My brief opinion on each side:
Any ODI side that contains Tendulkar in the top order needs to be respected. Otherwise I find the batting relatively tame, no truly great ODI bat in the middle order. Cronje, Lehmann, Border and Rhodes are all relatively similar paced. Not a line-up that will take a side past 300 too often. A couple of young cricketers in the lower order, relatively unproven. Bowling line-up is awesome, plenty of great bowlers mixed with a wealth of cricketers who can bowl 10 tidy overs.
Batting not strong enough for my liking. I am not a fan of Clarke, Gavaskar and Amarnath all in the one lineup. Too many slow accumulating types. Not a terrible lineup, just looks out of shape. Bowlers are strong though, and with depth.
How awesome to have Brett Lee batting at number 10. I am a big fan of ODI teams that bat very deep. So many all-time greats in the batting line-up, and nearly every bat capable of a century at greater than a run-a-ball. The only oddity is Dravid at number 6, also doubles up with the gloves which is a massive weakness in my opinion. A solid choice with the gloves, but how would he go keeping to Lee? The bowling is solid, not one of the strongest though. Relying on 10 overs from the likes of Morkel and Kulusekara is a touch risky given the quality of opposition.
Another solid team. But not the strongest. Some impressive bats, but a little one-paced. Jayawardene at 6? I don't find Boucher or Pollock to be the best later-order sloggers either. I think this team will struggle to make big totals on a regular basis. Bowling is very good, Ambrose and Pollock as brilliant as they come. Not the best support in the pace department though, beyond Vass you only have Steve Waugh. At best an average medium-pacer who hardly bowled a ball in the second half of his career.
Some very good top order bats. Can't dispute a team that has Ponting, Miandad, de Villiers and Hussey. Will struggle to have a flying start though with Chanderpaul and Boon, far too similar in style. Also a worry is Hadlee at 7 followed by tail-enders, a definite weakness. The lack of a strong tail made up for with the quality of bowlers on display, I don't know about everyone else but Ray Price looks so odd in that lineup. A definite risk considering the lack of all-rounders, if your frontline 5 don't work then trouble.
Long depth in batting, although Thorpe is a waste at 7. This team will score big every time, far too much quality. The bowling is decent, but nowhere near the strongest. Only six guys who can bowl is a slight risk, especially with Agarkar always a risk at going at greater than 6 an over.
Awesome opening combination. A good mix of attacking cricketers with solid run-scorers in the middle order. Tikolo and Morgan maybe a bit out of place considering some of the other combinations of 6 and 7. Enough depth with the batting though, actually great depth. Bowling lineup is the strongest in my opinion. McGrath, Holding and Bond is a fantastic combination. Hogg is a multiple world cup winner and such an underrated cricketer, and then you have Botham.
Batting lineup is very nice. Symonds and Kemp down the order is very dangerous, although I would prefer Lara as opener over Dilshan, and Symonds possibly one position higher in the order. Frontline bowling attack is top shelf, and enough bowling depth to manage 10 overs out of Symonds, Kemp and Dilshan. Very good team.
Vaughan such a standout weakness in the lineup. Such a shame, as so many fantastic bats throughout this side. No question marks that Sobers would have made a fantastic ODI cricketer, so no issues with his place. Bowling (spin especially) such a key to this side. Given the right conditions this team would be a nightmare to play. A couple of solid pace-bowlers, but far strong ones available.
Overall winner.....Pothas. Bowling lineup seals it. Batting perhaps a star short, but still has the depth to compensate. Sorry if anyone finds my analysis harsh, I just call it as I see it. I have my own preferences to how I like ODI teams to be compiled, and who I consider a good player and not.