What's new

Would India have been able to compete with Australia if they had Smith, Warner, Bancroft, Pattinson?

Bhaijaan

Bhaijaan

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 10, 2011
Runs
69,035
Post of the Week
1
3 key match winners of the Aussie team are missing from this series and they are still making India fight till death to remain competitive.

Had Smith, Warner and Pattinson all been available for this series at their peak powers Australia would probably have been dominating India quite convincingly.

Comments
 
Australia is like UAE, you have to win toss to win games. Batting first you have to do all things just normally. Batting second you have to play outstanding.
 
First of all it ain't India's fault if all three of them are not playing.

That said, no team is weak at home ( Pakistan being the exception these days :yk ). Players who are substituting these 3 ain't mugs.

Had Smith, Warner and Pattinson all been available for this series at their peak powers Australia would probably have been dominating India quite convincingly.
Click to expand...
Or not.

Cricket can be a funny game.
 
They're not here and, these IFs don't mean anything. Irrespective of who's missing, it's not easy to win in and against AUS.

We won the first test and that is what should be looked at.
 
Last edited:
Pattinson last played a test over 2 years ago. What happened to him?

For the record, yes - our batsmen would have stood up for sure and am increasingly confident in our bowlers.
 
Not sure pattinson would make a difference, Smith would've likely murdered the Indian 'attack' on his way to another 100+ averaging series and Warner would be much better than Finch so India wouldn't have much of a chance
 
Smith and Warner would have put the runs on the board and taken pressure off the players around them to score. They'd be coming in at scores of 200/3 instead of 50/3. Smith was the best Test batsmen in the world before he was banned.

Pattinson wouldn't make a difference.
 
Last edited:
They competed against full strength SA, so no reason why they would struggle against Australia. Indian bowling attack in particular was always going to make a difference.
 
Pointless thread.

People who say they will compete will stick to that. People who say otherwise will stick to their point.
 
Smith would have blanked India to oblivion like he always did and Warner would have smacked their confidence at start. It's funny that India is still struggling against a weak Aussie team. At least they don't get to face scoreboard pressure. Pattinson would not have made it to their XI so futile to talk about it.
 
freelance_cricketer said:
3 key match winners of the Aussie team are missing from this series and they are still making India fight till death to remain competitive.

Had Smith, Warner and Pattinson all been available for this series at their peak powers Australia would probably have been dominating India quite convincingly.

Comments
Click to expand...

I thot before Smith/Warner got banned u had created a thread on how India would murder Australia in Australia in this series. 1.5 tests into the series, you already questioning your own theory? Some conviction, ha!
 
Would Australia have won the 2004 BG series in India against our full team?
Would VVS have got a chance to create history with his 281 had Srinath and Kumble played that series?
 
Thread should be renamed to whether we would still be able to compete if Australia still had some rolls of sandpaper in the dressing room.
 
You forgot BANCROFT, he was really starting to establish himself as a solid test batsman.
 
Ifs and buts are for those armchair experts whose own teams have not won a single test in Australia in living memory. Indian teams have won a few tests in Australia in this century and they have even competed against the all time great Australian side in Australia. Two Australian batsmen out of the side would have made only marginal difference to the results, seeing that Indian team now has a potent pace bowling attack.
 
Let's not forget that Smith failed remarkably in South Africa this year, wasn't even half as good as Markram, AB or Elgar. So to assume that he would have excelled on bowler friendly pitches this series is just hope. Same for Warner, great on typical Aussie battas, but gets exposed on bowler friendly pitches.
 
Without a doubt, with Smith and Warner in team, Australia would have been one hell of a team to deal with esp. in their own backyard. I would go to the extent of saying that India would have perhaps won out of 4 matches in the best case scenario. But if the idea is to question India's achievement then i have a different view. To achieve any great accomplishment, you need loads to luck to be on your side, and absence of Smith and Warner is just that luck for India. And to India fans it shouldn't matter if people ask these questions, what should matter to them whether or not India wins this series. Pakistan's world cup 91 win is called fluke by many, as Pakistan lost to 4 teams in that tournament and was lucky to get a draw against England after being bowled out for 74. Yet, the fact is Pakistan won the world cup fair and square and no one can take that away from them. Similarly, if India manages to win this series, then the team should be proud of it and at the same time thank their stars for a massive dose of luck helped them.
 
Pattinson? Really? Has anybody watching cricket lately? :D

Smith & Warner definitely would have made the difference but even then the series would be equally competitive..
 
No. India would have lost the series.

Aussie's sandpaper game was strong under Smith's captaincy. On day like today he would have bought out trusty old 40-grit.
 
Swashbuckler said:
Would Australia have won the 2004 BG series in India against our full team?
Would VVS have got a chance to create history with his 281 had Srinath and Kumble played that series?
Click to expand...

This! But you forget two other key players Bucknor and Bowden

When we have "fans" like the OP undercutting Indian cricket who needs enemies. I mean does anyone undermine Aussie achievements against Indian team missing key players ? Its not like we are playing our first chouce players either. Shaw, Ashwin and Saha being the key players.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Nope. I don't think we even need to debate on this topic since it's too damn obvious. Could Pak win wc without IK? Could Argentina Win 86 wc without Maradona? Would barca be the same team without Messi?

We all know the answers of these questions. Smith is to Australia is what Maradona was to Argentina. The whole Australian batting revolves around Smith and Warner. Pattinson is another vital cog who is undoubtedly one of the best fast bowlers in the world.

Without the service of these megastars this Australian team is on Par with current srilankan team. Then add the fact that the whole team is under severe mental pressure due to that sand paper incident and almost nobody is able to play their natural game because of that. They r going through the motion and playing cricket just for the sake of it.
 
The early 2000 Australia batting line up had names like Langer, Hayden, Ponting, Steve Waugh, Martyn, Gilchrist etc. India still defeated this team in Australia bowling out this batting line up twice in the same test.
 
latecut said:
The early 2000 Australia batting line up had names like Langer, Hayden, Ponting, Steve Waugh, Martyn, Gilchrist etc. India still defeated this team in Australia bowling out this batting line up twice in the same test.
Click to expand...

Australia were without their two champion bowlers Warne and McGrath in that series.
 
The question is if Smith n Warner came with pocketful of sandpaper or not. If yes, Australia would have won surely. Else, who knows....
 
The harsh reality being that India would have lost the first test. Warner and Smith easily would have made up for that small margin.
 
The question should be “would India have won without DRS?” Pujara had 3 decisions reversed. Had he got out in the second innings without scoring that 70 odd runs, India would have lost the game.

If only frogs had wings they would not bump their butt when the hopped.
 
lets talk about ifs
If India had won 2 or 3 tosses in England, India would have won the test series in England.
If Kohli had selected proper team in south africa, India would have won in South Africa
 
ipl_fan said:
Pointless thread.

People who say they will compete will stick to that. People who say otherwise will stick to their point.
Click to expand...

This thread is a rather desperate attempt to prove that the current Aussie team is much weaker than the best they could have had. Smith and Warner sure. But Pattison? Including Pattison in the team would mean dropping Cummins, who was probably their best bowler yesterday.

Also, India is missing Shaw.
 
Last edited:
freelance_cricketer said:
Australia are playing without 4 of their top test cricketers.
Click to expand...

Smith, Warner and Pattison missing... followed by the above.

Reminds me of the saying "There are 3 kinds of people in the world. Those who can count, and those who can't".
[MENTION=134300]Tusker[/MENTION] [MENTION=146612]BlackShadow[/MENTION] [MENTION=132715]Varun[/MENTION] [MENTION=143530]Swashbuckler[/MENTION]
 
Prince of Pakistan said:
The harsh reality being that India would have lost the first test. Warner and Smith easily would have made up for that small margin.
Click to expand...

India is also missing Shaw, who probably would have added quite significantly to India's total. All this speculation about who is missing is pointless.
 
Napa said:
India is also missing Shaw, who probably would have added quite significantly to India's total. All this speculation about who is missing is pointless.
Click to expand...

So, u mean even if Warner and Smith were playing it would not have made much difference?
 
Napa said:
India is also missing Shaw, who probably would have added quite significantly to India's total. All this speculation about who is missing is pointless.
Click to expand...

This is the way of dealing with heart burns lol In the last match Kohli hardly contributed.
 
Smith and Warner missing this series is due to their own cheating misdeeds, should not be brought into debate whether Australia is at full strength or not. Had they missed this series due to fitness issues then probably it'd have made any sense.
 
Napa said:
Smith, Warner and Pattison missing... followed by the above.

Reminds me of the saying "There are 3 kinds of people in the world. Those who can count, and those who can't".
[MENTION=134300]Tusker[/MENTION] [MENTION=146612]BlackShadow[/MENTION] [MENTION=132715]Varun[/MENTION] [MENTION=143530]Swashbuckler[/MENTION]
Click to expand...

Bancroft!
 
Smith and Warner would have a made difference. Smith has a great record vs India. But it's out of India's control they can only beat what's infornt of them.
 
Don't think these types of "ifs and buts" make sense. India are playing Australia, not David Warner and Steve Smith. Anyway, this new opener Aus have may not even have been playing if Warner wasn't banned
 
hadi123 said:
Don't think these types of "ifs and buts" make sense. India are playing Australia, not David Warner and Steve Smith. Anyway, this new opener Aus have may not even have been playing if Warner wasn't banned
Click to expand...

It is indeed pointless, but you cannot deny the fact that Smith was one of the best in Tests in world cricket. Such players usually make it count in big games.

Lucky for India, but stupid from Aus's side and they are paying for it.
 
Compete? Yes

Win - Unlikely.

Anyway, they have one one game so far.
 
It doesn't matter who's in the opposition team. The Indians have gone to the next level compared to Dhoni's era. Gone are the days where they are pushovers abroad. They compete in almost every game and on any type of pitch. They have put themselves in good positions even in losing games against Eng, SA. Obviously, the killer instinct is lacking to bring that home with a win. That would be the next level. If Shaw clicks for India scoring at breath neck pace at the top like Sehwag did, they could go to the next level and will start winning games more frequently.
 
India has been missing Shaw who has been replaced by a walking wicket Rahul.
 
greatest said:
So, u mean even if Warner and Smith were playing it would not have made much difference?
Click to expand...

No, I am saying that both teams are missing key players. Besides Shaw, other players who would have played for India if not injured are Pandya, Shah, Ashwin and Rohit.
 
freelance_cricketer said:
Bancroft!
Click to expand...

I assume you believe Australia would have played Bancroft and Pattinson in addition to Starc, Cummins, Hazelwood and Lyons for a total of 13 players in the team. As I was saying, there are 3 kinds of people in the world...

Your attempts to downplay India's win are very weak.
 
[MENTION=65183]freelance_cricketer[/MENTION]

Can you ask your bhaijaan what he thinks of the aussie team losing at home on doctored pitches to an Indian team without Shaw, Ashwin,Hardik,Saha ? ohh don't forget to convey my absolute best regards to the bhaijaan :bow:
 
Smith would have taken India to the cleaners like he always does
 
Napa said:
India is also missing Shaw, who probably woulld have added quite significantly to India's total. All this speculation about who is missing is pointless.
Click to expand...

Wait are you seriously comparing Shaw to Smith or Warner? Like is this an actual thought which populates you mind?
 
Aus has their best bowling unit. They are not missing any bowler here. After a long time, Aus is able to play their 4 best bowlers in ongoing test series.

Aus is surely missing Warner and Smith. I still think posters are underrating Aus here. Aus should make this 1-1 after this test. Series is alive. Great knocks by Pujara and India having good bowling unit won them their previous test.
 
Anyone who say this is the best Indian test XI right now, they must be joking. Australia's missing players are more than adequately compensated by dumb squad selection of India.
 
Slog said:
Smith would have taken India to the cleaners like he always does
Click to expand...

Or the law of avgs would have caught up.

Slog said:
Wait are you seriously comparing Shaw to Smith or Warner? Like is this an actual thought which populates you mind?
Click to expand...

Conversely how do you know that Shaw wouldnt succeed ? how do you know that Ashwin wouldnt take wkts and score useful runs in Perth ? How do you know Rohit sharma wouldnt bludgeon a tired Aussie attack ? Ditto for Saha and Pandya.
 
Slog said:
Smith would have taken India to the cleaners like he always does
Click to expand...

Would have been interesting to see how Smith would have fared against Bumrah. I feel he has the ingredients (pace, steep bounce, yorker, sharp incoming ball, intelligence, unorthodox action etc) to expose chinks in Smith's technique. We will find out hopefully in 2020 when we tour Australia again for a 4 test series.
 
Australia would have been stronger if Smith and Warner were present.
That doesn't mean that India would not have been able to compete or win.
 
Pakistan played 5 years of international cricket from 2011 to 2016 where we kept telling ourselves and oppossition after every loss, “if we had Amir and Asif we would have eaten you alive”

There are no if and buts. The fact of the matter is that the current Australian team is their best team.

I would be very surprised if Smith and Warner return back to the level they left. They are now tainted, sorry to say.
 
Australia tour of India 2004:
- What if Tendulkar wasn't injured for first two matches and rushed into last few tests
- What if it didn't rain in Chennai

There are few ifs in the world. India competed well last time around when everyone was in team and India wasn't better than now.
 
Let me put it this way - if Smith and Warner were playing, no would expect India to win this series.

With those two out, many began to think India could win the series and potentially sweep Aus.

They lost the first match by 40 runs with none of the batsmen standing up, it's difficult to think Smith and Warner wouldn't have made an impact in at least one innings each and made the margin up.

This is a thing about facing an under strengthened side, it's a lose-lose situation. You either beat up on some easy beats which gets you nothing or you get humiliated by losing to a team missing their best players.
 
Last edited:
Aman said:
Let me put it this way - if Smith and Warner were playing, no would expect India to win this series.

With those two out, many began to think India could win the series and potentially sweep Aus.

They lost the first match by 40 runs with none of the batsmen standing up, it's difficult to think Smith and Warner wouldn't have made an impact in at least one innings each and made the margin up.

This is a thing about facing an under strengthened side, it's a lose-lose situation. You either beat up on some easy beats which gets you nothing or you get humiliated by losing to a team missing their best players.
Click to expand...

similarly with Shaw , Saha, Hardik India would have more than matched full strength Aus. And now we are missing Ashwin and Rohit Sharma too.
 
Aman said:
Let me put it this way - if Smith and Warner were playing, no would expect India to win this series.

With those two out, many began to think India could win the series and potentially sweep Aus.

They lost the first match by 40 runs with none of the batsmen standing up, it's difficult to think Smith and Warner wouldn't have made an impact in at least one innings each and made the margin up.

This is a thing about facing an under strengthened side, it's a lose-lose situation. You either beat up on some easy beats which gets you nothing or you get humiliated by losing to a team missing their best players.
Click to expand...

That is a genuine post! I agree.
 
Australia B team is dominating India in Perth currently.

It is an embarrassment.
 
Bancroft should be pleased to hear that he now gets mentioned in the same breath as Warner and Smith when people talk about how Australia miss its best players. Bancroft was nothing special. 8 Test matches and an average of 30. Had a serious issue with both balls seaming away and coming in.
 
Buffet said:
Aus has their best bowling unit. They are not missing any bowler here. After a long time, Aus is able to play their 4 best bowlers in ongoing test series.

Aus is surely missing Warner and Smith. I still think posters are underrating Aus here. Aus should make this 1-1 after this test. Series is alive. Great knocks by Pujara and India having good bowling unit won them their previous test.
Click to expand...

Tbh those two are probably worth more than 4 current Aussie top-order batsmen. But in a way it's not bad that they aren't present. It makes things much more even between two teams from a spectator point-of-view.
 
Last edited:
shariqnoor said:
Bancroft should be pleased to hear that he now gets mentioned in the same breath as Warner and Smith when people talk about how Australia miss its best players. Bancroft was nothing special. 8 Test matches and an average of 30. Had a serious issue with both balls seaming away and coming in.
Click to expand...

Lol. If mediocore player like Saha who averages 15 in Australia can be mentioned in the same breath as Smith and Warner then obviously a much much better batsman like Bancroft can be mentioned as well.

Ppl r saying here that India is missing Saha here who is is nothing more than a tailender outside Asia. He hast Played 4/5 matches in Australia and SA and averages mighty 15 with the bat in these countries. :))
 
Last edited:
Slog said:
Smith would have taken India to the cleaners like he always does
Click to expand...

Indian bowling standard has been exceedingly high in both games so far. Wouldn't be that easy. Although it's true that presence of Smith/ Warner would significantly tilt the overall balance in Australia's favor.
 
Last edited:
Chrish said:
Indian bowling standard has been exceedingly high in both games so far. Wouldn't be that easy. Although it's true that presence of Smith/ Warner would significantly tilt the overall balance in Australia's favor.
Click to expand...

That's because they r bowling against the current Australian batters. When a bowler bowls against mediocore players he looks better than he actually is. Its a well known fact.

Smith is a different kettle of fish and easily the best test batter in the world right now. These Indian bowlers wouldn't nearly look as much threatening against batters like Warner and Smith as they r looking now.
 
Slog said:
Wait are you seriously comparing Shaw to Smith or Warner? Like is this an actual thought which populates you mind?
Click to expand...

Let me try to explain this to you. Shaw and Smith will never play for the same country, so you will not be compare Shaw to Smith.

Rather, you should compare the difference between Shaw and his Indian replacement, to the difference between Smith and his Australian replacement.

For example, if Shaw's replacement is Vijay, and the expected difference in their scores is 40, then you should compare that with the difference between the expected scores of Smith and say Finch.

Maybe this correct logic is too much for you to comprehend, but give it a try.
 
RainMan_ said:
That's because they r bowling against the current Australian batters. When a bowler bowls against mediocore players he looks better than he actually is. Its a well known fact.

Smith is a different kettle of fish and easily the best test batter in the world right now. These Indian bowlers wouldn't nearly look as much threatening against batters like Warner and Smith as they r looking now.
Click to expand...

I think you aren't watching the game and relying on comments here. I saw the opening overs from Ishant and Bhumrah and they bowled really tight spell that would have troubled any players; ball bouncing alarmingly with occasional seam movement.

This Indian bowling attack isn't the same as last time.
 
Indians need to be humble. The series is still alive and if Australia B levels up 2-2 after Sydney test one could argue they would have morally won thr series without their 4 front line bowlers.

Pattinson > Starc/Hazzlewood

And Bancroft would walk into this batting line up with ease.
 
freelance_cricketer said:
Indians need to be humble. The series is still alive and if Australia B levels up 2-2 after Sydney test one could argue they would have morally won thr series without their 4 front line bowlers.

Pattinson > Starc/Hazzlewood

And Bancroft would walk into this batting line up with ease.
Click to expand...

Australia is weak by fate. INdia is weak through ridiculous selection untimely injury for Shaw. As a sum Australian batting is still equal to us. We had two rubbish openers. Then inconsistent Rahane and noob Pant then walking wickets. Just Kohli and Pujara. Basically possibly one of the worst Indian abtting that toured overseas. At the end of the day England's depth saved them. Australia's depth also saved them in one test. India has zero depth. Not like this is the best ever India line up. Thankfully we have a wonderful group of fast bowlers who paper over so many cracks.
 
No True Australian fans descibe their team as Australia B just because they are missing two players. It is Bangladeshis (pretending to be Indians) who start calling a team B team as soon as that team loses to India. Australia team is being described as B team by such people whose own team has never won a single test in Australia, forget drawing or winning a series there, something that India is likely to achieve this time.
 
Provided our team selections was spot on, no doubt we will be winning the series. But that's too much to ask of this pathetic team management.
 
latecut said:
No True Australian fans descibe their team as Australia B just because they are missing two players. It is Bangladeshis (pretending to be Indians) who start calling a team B team as soon as that team loses to India. Australia team is being described as B team by such people whose own team has never won a single test in Australia, forget drawing or winning a series there, something that India is likely to achieve this time.
Click to expand...

What in the world are you talking about? Lot of us are calling this AUS team a B team. What the point on baiting BD supporters in this? Take a visit to any indian cricket forum and ask this same question, most of us will agree that this is a AUS B TEAM just like the IND B team we sent to ASIA cup - without king kohli.
 
Australia are playing at home for god's sake. If India plays a home series against any team without Pujara and Kohli, they'll easily win it. Because it's the bowlers who win you test matches. And a few good batsmen ( i dare say even average batsmen) to put a decent total.
You must give credit when it's due. Any other team except (SAF and Kiwis) , would have been thrashed apart by this very team in Australia.
 
Stalin said:
Australia are playing at home for god's sake. If India plays a home series against any team without Pujara and Kohli, they'll easily win it. Because it's the bowlers who win you test matches. And a few good batsmen ( i dare say even average batsmen) to put a decent total.
You must give credit when it's due. Any other team except (SAF and Kiwis) , would have been thrashed apart by this very team in Australia.
Click to expand...

That’s rubbish.

If India came close to losing home series to both Australia and South Africa.

Pujara had huge impact on those series.

India B would have definitely lost them.
 
Indian batsmen should not have given any chances.
Opposition should win the toss
Opposition should have full strength.
Indians should be fitter and stop all boundaries.
Give the hell of a pitch to Indian team.
Indians should behave well.
Drink water without spilling.
Walk properly.
Look nicely.
Speak politely.

Lose and go to India - fair play India/Losers/ smileys and taunts...

That is what all non-Indians might want from Indian team.
And few Indians too.

Why this criteria is not applied to non-Indians.

Forgot, this is non-Indian platform/forum.
 
Last edited:
ind_win said:
Indian batsmen should not have given any chances.
Opposition should win the toss
Opposition should have full strength.
Indians should be fitter and stop all boundaries.
Give the hell of a pitch to Indian team.
Indians should behave well.
Drink water without spilling.
Walk properly.
Look nicely.
Speak politely.

Lose and go to India - fair play India/Losers/ smileys and taunts...

That is what all non-Indians might want from Indian team.
And few Indians too.

Why this criteria is not applied to non-Indians.

Forgot, this is non-Indian platform/forum.
Click to expand...

Reason-Jealousy, Hypocrisy. Realisation that their own teams have not achieved even a fraction of what this Indian team and its predecessors have achieved in Australia. Their own teams have also played so called B teams of Australia in Australia, but they failed to register any wins against them.
:bhajji
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Savak
The myth that Pakistani senior cricketers have been mistreated by the PCB
Replies
5
Views
581
Varun
Varun
Savak
Would PCB have been the second richest board today if it benefited from hosting India Pakistan bilateral series at home from 2009 to today?
Replies
77
Views
3K
mominsaigol
mominsaigol
BouncerGuy
Five match-ups that could prove decisive in the World Cup final
Replies
23
Views
830
happydavy
H
MenInG
Pakistan cannot win the ICC World Cup 2023 as they are not mentally and physically strong enough to defeat India, England, Australia and New Zealand
2
Replies
145
Views
10K
FearlessRoar
FearlessRoar
BouncerGuy
Beyond the Boundary: Pakistan Champions Trophy 2025 campaign: Only Win, no time for Learn (By Rana)
Replies
12
Views
1K
jnaveen1980
J
Back
Top