View Full Version : Where does this series win rank?
Sylvia Saint
11 Mar 2009, 14:58
As an Aussie fan, I can't remember ever being as satisfied about a series win than this one. Whipping the Poms 5-0 a couple of years back was good, but in a way I think most of us expected us to win that series and win comfortably.
This one, being massive underdogs and seeing a 20 year old rip the best attack in the world to shreds, seeing Siddle continue to develop into a possible pace superstar, seeing Johnson make serious claims for being the best player in the world, and reminding the world that Aussie cricket is not yet dead.... it's as good as it gets....
I guess the 95 Windies tour may go close, but I was too young to really savour that series win.
Thoughts?
UpForGrabs
11 Mar 2009, 15:03
For me, the pinnacle is the 1989 Ashes series.
The team was ridiculed before it had even played a game yet came away with a 4-0 result.
Some similarities with this series, except in the 89 series the only real newcomer was Mark Taylor.
frankrizzo
11 Mar 2009, 15:07
Because of the last year the lack of a spinner and the retirement of so many greats it must rate up here with any win from the modern era.
My sentimental favorites remain the 89 ashes and the 95 west indies tour though.
To truly understand the 95 windies tour and it's significance i think you have to have lived through the dark 80's and of course felt ab's pain as mcdemott got out in Adelaide in 93 watching ab hurl his worry ball down in disgust as his dream of a win over the windies slipped away made the 95 series all the more special.
Minotaur
11 Mar 2009, 15:26
Good question ... I agree with others that it would have to rank pretty high because it was against the odds and it has confirmed that we have a pretty decent bowling line up with Siddle and Johnson and Hughes would have to be the most exciting debut series since ????
Jimthegreat
11 Mar 2009, 16:46
I'm older. Nothing beats Lillee and Thomson running absolute rampant through the Poms 4-1 in 1974-75 and the West Indies 5-1 in 1975-76. Thomson's pace and bounce was frightening and made Johnson look like a "spinner".
This series ranks with the West Indies 1995 win as an unexpected win with an inexperienced bowling line-up that never was supposed to happen.
damochandler
11 Mar 2009, 17:36
as good as their 2004 run. when they beat sri lanka in sri lanka on turning square pitches from ball dott. and of course beating india in india for the first time in a long time
Wallaby
11 Mar 2009, 20:20
I think the 95 Windies was almost expected (we were a bit stiff in 91 and 92-93). We were due.
The first series win in Pakistan was pretty good.
With the Sith Efrikans record for choking I always gave us a chance in this series. Ponting, Clark, Hussey and Johnson were all top players. It's still bloody good.
For me, the 89 ashes was the best - everyone wrote us off, Tony Greig coined the term 'Pie-chuckers' for the first time (except he used it to describe Alderman, Lawson and Hughes instead of the Poms).
The best part was after we had won the series and moved on to the 5th test. Close of play First Day - Aus 0/301.
Now thats how to rub it in.
Better than India 2004, considering all the circumstances and the changing of the guard to go 2-0 with the possibility of a whitewash is extraordinary.
krusden
12 Mar 2009, 12:42
I personally rate this series highly as it has been the first real test of the depth of Australian cricket since the Winning streak in the early 00's.
In this series we have gone in with an inexperienced batting attack (minus the seniors of Kat, Punter, Huss and Clarke) and an inexperienced bowling attack.
The stat that stood out for me was on the final day I think it was roebuck or Lawson who said Aussies had 135 wickets between their bowlers and the Saffers had 900 or something like that.
I haven't verified that, and it may be spurious so PLease pull me up on it, but the likes of Hilfy, Siddle and Johnno against The great Ntini, Kallis and Steyn certainly held their own.
I think we need a clean sweep to get momentum to go the the UK but also for the confidence of the bowlers. Even a draw in the last test would be fine - but this team has proved it can scrap out a win on foreign soil and IMO that is nothing but morale and confidence boosting. The team now knows what to do when they are down and the captain has people he can call on to eke, scrap and drag out a wicket.
frankrizzo
12 Mar 2009, 12:51
I think the 95 Windies was almost expected (we were a bit stiff in 91 and 92-93). We were due.
You really think that?
Playing the windies at home in those times was like a war, added to that our first choice seam attack(fleming/mcdermott) was gone before a ball was bowled.
I think the brutal third test was proof enough of how violently things in the west indies could shift when faced with bowlers that good on crumbling pitches.
Nothing was locked in in those times, the 99 tour we were lucky to draw against a much weaker windies is even more proof of just how special and well executed 95 was.
TorresIsGod
12 Mar 2009, 12:57
Steve Waugh's double century in that series, the best innings I've ever seen.
Wallaby
12 Mar 2009, 13:25
You really think that?
Playing the windies at home in those times was like a war, added to that our first choice seam attack(fleming/mcdermott) was gone before a ball was bowled.
I think the brutal third test was proof enough of how violently things in the west indies could shift when faced with bowlers that good on crumbling pitches.
Nothing was locked in in those times, the 99 tour we were lucky to draw against a much weaker windies is even more proof of just how special and well executed 95 was.
Yeah, I do. In 91 we were very close - got done by a few dodgy decisions, and Gordon Greenidge's last century (he really was poor for his last 18 months and then popped up with a double against us) - we still only lost 2-1.
And 92/93 - well, we all know what happened there. We would have won in Brisbane if Warne had played, and if McDermott's legside flick off the second last ball hadn't hit Haynes (Haynes never saw it) - well, we nearly won the series 3-1.
We were far better than them in 95 - they only won their test due to a crap pitch.
In 99 there were two all-time great players on show - Lara had almost his best ever series (the 153* is rated by many as the greatest ever innings) and Warne had his worst. Even with that, they just managed to draw with us.
japaljarri
15 Mar 2009, 14:56
I think the 95 Windies was almost expected (we were a bit stiff in 91 and 92-93). We were due. The first series win in Pakistan was pretty good.With the Sith Efrikans record for choking I always gave us a chance in this series. Ponting, Clark, Hussey and Johnson were all top players. It's still bloody good. For me, the 89 ashes was the best .
About right l reckon - this is right up there and bloody bloody sweet but just behind a few series.
Ashes 89 is almost mystical now and can;t be touched. Youhave to have followed cricket through World Series, Rebel tours, Lillee, Chappel and Marsh and then the eternal doldrums to fully appreciate what it meant. And like the 87 World Cup it represents the start fo 20 years of growth and domination. Border like a proud surly grandfather over it all :D
l would also add our wins in Sri Lanka and India. As an old Martyn fan l loved those series.
roostersgal4eva
15 Mar 2009, 16:27
In my time there is no test win better than WI 95 and this one would be 2nd up there
I cant get why anyone would say Ashes 05 was good - that was by far the worst Ive ever sat through....like a living nightmare
Yes to finally get the Windies monkey off our backs was a real boon.