting. Apart from Mcgrath there is nobody from 2000 that are as good current trio. Ofcourse Warne probbaly will trouble the current set of batsmen unlike Laxman who scored 2000 runs against Australia in the 2000s. That match up will favor Australia. Australia scored 556 at Adelaide oval against India and yet went on to lose the Test match. Because India had batting might to match them. In current era you can't score 500 that easily against this unit.

My point was that current Indian team as is, is not beating classic Australia. For time period sake let's take 2003 Australia.

Rohit in prime is good, however on current form he's a certified home track PP bully. Otherwise he's a walking wicket. No more 2024 rubbish burnt out starc bowling him pies. Let's take 2023 India and assume their playing in England?

Rohit's reactions are no longer capable of dealing with Lee's pace, and Mcgrath will certainly het him out considering his speciality is to force batters to loft and that's all that rohit tries to do nowadays in PP, cause even rohit himself knows that unless the bowling is rubbish, he'll get out once PP is over.

Kohli in odi is still king on home turf but he won't bother Australia overseas, he's now more or less an accumulator with a 5th gear.

The rest of the batting unit is a walking wicket. Gill will get out early to any aussie bowler, Sheryas iyer will get targeted with short ball and overseas sheryas just isn't that good. Rahul is certainly going to struggle against pace and Warne level spin. Pandya and jadeja are non factors.

2023 India which alot of people praise is not that strong, they curated their pitches to suit them and had full control. Overseas in 2024 we saw that while their still the best team, they don't give vibes of being unbeatable.

They were extremely lucky that rohit fired against the rubbish that starc was bowling who single handidely lost Australia the game and that bumrah took travis' wicket.

Sa was a close encounter with the spinners not even posing a challenge and once again bunrah magic was needed.

Same with pakistan with rizwan, Imad and Babar botching it as usual.

Overseas India is not as unbeatable as 2023 home den curation made them out to be.

 

[jnaveen1980]

The ATG Australian team dominated 1999, 2003 and 2007 World Cups and beat everyone everywhere except India.

There is no better team anywhere.

Current India?

Laughable to compare them to ATG Australia.

I watched that era and Australians were mostly invincible.

Current Indian team hasnt even won a ODI World Cup which was made for India on Indian designed pitches.

Don't think anyone is compared with them. lol Imaginary comparison is made by criticis just to use that as a tool. India in isolation is very good in this era.

 

[NishanKonar]

The ATG Australian team dominated 1999, 2003 and 2007 World Cups and beat everyone everywhere except India.

There is no better team anywhere.

Current India?

Lauhable to compare them to ATG Australia.

I watched that era and Australians were mostly invincible.

Current Indian team hasnt even won a ODI World Cup which was made for India on Indian designed pitches.

Roger federer dominated tennis from 2003-07 and won almost every grand Slam bcoz he had no real opposition except Nadal at French Open. He used to win every Grand Salm except French in those years

From 2008 onwards Djokovic & Nadal grew into top tier players on all surfaces & Federer's dominance vanished

Its the same thing. Australia dominated world cricket in an era when the opposition was too weak. England was laughably bad in ODI cricket. West Indies were in decline. Pakistan blew hot & cold. India was below par in bowling. South Africa choked at ICC events

Today's landscape is different. India has a formidable team. England changed the nature of ODI cricket. Winning is not that easy for any team. Tats why we have not seen any prolonged period of dominance

 

[charlie007]

I don’t think there is any sense in talking about hypotheticals, it just becomes an argument of opinions. Debate on realities and history, that is a debate that makes sense and can be backed by data.
If, could, would have etc. are pointless and meaningless fluffs to fill up space and can’t produce anything worthwhile. Just my $0.02

 

[jnaveen1980]

My point was that current Indian team as is, is not beating classic Australia. For time period sake let's take 2003 Australia.

Rohit in prime is good, however on current form he's a certified home track PP bully. Otherwise he's a walking wicket. No more 2024 rubbish burnt out starc bowling him pies. Let's take 2023 India and assume their playing in England?

Rohit's reactions are no longer capable of dealing with Lee's pace, and Mcgrath will certainly het him out considering his speciality is to force batters to loft and that's all that rohit tries to do nowadays in PP, cause even rohit himself knows that unless the bowling is rubbish, he'll get out once PP is over.

Kohli in odi is still king on home turf but he won't bother Australia overseas, he's now more or less an accumulator with a 5th gear.

The rest of the batting unit is a walking wicket. Gill will get out early to any aussie bowler, Sheryas iyer will get targeted with short ball and overseas sheryas just isn't that good. Rahul is certainly going to struggle against pace and Warne level spin. Pandya and jadeja are non factors.

2023 India which alot of people praise is not that strong, they curated their pitches to suit them and had full control. Overseas in 2024 we saw that while their still the best team, they don't give vibes of being unbeatable.

They were extremely lucky that rohit fired against the rubbish that starc was bowling who single handidely lost Australia the game and that bumrah took travis' wicket.

Sa was a close encounter with the spinners not even posing a challenge and once again bunrah magic was needed.

Same with pakistan with rizwan, Imad and Babar botching it as usual.

Overseas India is not as unbeatable as 2023 home den curation made them out to be.

I don't think anyone is compared. Comparison is useless in every sense as they are not going to meet each other. We just have to come up with imaginary theories. That's it.

 

[NishanKonar]

My point was that current Indian team as is, is not beating classic Australia. For time period sake let's take 2003 Australia.

Rohit in prime is good, however on current form he's a certified home track PP bully. Otherwise he's a walking wicket. No more 2024 rubbish burnt out starc bowling him pies. Let's take 2023 India and assume their playing in England?

Rohit's reactions are no longer capable of dealing with Lee's pace, and Mcgrath will certainly het him out considering his speciality is to force batters to loft and that's all that rohit tries to do nowadays in PP, cause even rohit himself knows that unless the bowling is rubbish, he'll get out once PP is over.

Kohli in odi is still king on home turf but he won't bother Australia overseas, he's now more or less an accumulator with a 5th gear.

The rest of the batting unit is a walking wicket. Gill will get out early to any aussie bowler, Sheryas iyer will get targeted with short ball and overseas sheryas just isn't that good. Rahul is certainly going to struggle against pace and Warne level spin. Pandya and jadeja are non factors.

2023 India which alot of people praise is not that strong, they curated their pitches to suit them and had full control. Overseas in 2024 we saw that while their still the best team, they don't give vibes of being unbeatable.

They were extremely lucky that rohit fired against the rubbish that starc was bowling who single handidely lost Australia the game and that bumrah took travis' wicket.

Sa was a close encounter with the spinners not even posing a challenge and once again bunrah magic was needed.

Same with pakistan with rizwan, Imad and Babar botching it as usual.

Overseas India is not as unbeatable as 2023 home den curation made them out to be.

Basically if India wins - its bcoz the opposition was rubbish. No credit to any Indian player

That makes so much sense. And u were saying I am biased

 

[Dr_Bassim]

Roger federer dominated tennis from 2003-07 and won almost every grand Slam bcoz he had no real opposition except Nadal at French Open. He used to win every Grand Salm except French in those years

From 2008 onwards Djokovic & Nadal grew into top tier players on all surfaces & Federer's dominance vanished

Its the same thing. Australia dominated world cricket in an era when the opposition was too weak. England was laughably bad in ODI cricket. West Indies were in decline. Pakistan blew hot & cold. India was below par in bowling. South Africa choked at ICC events

Today's landscape is different. India has a formidable team. England changed the nature of ODI cricket. Winning is not that easy for any team. Tats why we have not seen any prolonged period of dominance.

False equivalence.

Roger Federer dominated when he was at his peak.

Nadal was mostly about French Open.

Djokovic was simply a better player and as he evolved Federer simply started getting outplayed more often.

Even if I am to take your todays landscape at face value, Australia still won 2 out of 3 ODI World Cups at a time when you feel its harder to win World Cups.

Care to explain this discrepancy?

 

[NishanKonar]

False equivalence.

Roger Federer dominated when he was at his peak.

Nadal was mostly about French Open.

Djokovic was simply a better player and as he evolved Federer simply started getting outplayed more often.

Even if I am to take your todays landscape at face value, Australia still won 2 out of 3 ODI World Cups at a time when you feel its harder to win World Cups.

Care to explain this discrepancy?

Thats why I say today's Australia is no less than that ATG Australia that u guys keep hyping. Winning ICC events is tougher in this era & this Australia actually did i twice. Winning 2023 ODI WC is much tougher than beating India in that 2003 ODI WC

In 2003 & 2007 WC - Australia did not lose any game. In 2015 & 2023 Australia lost many matches - in fact even came close to getting knocked out in semis in 2023

Just like winning overseas test series is harder in this era - and India won twice in Australia

 

[jnaveen1980]

Player reviews have changed how the batting has become. Back then you could pad away and get away. Not anymore. So many crucial things have changed.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Thats why I say today's Australia is no less than that ATG Australia that u guys keep hyping. Winning ICC events is tougher in this era & this Australia actually did i twice. Winning 2023 ODI WC is much tougher than beating India in that 2003 ODI WC

In 2003 & 2007 WC - Australia did not lose any game. In 2015 & 2023 Australia lost many matches - in fact even came close to getting knocked out in semis in 2023

Just like winning overseas test series is harder in this era - and India won twice in Australia

They had two of the greatest magicians playing at the same time for Australia. Plus their professionalis, seasoned experienced unit , smoothest transition (Healy -> Gilchrist, Waugh -> Ponting -> Clarke) all helped them staying as top dogs. In fact South Africa was a gun team. But they were not mentally as strong as Australia. Unlike Australia who was desperate to win in India , SA would start playing for draw from day 1 in India. If only they had Hansie Cronje leading that side without corrupt mind SA would have challenged Australia massively. Turns out India was the only team that posed any sort of challenge to them.

 

[mominsaigol]

I don't think anyone is compared. Comparison is useless in every sense as they are not going to meet each other. We just have to come up with imaginary theories. That's it.

Why? Then all comparisons are useless.

No point in comparing kohli to Tendulkar, No point in comparing sehwag to rohit etc etc.

2023 India gets badly crushed by classic Australia (1999 to 2007)

 

[NishanKonar]

They had two of the greatest magicians playing at the same time for Australia. Plus their professionalis, seasoned experienced unit , smoothest transition (Healy -> Gilchrist, Waugh -> Ponting -> Clarke) all helped them staying as top dogs. In fact South Africa was a gun team. But they were not mentally as strong as Australia. Unlike Australia who was desperate to win in India , SA would start playing for draw from day 1 in India. If only they had Hansie Cronje leading that side without corrupt mind SA would have challenged Australia massively. Turns out India was the only team that posed any sort of challenge to them.

No denying that Australia team was extremely good.

But I also feel that their greatness got exaggerated bcoz of weak opposition. England in the 90s were rubbish team even at home. South Africa choked in big events. India was mediocre. West Indies was in decline. That Australia never got challenged in a proper rivalry (except India in India)

 

[jnaveen1980]

Why? Then all comparisons are useless.

No point in comparing kohli to Tendulkar, No point in comparing sehwag to rohit etc etc.

2023 India gets badly crushed by classic Australia (1999 to 2007)

Because you can't prove it? It is just your opinion.

 

[jnaveen1980]

No denying that Australia team was extremely good.

But I also feel that their greatness got exaggerated bcoz of weak opposition. England in the 90s were rubbish team even at home. South Africa choked in big events. India was mediocre. West Indies was in decline. That Australia never got challenged in a proper rivalry (except India in India)

This i the point many ignore. Australia had no real challenge. Fact that India was the only challengers (we were poor in bowling department) explains what kind of opposition they had to play agianst. Even then Australia lost an Ashes moment Mcgrath picked up an injury.

 

[mominsaigol]

Roger federer dominated tennis from 2003-07 and won almost every grand Slam bcoz he had no real opposition except Nadal at French Open. He used to win every Grand Salm except French in those years

From 2008 onwards Djokovic & Nadal grew into top tier players on all surfaces & Federer's dominance vanished

Its the same thing. Australia dominated world cricket in an era when the opposition was too weak. England was laughably bad in ODI cricket. West Indies were in decline. Pakistan blew hot & cold. India was below par in bowling. South Africa choked at ICC events

Today's landscape is different. India has a formidable team. England changed the nature of ODI cricket. Winning is not that easy for any team. Tats why we have not seen any prolonged period of dominance

Opposition of the classic era besides England are all superior to today's era. You're really stretching with one.

2003 SA would absolutely demolish 2023 sa with no difficulty. Sri lanka of the past with the likes of jaysuria, Sanga would cremate today's sri lanka. Pakistan of the past even in 2003 qith burnt out corpses of players would cremate minnow Pakistan of today.

If anything it's the modern era which has become boring as the only oppositions now days is Sa, Eng, Aus and India with NZ sometimes weazling through but NZ is a certified aussie bunny so no point.

Back then all teams were competitive with one another. And classic india's batting is superior to current india's batting, 2023 and 2024 india are playing with the corpses of kohli and rohit with the rest like Gill, Sheryas, Jadeja being Walking wickets overseas, and the likes of rahul and oandya being just average.

It's just the bowling which is significantly better.

You're really reaching qith acting as if current india's batting is superior to the batting of india especially the one from 2006-2007.

 

[Dr_Bassim]

Thats why I say today's Australia is no less than that ATG Australia that u guys keep hyping. Winning ICC events is tougher in this era & this Australia actually did i twice. Winning 2023 ODI WC is much tougher than beating India in that 2003 ODI WC

In 2003 & 2007 WC - Australia did not lose any game. In 2015 & 2023 Australia lost many matches - in fact even came close to getting knocked out in semis in 2023

Just like winning overseas test series is harder in this era - and India won twice in Australia

Winning overseas Test in Australia is always hard and for India to have done it twice is the only remarkable thing current Indian team has done this generation.

The rest of your argument hardly makes any sense as winning a World Cup is hard in any particular time and place for the skillset of that generation.

You cannot discount or discredit the achievements of previous generations because they played according to maximum skill requirement of that particular era.

Thats like saying a 1960 Rolls Royce is terrible because a BMW M5 from 2024 is faster and anyone who thinks that the 60 Rolls was amazing is having nostalgia.

And neither can your hyperpolate the achievements of current generation and say since its harder to play cricket now all the previous people had it easy.

Michael Schumacher would really be disappointed in hearing that his 2004 Ferrrari was just average because the Ferrari from 2024 is so much better and faster.

Your arguments are really poor to be honest.

 

[jnaveen1980]

I have great respect for Australian 2000 side. But this categorical assessment like "they will destroy anyone in any era" is massively exaggerated. I remember Mcgrath bowling wides after wides as NZ was pushing for a win on day 5 in one of the Test. They had just 2 legit ATG bowlers. Others were support bowlers who were good enough. It was their ability to bully opposition with their batting might and fielding that separated them. But India could counter their batting might with their own batting might. Once those two bowlers were nuetralized they could not buy a single wicket on day 4 pitch at Eden Gardens.

 

[mominsaigol]

Because you can't prove it? It is just your opinion.

Yes you can, not everything needs to be objectified to the point that it needs to blatant in your face. That's not how the world works.

By this logic if I murder someone but if theirs no proof of me being their aka no finger prints, no camera recording etc etc, I can still be thrown in jail if the detective finds some probable cause or some evidence that isn't objective.

Similarly Einstein theory of relativity amd Steven hawkings black hole theory was accepted long before the black hole was discovered, it wasn't a theory cause he showed certain evidence pointing towards it.

Me saying Lee would absolutely wreck Rohit based of the fact that rohit in 2023 to 2024 has started to struggle a bit and has his reactions delayed based of game evidence is not an opinion, when you realise the stark difference between a 140Kph delivery and 157KPH delivery.

Similarly ne claiming sheryas iyer wouldn't bother classic aussie bowlers based of the fact that he sucks against short paced deliveries and is absolutely garbage overseas is not am opinion.

And last but not least me saying mcgrath would rip through an opposition which has lesser batters to that of saching Sehwag, Ganguly is not an opinion.

You guys are really stretching home a narrative on trying to act like Gill, Sheryas, Jadeja etc are comparable to the likes of sehwag and others lol

 

[jnaveen1980]

Yes you can, not everything needs to be objectified to the point that it needs to blatant in your face. That's not how the world works.

By this logic if I murder someone but if theirs no proof of me being their aka no finger prints, no camera recording etc etc, I can still be thrown in jail if the detective finds some probable cause or some evidence that isn't objective.

Similarly Einstein theory of relativity amd Steven hawkings black hole theory was accepted long before the black hole was discovered, it wasn't a theory cause he showed certain evidence pointing towards it.

Me saying Lee would absolutely wreck Rohit based of the fact that rohit in 2023 to 2024 has started to struggle a bit and has his reactions delayed based of game evidence is not an opinion, when you realise the stark difference between a 140Kph delivery and 157KPH delivery.

Similarly ne claiming sheryas iyer wouldn't bother classic aussie bowlers based of the fact that he sucks against short paced deliveries and is absolutely garbage overseas is not am opinion.

And last but not least me saying mcgrath would rip through an opposition which has lesser batters to that of saching Sehwag, Ganguly is not an opinion.

You guys are really stretching home a narrative on trying to act like Gill, Sheryas, Jadeja etc are comparable to the likes of sehwag and others lol

Still no proof. In DRS era against the likes of Ashwin/Jadeja will they be equally effective as they were in 2000s? That australian side in INdia would get their clock cleaned. There is a reason why India has won 17 series in a row at home. Impenetrable fortress this is. Ashwin/Jadeja is a massive upgrade over any difference between the sides.

 

[mominsaigol]

Still no proof. In DRS era against the likes of Ashwin/Jadeja will they be equally effective as they were in 2000s? That australian side in INdia would get their clock cleaned. There is a reason why India has won 17 series in a row at home. Impenetrable fortress this is. Ashwin/Jadeja is a massive upgrade over any difference between the sides.

Yes they will, ashwin and jadeja are non factors in odi and In test their not a big deal as you're making them out to be lol.

Also I find it hypocritical that you're asking for blatant proof from me but making narratives of could have would have for ashwin and jadeja.

Where is your Blantant proof of Ashwin and jadeja being effective in 2000's with drs? Lol

See how silly your logic is?

 

[jnaveen1980]

Yes they will, ashwin and jadeja are non factors in odi and In test their not a big deal as you're making them out to be lol.

Also I find it hypocritical that you're asking for blatant proof from me but making narratives of could have would have for ashwin and jadeja.

Where is your Blantant proof of Ashwin and jadeja being effective in 2000's with drs? Lol

See how silly your logic is?

Sorry totally disagree with you. They couldn't een handle Harbhajan who took 32 wickets in 3 Testt against Australia. He never bowled like that ever in his life after that. Heck even Tendulkar ran riot at Eden Gardens test against Australia with his bowling.

 

[NishanKonar]

Opposition of the classic era besides England are all superior to today's era. You're really stretching with one.

2003 SA would absolutely demolish 2023 sa with no difficulty. Sri lanka of the past with the likes of jaysuria, Sanga would cremate today's sri lanka. Pakistan of the past even in 2003 qith burnt out corpses of players would cremate minnow Pakistan of today.

If anything it's the modern era which has become boring as the only oppositions now days is Sa, Eng, Aus and India with NZ sometimes weazling through but NZ is a certified aussie bunny so no point.

Back then all teams were competitive with one another. And classic india's batting is superior to current india's batting, 2023 and 2024 india are playing with the corpses of kohli and rohit with the rest like Gill, Sheryas, Jadeja being Walking wickets overseas, and the likes of rahul and oandya being just average.

It's just the bowling which is significantly better.

You're really reaching qith acting as if current india's batting is superior to the batting of india especially the one from 2006-2007.

Tis is now height of ridiculousness

That 2003 South Africa got badly mauled by Australia in test series & became a laughing stock & knocked out in 1st round of 2003 WC at home after defeats to West indies , new Zealand & Sri Lanka. The 2023 SA reached the semis of ODI WC , losing narrowly to Australia and reached finals of 2024 T20 WC

Only Pakistan & Sri Lanka of 2003 is better than 2023 version. But England , India & South Africa are comfortably better in 2023 than in 2003

Ur post basically confirm what I keep saying - cricket is badly plagued by nostalgia bias

 

[mominsaigol]

Sorry totally disagree with you. They couldn't een handle Harbhajan who took 32 wickets in 3 Testt against Australia. He never bowled like that ever in his life after that. Heck even Tendulkar ran riot at Eden Gardens test against Australia with his bowling.

Who is the better player, Rizwan or Sachin Tendulkar, Answer this first

 

[jnaveen1980]

Yes they will, ashwin and jadeja are non factors in odi and In test their not a big deal as you're making them out to be lol.

Also I find it hypocritical that you're asking for blatant proof from me but making narratives of could have would have for ashwin and jadeja.

Where is your Blantant proof of Ashwin and jadeja being effective in 2000's with drs? Lol

See how silly your logic is?

In ODIs, Virat Kohli would have made mince meat of their bowling lol Not even funny. So will Rohit Sharma.

 

[mominsaigol]

In ODIs, Virat Kohli would have made mince meat of their bowling lol Not even funny. So will Rohit Sharma.

You're claiming kohli and rohit are > Sachin? Is that it?

 

[jnaveen1980]

Who is the better player, Rizwan or Sachin Tendulkar, Answer this first

This Indian team has a W/L ratio of 6 plus in the last 4 world cups. Next best Australia 2 or something. That is total domination. Sure they choked. That doesn't mean you can "destroy" this team. There is no way that tema can beat this Indian team. May be in a FInal where we choke. But in a league game of world cup India would totally decimate that unit.

 

[jnaveen1980]

You're claiming kohli and rohit are > Sachin? Is that it?

Sachin never had a great bowling unit to start with. India had half baked bowling unit back then

 

[mominsaigol]

Tis is now height of ridiculousness

That 2003 South Africa got badly mauled by Australia in test series & became a laughing stock & knocked out in 1st round of 2003 WC at home after defeats to West indies , new Zealand & Sri Lanka. The 2023 SA reached the semis of ODI WC , losing narrowly to Australia and reached finals of 2024 T20 WC

Only Pakistan & Sri Lanka of 2003 is better than 2023 version. But England , India & South Africa are comfortably better in 2023 than in 2003

Ur post basically confirm what I keep saying - cricket is badly plagued by nostalgia bias

No their not, not with the likes of bavuma and reeza hendricks lol. Only quinton is superior to boucher but only in batting, not in keeping

 

[mominsaigol]

This Indian team has a W/L ratio of 6 plus in the last 4 world cups. Next best Australia 2 or something. That is total domination. Sure they choked. That doesn't mean you can "destroy" this team. There is no way that tema can beat this Indian team. May be in a FInal where we choke. But in a league game of world cup India would totally decimate that unit.

Doesn't answer my question, who is superior rizwan or Tendulkar?

 

[Dr_Bassim]

The problem with Indian posters on this forum is their inherent bias for anything Indian.

You discount Bradman on account that cricket at that time was really poor. Fine. I am willing to accept that line of reasoning.

Then Tendulkar comes along and cricket becomes the highest level of cricket world has ever seen. Fine. I will bite that, too.

But suddenly, when Australia comes into the picture during the same era, cricket was not really competitive and all the teams were poor.

So let me ask, did Tendulkar play against poor teams in 90s and 2000s to average so high? And the competition was so poor that he managed to overcome it? Or did he play against ATG teams like Australia and we should consider him a true legend?

It seems there is magical moment where Bradman was poor, Tendulkar was awesome scoring against the best (but the best were not really best) and then cricket went downwards and upwards again as Bumrah came along.

 

[jnaveen1980]

People don't realize how much Indian ODI team has changed since MSD took over. Culturally it has changed massively. Back then we had rubbish captains like Dravid. Ganguly was a good captain. But he never developed pace unit.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Doesn't answer my question, who is superior rizwan or Tendulkar?

Obviously Tendulkar. What did Rizwan achieve lol You are picking a guy from a side that is ranked no.8 in the world. That is like Asking Steve tikolo vs ABDV just because both made the semi finals.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

I've never seen Bumrah fail in the last 6 years in any format, in any game. That is good enough for me.

Here is one. Big stage.

IND vs PAK Cricket Scorecard, Final at London, June 18, 2017

Live Cricket Scoreboard: Get India vs Pakistan Final, cricket scorecard, ICC Champions Trophy 2017 dated June 18, 2017.

www.espncricinfo.com

9 overs at over 7rpo with no wickets.

EDIT. Just saw you mentioned six years and this was 7 years ago. My mistake.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Here is one. Big stage.

IND vs PAK Cricket Scorecard, Final at London, June 18, 2017

Live Cricket Scoreboard: Get India vs Pakistan Final, cricket scorecard, ICC Champions Trophy 2017 dated June 18, 2017.

www.espncricinfo.com

9 overs at over 7rpo with no wickets.

To be fair he was very new to international cricket. He evolved over a period.

 

[mominsaigol]

Obviously Tendulkar. What did Rizwan achieve lol You are picking a guy from a side that is ranked no.8 in the world. That is like Asking Steve tikolo vs ABDV just because both made the semi finals.

Well according to your logic you cannot claim that, as their is no Blantant proof.

Rizwan never faced the bowlers sacjin faced and sachin never faced the bowlers rizwam faced, so I can say Rizwan in that era would demolish sachin's stats.

^^ This is the argument you are making. I'm reading it back to you the moment you said proof this proof that.

As I said, all proof doesn't have to be objective. If you're arguing sachin >>>>>> Rizwan, then you'll obviously compare their stats, their achievements and compare the bowlers and eras they had to face. So yes, you asking me for blantant proof and shutting me off by saying its just your opinion is a hypocritical argument

 

[DeadlyVenom]

To be fair he was very new to international cricket. He evolved over a period.

Yeah I edited my post when I re read the post I was replying to.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Well according to your logic you cannot claim that, as their is no Blantant proof.

Rizwan never faced the bowlers sacjin faced and sachin never faced the bowlers rizwam faced, so I can say Rizwan in that era would demolish sachin's stats.

^^ This is the argument you are making. I'm reading it back to you the moment you said proof this proof that.

As I said, all proof doesn't have to be objective. If you're arguing sachin >>>>>> Rizwan, then you'll obviously compare their stats, their achievements and compare the bowlers and eras they had to face. So yes, you asking me for blantant proof and shutting me off by saying its just your opinion is a hypocritical argument

You are not being objective either. You just purely going by stats. I am going by strengths and weaknesses of both teams. May be you have not seen 2000s teams playing poorly much against Pakistan. But i have seen them struggle against India many times in Tests. India was definitely a good side in ODIs. But not remotely close to Australia back then because India's problem was always bowling. I am merely going by comparing current India and 2000 India just like you are comparing current Australia and 2000 Australia.

 

[mominsaigol]

The problem with Indian posters on this forum is their inherent bias for anything Indian.

You discount Bradman on account that cricket at that time was really poor. Fine. I am willing to accept that line of reasoning.

Then Tendulkar comes along and cricket becomes the highest level of cricket world has ever seen. Fine. I will bite that, too.

But suddenly, when Australia comes into the picture during the same era, cricket was not really competitive and all the teams were poor.

So let me ask, did Tendulkar play against poor teams in 90s and 2000s to average so high? And the competition was so poor that he managed to overcome it? Or did he play against ATG teams like Australia and we should consider him a true legend?

It seems there is magical moment where Bradman was poor, Tendulkar was awesome scoring against the best (but the best were not really best) and then cricket went downwards and upwards again as Bumrah came along.

Their arguments are hypocrital in nature.

Besides England, every team from 2003-2007 is superior to current Teams

One exception being india's bowling as current Indian bowlers > past Indian bowlers however current Indian bats are all worse then past Indian bats. Only rohit and kohli are exceptions however their 2023 versions are terrible and are them at their lowest compared to sachin and sehwag who were in their primes in 2003.

It isn't a comparison nor a stretch to say 2003 Sachin + 2003 Sehwag > 2023 rohit and kohli.

Now prime rohit and prime kohli are more debatable but not 2023

 

[mominsaigol]

You are not being objective either. You just purely going by stats. I am going by strengths and weaknesses of both teams. May be you have not seen 2000s teams playing poorly much against Pakistan. But i have seen them struggle against India many times in Tests. India was definitely a good side in ODIs. But not remotely close to Australia back then because India's problem was always bowling. I am merely going by comparing current India and 2000 India just like you are comparing current Australia and 2000 Australia.

It's not about being objective, I never claimed to be, you asked me to be and I spoke what you claimed back to you, to let you know how silly it sounded when you said it.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Their arguments are hypocrital in nature.

Besides England, every team from 2003-2007 is superior to current Teams

One exception being india's bowling as current Indian bowlers > past Indian bowlers however current Indian bats are all worse then past Indian bats. Only rohit and kohli are exceptions however their 2023 versions are terrible and are them at their lowest compared to sachin and sehwag who were in their primes in 2003.

It isn't a comparison nor a stretch to say 2003 Sachin + 2003 Sehwag > 2023 rohit and kohli.

Now prime rohit and prime kohli are more debatable but not 2023

There is a saying. Batsmen win matches. Bowlers win tournaments. Australia had entire batting unit in 2005 series. They just lost Mcgrath due to injury. That's it. THey lost 2 Tests.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Given a choice i would take this Indian unit any day over the 2000 unit simply because they can win overseas matches series even with low scores. Sure the team in the 2000s could score 600, 700. But who would take 20 wickets?

 

[dubeTheGoat]

McGrath definitely was a beast no doubt about it. His avg is remarkable for his time, however I would say Cummins is right behind him - while his away avg isn't as strong as McGrath's one must also consider he is playing at probably during the flattest pitches in cricket's history. Any random cricketer nowadays has a 40+ avg which is ridiculous to say the least. Imo bowlers of today are definitely superior compared to bowlers tof yesteryears but batsmen have deteriorated significantly (barring Smith,Kohli and Root)

 

[mominsaigol]

There is a saying. Batsmen win matches. Bowlers win tournaments. Australia had entire batting unit in 2005 series. They just lost Mcgrath due to injury. That's it. THey lost 2 Tests.

It doesn't matter, you can't single out mcgrath or single out Warne or anyone.

By this logic single out bumrah and shami for odi and ashwin/jadeja and bumrah for Test lol.

You all are stretching it and have completly lost it if you think rohit and kohli in their 2023/2024 states along with the rest of the lot like Gill, Sheryas, Pandya, Rahul are giving classic Australia a challenge. All these guys are getting bundled out for 100-150.

They only compete in India on their home turf. Anywhere else in asia and especially in Australia they'll get demolished.

And idkw you keep going for could have would have prime kohli and prime rohit when bumrah never even played under their primes.

Bumrah in 2017 was not the bowler he is now, and by 2018 kohli and rohit had already started declining granted not as much as they did now.

By 2021 and 2022 kohli was more or less done and only did what he did against pakistan and Afghanistan as both are minnows? And only succeeded on curated pitches in their home den.

Throughout 2024 wc both rohit and kohli were passengers overseas and just clicked at the right time in the final and against australia?

Idkw you're acting like their burnt out selves are comparable. Both of these 2 in their current states would not make it in the classic indian team, only their prime selves?

Bumrah as of today after injury is a reformed bowler and his current self is hisnprime self, but his current self never played with 2014-2016 kohli and rohit?

 

[NishanKonar]

Here is one. Big stage.

IND vs PAK Cricket Scorecard, Final at London, June 18, 2017

Live Cricket Scoreboard: Get India vs Pakistan Final, cricket scorecard, ICC Champions Trophy 2017 dated June 18, 2017.

www.espncricinfo.com

9 overs at over 7rpo with no wickets.

EDIT. Just saw you mentioned six years and this was 7 years ago. My mistake.

Bumrah post 2018 turned into a beast. Before that he more of a meme bowler with a funny action who wud fade away once the novelty wore off. Most Indian fans thought it was a joke when Ravi Shastri decided to play him in tests in 2018. How wrong we all were

 

[NishanKonar]

Given a choice i would take this Indian unit any day over the 2000 unit simply because they can win overseas matches series even with low scores. Sure the team in the 2000s could score 600, 700. But who would take 20 wickets?

This is no brainer. This current team is far superior to the 2000 team

The 2000 team was so bad. every time India toured overseas - avoiding whitewash was seen as an achievement.

 

[jnaveen1980]

McGrath definitely was a beast no doubt about it. His avg is remarkable for his time, however I would say Cummins is right behind him - while his away avg isn't as strong as McGrath's one must also consider he is playing at probably during the flattest pitches in cricket's history. Any random cricketer nowadays has a 40+ avg which is ridiculous to say the least. Imo bowlers of today are definitely superior compared to bowlers tof yesteryears but batsmen have deteriorated significantly (barring Smith,Kohli and Root)

DRS has eliminated bias umpiring. Hence lot of result oriented matches. There was this guy Jimmy Adams from West Indies who earned a nick name "Paddams" who literally padded everything hiding his bat behind and getting away. That is not possible in this era.

 

[jnaveen1980]

This is no brainer. This current team is far superior to the 2000 team

The 2000 team was so bad. every time India toured overseas - avoiding whitewash was seen as an achievement.

Even in ODI when the current India is at their very best very few team can match. You can beat them when they choke themselves. but back then Even at their very best Indian team could not challenge Australia or even SA for that matter. Back then i never expected India to dominate a match.

 

[NishanKonar]

Even in ODI when the current India is at their very best very few team can match. You can beat them when they choke themselves. but back then Even at their very best Indian team could not challenge Australia or even SA for that matter. Back then i never expected India to dominate a match.

The 2003 team punched above its weight - due to long batting lineup thanks to Dravid keeping & judicious bowling by Zaheer / Srinath / Nehra but it was never a great ODI team. Now wonder wheels fell of when the batters started to struggle in 2006 and led to humiliating 1st round exit in 2007 ODI WC

That team had 1 game plan - bat out the opposition. But if the team scored say only 250-260 - then the game was over bcoz no way the bowlers were going to defend the total. So batters went all out and tried to score 300 plus in every game. That was not sustainable strategy

Bit like Real Madrid in the 2003-06 Galacticos era. They had weak defence but tried to compensate by scoring as many goals as possible. But when their forwards stopped scoring, they started losing badly bcoz they could not defend at all. So even with loads of galacticos they ended up losing more often than not

 

[NishanKonar]

DRS has eliminated bias umpiring. Hence lot of result oriented matches. There was this guy Jimmy Adams from West Indies who earned a nick name "Paddams" who literally padded everything hiding his bat behind and getting away. That is not possible in this era.

DRS definitely made life better for spinner. Warne & Murali wud have probably taken 100-150 more wickets if they had DRS during their era. Pad play has become very risky due to DRS

 

[Vikram1989]

People are completely underestimating cummins batting. He won the 23 semis ,Edgbaston test, Johannesburg test etc. He was part of many stubborn stands like perth 2018, mcg 2021. McGrath was a bunny.

 

[mominsaigol]

People are completely underestimating cummins batting.He won the 23 semis ,Edgbaston test ,Johannesburg test etc.He was part of many stubborn stands like perth 2018, mcg 2021.McGrath was a bunny

Cummings > Mcgrath as a batter, no one disagrees. He's probably the best tailender in the world and he's a gun captain, he took Australia very far despite having nowhere near the resources of Clarke, Finch, Waugh and Pointing.

But mcgrath as a bowler is > Cummings. Cummings isn't a bad bowler, he's a fantastic pacer but mcgrath Is next level. Hence people claiming that mcgrath = Cummings as a bowler is beyond hilarious.

Mcgrath is top 5 bowlers of all time plain and simple. Cummings isn't in that hallmark

 

[sweep_shot]

I think India may become a mid-tier team once Shami, Bumrah, Kohli, and Rohit retire.

Depleted Indian ODI team lost series in both Sri Lanka (0-2) and Bangladesh (1-2). That gave us a bit of hint.

 

[Vikram1989]

Mcgrath is top 5 bowlers of all time plain and simple. Cummings isn't in that hallmark

Even if cummins is 80 percent of McGrath, he will make more than the remaining by his batting. So at the end he will be as important as McGrath in this era . McGrath was not able to bowl an Yorker to Ashley Giles in an odi and tied the match.Cummins was injured in his early days and came back as a top player rt away.Who is better or least good is different matter altogether.

 

[mominsaigol]

I think India may become a mid-tier team once Shami, Bumrah, Kohli, and Rohit retire.

Depleted Indian ODI team lost series in both Sri Lanka (0-2) and Bangladesh (1-2). That gave us a bit of hint.

Exactly, Indian posters had a frenzy, but my question was genuine.

Yes India is talented and has money, however kohli and rohit and bumrah are high tier even for their standards.

Australia has yet to find a replacement for gilchrist, Warner and Travis are good but their hasn't been a KEEPER BAT, like gilchrist. Similarly they've yet to find someone like Warne and mcgrath.

India has also yet to find a keeper like Dhoni or allrounder like yuvi. Does that mean that Pant, Rahul, Pandya and Jadeja are bad? Ofcourse not, but Yuvi and Dhoni were unmatched.

 

[mominsaigol]

Even if cummins is 80 percent of McGrath, he will make more than the remaining by his batting. So at the end he will be as important as McGrath in this era . McGrath was not able to bowl an Yorker to Ashley Giles in an odi and tied the match.Cummins was injured in his early days and came back as a top player rt away.Who is better or least good is different matter altogether.

Cummings is not 80% of Mcgrath.

Mcgrath bowling 4-8 to an Indian team with the likes of Sachin, Laxman, Dravid, Ganguly and many others is > Anything Cummings can do.

Cummings can't ever replicate this even if he's against nambia or Nepal lol.

 

[Buffet]

Every other bowler including bumrah has multiple times in almost every match given a loosner, aka maybe a full toss, or a wide or bowled 1 to 3 bad overs, and on occasion he's had off days especially against Travis Head.

Mcgrath didn't, Mcgrath only 5% of the time had off days bit otherwise 95% of the time all 60 of his deliveries in odi and every delivery in test was perfectly onsong.

Bumrah has actually less off days than McGrath in ODI WC.

McGrath despite his accuracy was not that much outlier in ER in ODI WC. Wasim, Donald, McGrath were close in ER. But Bumrah is an outlier in WC in ER when comapred to other pacers with 30 plus wickets. Boult, Starc, Shami etc are lot more expensive. You don't even have to see relative standing in respective era. Just make a direct comparison.

McGrath ER was around 3.96 in WC matches when 230-250 scores were good scores. Bumrah ER is 4.23 in WC when 300-350 are good scores. Bumrah is much harder to score on any average day.

McGrath is still a better bowler for me due to longevity but no way he was harder to hit than Bumrah. Harder to hit should be reflected in occumulative data at highest stage. Data shows that McGrath was far easier to score than Bumrah in WC.

 

[ChennaiFan]

Cummings > Mcgrath as a batter, no one disagrees. He's probably the best tailender in the world and he's a gun captain, he took Australia very far despite having nowhere near the resources of Clarke, Finch, Waugh and Pointing.

But mcgrath as a bowler is > Cummings. Cummings isn't a bad bowler, he's a fantastic pacer but mcgrath Is next level. Hence people claiming that mcgrath = Cummings as a bowler is beyond hilarious.

Mcgrath is top 5 bowlers of all time plain and simple. Cummings isn't in that hallmark

I agree. McGrath was one of the best pace bowlers cricket has ever seen. He was clearly above Cummins.
By the way, correct the spelling; it is not Cummings.

 

[Vikram1989]

Cummings can't ever replicate this even if he's against nambia or Nepal lol.

Cummins has that ever probing, never stopping terminator kind of attitude like mcgrath himself as he has shown in last bgt.Hazlewood will be blunted after 2 sessions, starc will blow hot and cold.But cummins can be definitely replace Gillespie(2nd best fast bowler) in 2000 era and can increase the team quality.Mcgrath as a bowler is better only in test matches.Symonds in an ipl match was simply backing away and hitting mcgrath test match length for 3,4 boundaries and mcgrath did not had any answers .McGrath is great test bowler and very good/good bowler in odi.

 

[Buffet]

McGrath ER was around 3.96 in WC matches when 230-250 scores were good scores. Bumrah ER is 4.23 in WC when 300-350 are good scores. Bumrah is much harder to score on any average day.

McGrath is still a better bowler for me due to longevity but no way he was harder to hit than Bumrah. Harder to hit should be reflected in occumulative data at highest stage. Data shows that McGrath was far easier to score than Bumrah in WC.

Just to add on topic more,

McGrath is comfortably better bowler than Cummins.

Also, ATG Aus team was far better team than current Aus team. There is no conparison.


Yes, McGrath is the one who made them ATG team because without McGrath they were at SA level in test format. But SA was very gun team in test. ATG Aus team had some very good players. Warne, Gilly etc don't come in every generation.

 

[Buffet]

On main topic:

I think India has a good domestic system so over time they will keep producing good players. They may not produce ATG batting units at same time like they had in past or ATG bowling unit they have had in the last 6-7 year in the test format, but they will keep producing good players.

Just like Aus, India will be producing good players. Mainly due to system in place.

 

[ChennaiFan]

On main topic:

I think India has a good domestic system so over time they will keep producing good players. They may not produce ATG batting units at same time like they had in past or ATG bowling unit they have had in the last 6-7 year in the test format, but they will keep producing good players.

Just like Aus, India will be producing good players. Mainly due to system in place.

My thoughts are similar. In India, the main players used to come from main cities. India didn't have the infrastructure for aspiring crickets in rural areas to train and play good cricket. The scene is changing now. We expect a large pool of good cricketers going forward. I hope this will lead to a high standard of cricketers playing international cricket.

 

[kron]

Cummins is good but he is nowhere close to Mcgrath.

Mcgrath is simply underrated by NEARLY EVERYONE on this forum be it Indians, Pakisanis or any other nationality.

Mcgrath is the cream of the crop. Best of the best. He is the best bowler ever. Period

 

[AMSS]

The big stain on Cummins' career is he let India win two test series at home. The shame of Pant merrily scoring at Brisbane while Cummins could only watch helplessly is not going to fade from the collective memory, ever.

 

[AMSS]

About the OP, thank you for the revelation that teams get weak when their star players retire. I am wiser now having read it.

But also, did anyone anticipate Rohit replacing Sachin/Sehwag in 2012? Lmao.

 

[Buffet]

Mcgrath is the cream of the crop. Best of the best. He is the best bowler ever. Period

Bold statement is true but many posters do go over board with putting McGrath too high when compared to other greats.That's not true.

Bumrah, Wasim etc are judged on what they outside Asia. Similarly, non-asian pacers are judged based on what they do in Asia. MCgrath gets elevatyed to some m ythical level, but look at his 5-fers in Asia. Some one like Steyn was far more likely to run through batting line up in Asia than McGrath.

McGrath is cream of the crop. Sore sure, but depsite that he has 1, just 1, 5-fers in Asia despite having 30 innings.

Mcgrath was best bowler for me but not hardest to hit in ODI and not most likely to run through sides in Asian conditions. All bowlers lacked something, including Mcgrath, who was the best pacer for me. McGrath's lack of gun yorker made it easier to hit him some time in ODI. In Test, he won't be my pick to run over batting line ups in Asia over some one like Steyn. That hardly means, I don't rate Mcgrath as the best pacer. But some poster over hype him too much.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Wait and watch. You will see a thread

"Will India become weaker after retirement of Jaiswal, Shubman Gill, Yash Dhull, Kuldeep? "

 

[kron]

Bold statement is true but many posters do go over board with putting McGrath too high when compared to other greats.That's not true.

Bumrah, Wasim etc are judged on what they outside Asia. Similarly, non-asian pacers are judged based on what they do in Asia. MCgrath gets elevatyed to some m ythical level, but look at his 5-fers in Asia. Some one like Steyn was far more likely to run through batting line up in Asia than McGrath.

McGrath is cream of the crop. Sore sure, but depsite that he has 1, just 1, 5-fers in Asia despite having 30 innings.

Mcgrath was best bowler for me but not hardest to hit in ODI and not most likely to run through sides in Asian conditions. All bowlers lacked something, including Mcgrath, who was the best pacer for me. McGrath's lack of gun yorker made it easier to hit him some time in ODI. In Test, he won't be my pick to run over batting line ups in Asia over some one like Steyn. That hardly means, I don't rate Mcgrath as the best pacer. But some poster over hype him too much.


View attachment 146108

Put bumrah in that atg aus side and the drop in quality would be negligible. Same with prime steyn.

In saying that without mcg that Oz team is very beatable for the top sides of that era

 

[jnaveen1980]

Bold statement is true but many posters do go over board with putting McGrath too high when compared to other greats.That's not true.

Bumrah, Wasim etc are judged on what they outside Asia. Similarly, non-asian pacers are judged based on what they do in Asia. MCgrath gets elevatyed to some m ythical level, but look at his 5-fers in Asia. Some one like Steyn was far more likely to run through batting line up in Asia than McGrath.

McGrath is cream of the crop. Sore sure, but depsite that he has 1, just 1, 5-fers in Asia despite having 30 innings.

Mcgrath was best bowler for me but not hardest to hit in ODI and not most likely to run through sides in Asian conditions. All bowlers lacked something, including Mcgrath, who was the best pacer for me. McGrath's lack of gun yorker made it easier to hit him some time in ODI. In Test, he won't be my pick to run over batting line ups in Asia over some one like Steyn. That hardly means, I don't rate Mcgrath as the best pacer. But some poster over hype him too much.


View attachment 146108

In current era ODIs bowling is way harder due to change in rules and also 2 white balls. People forget the advantages they had in that era in ODIs.

 

[kron]

Exactly, Indian posters had a frenzy, but my question was genuine.

Yes India is talented and has money, however kohli and rohit and bumrah are high tier even for their standards.

Australia has yet to find a replacement for gilchrist, Warner and Travis are good but their hasn't been a KEEPER BAT, like gilchrist. Similarly they've yet to find someone like Warne and mcgrath.

India has also yet to find a keeper like Dhoni or allrounder like yuvi. Does that mean that Pant, Rahul, Pandya and Jadeja are bad? Ofcourse not, but Yuvi and Dhoni were unmatched.

Pant is like the second best keeper ever since gilly. In form he is literally India's best batsman in tests .

Unless you mean odi/ t20

 

[kron]

In current era ODIs bowling is way harder due to change in rules and also 2 white balls. People forget the advantages they had in that era in ODIs.

Lot of so called greats of 90s would have mjpr issues bowling in modern loi format

 

[mominsaigol]

Pant is like the second best keeper ever since gilly. In form he is literally India's best batsman in tests .

Unless you mean odi/ t20

Odi and t20. However even despite this, they have not managed to replace Dhoni.

Dhoni as a batsmen is a bit overrated as he's mostly an Asian bully and outside Asia he's just okay, however theirs no denying his ability to finish games worldwide and the mantra of taking it deep is unmatched.

To top it off he transformed the indian side in his era, he was a fantastic leader, a fantastic captain and a fantastic finisher and Pant just doesn't replace that.

As I said India were very very lucky that they found Rohit and kohli straight after sehwag and Sachin.

The rest of their batters are just okay, Their class and reliable batters but their not atg or any of that.

Being a top side and a country with resources doesn't automatically mean that you'll just find atg's out of your hat.

Even if the likes of Gill, Sheryas, Jaiswal, Abhisheik, Arshdeep, Rinku Singh become atg's 10 years from now, it'll be extremely extremely difficult to match rohit and kohli who are in the upper echelons of ATG's and not the lower.

As for my gilchrist comment, I think people misunderstood. Yes Warner and Travis head are suitable replacements for gilchrist as an opener, however since his retirement Australia has been forced to waste an extra wicketkeeper no 7 slot in the likes of wade, Carrey, inglis etc who don't match up, whereas previously the likes of Bevan could occupy that slot.

 

[jeetu]

Put bumrah in that atg aus side and the drop in quality would be negligible. Same with prime steyn.

In saying that without mcg that Oz team is very beatable for the top sides of that era

Warne was bigger fear factor than Mcgrath. A relentless ATG spinner bowling tons of overs creates massive impact. The only reason India won some test matches against Australia then was their ability to counter Warne.

 

[NishanKonar]

Put bumrah in that atg aus side and the drop in quality would be negligible. Same with prime steyn.

In saying that without mcg that Oz team is very beatable for the top sides of that era

This is what I m trying to say. Replace McGrath with Cummins in that ATG side & dont think it wud make much difference

 

[NishanKonar]

The problem here is thsi mindset that every great player must be replaced like for like. Else u become weak. Thats not how team sports operate. It more about getting the right balance

Australia did not replace Gilchrist but in Dave Warner, Travis Head & Glen Maxwell they got enough firepower. Also Mitch Marsh's big hitting & bowling ensured the balance. Now McGrath & Warne were not replaced but with Cummins , Starc , Hazlewood & Lyon - Australia had the tools to take 20 wickets in test cricket

Same way people say India could not replace Dhoni. Rishab Pant has actually done more in test cricket in 5 years than what Dhoni did in his whole career. Then u say Rohit & Kohli cannot be repalced. Same things people said about Sachin / Sehwag. U say Yuvraj was not replaced - well that 2003 team did not have a HArdik Pandya. Can u imagine Yuvi bowling the 20th over of a T20 WC final like Hardik did in 2024 T20 WC

 

[NishanKonar]

Bold statement is true but many posters do go over board with putting McGrath too high when compared to other greats.That's not true.

Bumrah, Wasim etc are judged on what they outside Asia. Similarly, non-asian pacers are judged based on what they do in Asia. MCgrath gets elevatyed to some m ythical level, but look at his 5-fers in Asia. Some one like Steyn was far more likely to run through batting line up in Asia than McGrath.

McGrath is cream of the crop. Sore sure, but depsite that he has 1, just 1, 5-fers in Asia despite having 30 innings.

Mcgrath was best bowler for me but not hardest to hit in ODI and not most likely to run through sides in Asian conditions. All bowlers lacked something, including Mcgrath, who was the best pacer for me. McGrath's lack of gun yorker made it easier to hit him some time in ODI. In Test, he won't be my pick to run over batting line ups in Asia over some one like Steyn. That hardly means, I don't rate Mcgrath as the best pacer. But some poster over hype him too much.


View attachment 146108

Nobody is doubting McGrath. I myself was defending him on the other thread. I kept saying McGrath was hands down the best bowler of the 90s - ahead of Wasim Akram or Ambrose

My problem is this level of hyperbole. That he was untouchable & nobody comes close to him. And Cummins on current form is not that far of the mark from peak McGrath

 

[NishanKonar]

The big stain on Cummins' career is he let India win two test series at home. The shame of Pant merrily scoring at Brisbane while Cummins could only watch helplessly is not going to fade from the collective memory, ever.

There is no shame in losing that Gabba test. That was test cricket at its finest. Australia threw the kitchen sink at India - Pujara got hit 5-6 times on his body due to lethal bouncers - but somehow India survived & won a glorious victory. Australia lost but definitely not disgraced. Like France losing the 2022 WC final inspite of Mbappe's heroics

 

[light]

At this moment, India will always have someone taking on the mantle. The cricket culture in India tries to produce top players.

SL was always going to be in trouble when sanga and co retired. Their pipeline was never there.

 

[mominsaigol]

Nobody is doubting McGrath. I myself was defending him on the other thread. I kept saying McGrath was hands down the best bowler of the 90s - ahead of Wasim Akram or Ambrose

My problem is this level of hyperbole. That he was untouchable & nobody comes close to him. And Cummins on current form is not that far of the mark from peak McGrath

No he's not, Cummins cannot dream of getting a 4-8 in odi against a side featuring Sachin, gamguly, Laxman, Dravid etc etc.

He ain't even getting that against nambia.

 

[jnaveen1980]

At this moment, India will always have someone taking on the mantle. The cricket culture in India tries to produce top players.

SL was always going to be in trouble when sanga and co retired. Their pipeline was never there.

There will be a brief slump in India's fortunes much like how they felt after retirement of Fab 4. (Sachin/Laxman/Dravid/Sourav). THey recovered well. India's batting culture is still the same. Now they have addition of fast bowling culture. They will only get better. It is not like Steve smith and Jo Root will be playing till 100.