Australia will struggle without star duo: Akram!

[MundaPakistani]

Australian team was very good in the 70s and 80s till the retirement of the trio in one match. So' date=' yes their domestic was still good and produced a good unit but not good enough to cope with losing your best batsman, best bowler, and an excellent gloveman in one go. They have built upon that good foundation since then to come up with an excellent system and the loss of McGrath, Warne, Langer, Martyn and sooner than later Hayden and Gilchrist is not going to hurt them as bad as it did in the mid 80s. They'll still remain among the top 2-3 teams..[/quote'] First of all applogizes for the late reply. Ok coming to the topic didn't WI lost Holding, Llyod and Garner at about the same time and IIRC Roberts had left a year or two earlier? yet they continued to dominate the world for the next 9 years( literally not losing a single series for 9 years). Was WI's domestic structure any better than AUS's? not even close. What made WI stay at the top was the approach and the attitude towards the game! The more experienced players at the time took responsiblity for their team's performance and never walked in to the games with a negative attitude. Even off the field they did most of the right things and set the right example for the others.

Both, but having a good domestic structure in place will at least ensure decent fast bowlers. In that respect the MRF pace academy, the preparation of more seam friendly pitches, and 2 tier Ranji system over the last few years have at least ensured that guys like Zaheer, Balaji, RP Singh, Sreesanth, Nehra, Munaf etc. have come out and the cupboard isn't as bare as it has been during India's entire cricketing history except for the aberrations of Kapil and Srinath. In fact, even Srinath got honed at the MRF pace academy.

Pakistan played their cricket in similar conditions, the domestic strcuture was worse yet where did all the fast bowlers come from? Once again it's the attitude towards the game which makes the difference. If you are going to have the likes of Sunny Gavaskar open the bowling in a test match then there is no way you will get fast bowlers. Indian cricket should be thankful to Kapil. It is possible to bowl fast even one of the flattest of pitches as long as you have the will to do it.

[The Outsider]

Ok coming to the topic didn't WI lost Holding, Llyod and Garner at about the same time and IIRC Roberts had left a year or two earlier? yet they continued to dominate the world for the next 9 years( literally not losing a single series for 9 years). Was WI's domestic structure any better than AUS's? not even close.

But look at the quality of players who replaced them/were still around in the team - Marshall, Walsh, Ambrose, Richards, Greenidge, Haynes, Richardson. Once WI were left with only Lara, Ambrose, and Walsh they started going down and once Ambrose and Walsh left they have been pathetic for many years. Australia, due to their domestic system and infrastructure not only bounced back within 4-5 years but went on to become the best team in 10 years.

Pakistan played their cricket in similar conditions, the domestic strcuture was worse yet where did all the fast bowlers come from? Once again it's the attitude towards the game which makes the difference. If you are going to have the likes of Sunny Gavaskar open the bowling in a test match then there is no way you will get fast bowlers. Indian cricket should be thankful to Kapil. It is possible to bowl fast even one of the flattest of pitches as long as you have the will to do it.

Those came despite the system and Imran hardly played any domestic cricket in Pakistan. He was a fairly ordinary bowler when he came on to the scenes, talented but wayward. He perfected his game in England and Australia and has been on record saying he did not play in Pakistan domestic because there was little to gain from it. He spotted Akram(or maybe Miandad did, not sure) but certainly nurtured him and encouraged him to play county cricket. It took Akram a good 4-5 years to develop his game. So after precoucious talent like Akram and Waqar, Pakistan has had a talented Akhtar who wasted away his career and no other fast bowler of note till Asif, who still has a lot to prove. Compare that to Australia, England, or even South Africa. They keep producing one decent quick after another, if not greats. No one can guarantee an Imran, Akram, Kapil, McGrath, Pollock etc. but what a good system guarantees is good players like Lee, Clark, Hoggard, Ntini etc.

[itduzz]

But look at the quality of players who replaced them/were still around in the team - Marshall, Walsh, Ambrose, Richards, Greenidge, Haynes, Richardson. Once WI were left with only Lara, Ambrose, and Walsh they started going down and once Ambrose and Walsh left they have been pathetic for many years. Australia, due to their domestic system and infrastructure not only bounced back within 4-5 years but went on to become the best team in 10 years. Those came despite the system and Imran hardly played any domestic cricket in Pakistan. He was a fairly ordinary bowler when he came on to the scenes, talented but wayward. He perfected his game in England and Australia and has been on record saying he did not play in Pakistan domestic because there was little to gain from it. He spotted Akram(or maybe Miandad did, not sure) but certainly nurtured him and encouraged him to play county cricket. It took Akram a good 4-5 years to develop his game. So after precoucious talent like Akram and Waqar, Pakistan has had a talented Akhtar who wasted away his career and no other fast bowler of note till Asif, who still has a lot to prove. Compare that to Australia, England, or even South Africa. They keep producing one decent quick after another, if not greats. No one can guarantee an Imran, Akram, Kapil, McGrath, Pollock etc. but what a good system guarantees is good players like Lee, Clark, Hoggard, Ntini etc.

:giggle: