Alltime World Left handers XI

[C_C]

This is what I mean C_C, All three of these batsmen are not even in the same league as Greg Chappel who managed to average over 50 against the WI when they had their best bowling attack.

Greg was great but not in Richards-tendy-lara class.
He wasnt as fluent and he averaged 50 against WI because he averaged 48.5 and 117 when WI had a very weak bowling lineup ( it was after the 1975 tour that WI started employing the four prong) - Andy Roberts, Lance Gibbs and Michael Holding were the only bowlers of class on that tour and it was Holding's debut series and Gibbs's last series with him a shadow of his former self.

The 73 attack was even thinner.

After WI resorted to the four-prong, Greg Chappell bombed...averaging less than 30 in his next 12 innings against them.


PAKMAN- Saeed Would be mentioned had it not been for his reckless batting against the better bowling lineups

 

[Scallywag]

Greg was great but not in Richards-tendy-lara class.
He wasnt as fluent and he averaged 50 against WI because he averaged 48.5 and 117 when WI had a very weak bowling lineup ( it was after the 1975 tour that WI started employing the four prong) - Andy Roberts, Lance Gibbs and Michael Holding were the only bowlers of class on that tour and it was Holding's debut series and Gibbs's last series with him a shadow of his former self.

The 73 attack was even thinner.

After WI resorted to the four-prong, Greg Chappell bombed...averaging less than 30 in his next 12 innings against them.


PAKMAN- Saeed Would be mentioned had it not been for his reckless batting against the better bowling lineups

Richards only averaged 44 against Australia and less against NZ and even less again against Pak, But he did extremely well against the English pace attack.

 

[C_C]

Richards only averaged 44 against Australia and less against NZ and even less again against Pak, But he did extremely well against the English pace attack.

Yes but he did better against Lillee-Thommo(closest AUS attack to the fourprong) than Chappell did against the four prong.

Richards, lara and tendulkar are greater than Greg Chappell IMO.

But why are ya turning this into a richards vs Chappell issue ? this is about LEFT HANDERS XI greg Chappell does NOT qualify.

 

[Scallywag]

this is about LEFT HANDERS XI greg Chappell does NOT qualify.

And Tendulkar is, remember you introduced Tendulkar.

 

[social]

Graham Wood was a major disappointment over his test career and does not warrant dicussion on this thread.

Border had a series in the West Indies against the four-prong that rivals any played against the WI in this era. That, combined with his overall record, should guarantee him selection in this side plus serious consideration for an all-time X1. He is as responsible as anyone for the dominant position Australian cricket finds itself in today.

BTW, and off topic as pointed out earlier, Greg Chappell was a fabulous player who was condidered the equal of Richards during their over-lapping careers.

 

[Top_Cat]

Greg was great but not in Richards-tendy-lara class.
He wasnt as fluent and he averaged 50 against WI because he averaged 48.5 and 117 when WI had a very weak bowling lineup ( it was after the 1975 tour that WI started employing the four prong) - Andy Roberts, Lance Gibbs and Michael Holding were the only bowlers of class on that tour and it was Holding's debut series and Gibbs's last series with him a shadow of his former self.

The 73 attack was even thinner.

After WI resorted to the four-prong, Greg Chappell bombed...averaging less than 30 in his next 12 innings against them.

Now wait a second; where's your assertion of looking at a player's whole career to judge them against a particular team? We've been doing exactly what you just did in the above post in the other thread (i.e. explaining performance using factors other than the bare numbers) and now when you do it, it's perfectly okay and useable to explain why Chappell isn't as great as the others?!?!? You ARE kidding, right? Believe what you want but at least give us some consistency!

Please show the difference between explaining Chappell's early success against the WI as down to facing an inferior bowling attack and explaining Lillee's failures in Pakistan as being due to the pitches over there. I and others have been doing stuff like this all along and you rubbished it and now you want to? Interesting.............

Personally, I think this is a perfect example of where the bare numbers fail to tell the story. When Chappell had his run of outs against the WI in the early 80's and 4 ducks in a row, he was so strung out mentally it probably wouldn't have mattered who he played. No I can't prove it objectively with the bare numbers and I know performance over the entire time they've played against an opposition is the only criteria by which you say you judge players (as the above example shows, this isn't the case) but hey, that's my opinion on it.

 

[social]

And it could be argued that the only time Viv plated a full-strength Aus bowling line-up was in 1975-76, when he was a relative failure. From that point on, most of the bowlers declined.

In 1976/77, Thommo sustained the shoulder injury that left him a shadow of his former self (frightening to think about when he could still bowl well in excess of 150 ks after the injury).

Walker and Gilmour basically retired following WSC, and Lillee re-invented himself as his pace declined.

Please dont tell me you're now going to question Viv's greatness.

 

[C_C]

Now wait a second; where's your assertion of looking at a player's whole career to judge them against a particular team? We've been doing exactly what you just did in the above post in the other thread (i.e. explaining performance using factors other than the bare numbers) and now when you do it, it's perfectly okay and useable to explain why Chappell isn't as great as the others?!?!? You ARE kidding, right? Believe what you want but at least give us some consistency!

Umm.
Are you following what i am arguing in the first place?

This IS detailed analysis of the stats- thats what i just did!

Please show the difference between explaining Chappell's early success against the WI as down to facing an inferior bowling attack and explaining Lillee's failures in Pakistan as being due to the pitches over there. I and others have been doing stuff like this all along and you rubbished it and now you want to? Interesting.............

This is NOT what you were doing. You were going by he-says she-says blahblah.

WI attack early on was inferior to their pre-75 version. Especially in the 5-6 year period between the rise of the four prong and retirement of Griffiths-Hall.

Greg Chappell failed to live up to his standards once WI bowling attack was upgraded.
Lillee failed to perform ANYWHERE in the subcontinent whereas Hadlee did perform in India and Sri Lanka.
Thus Lillee's resume in the subcontinent reads: Failure, Absent,Failure while Hadlee's reads: Failure, Success,Success.

On that count, Hadlee gets more points than Lillee.

Lillee's overall performance against PAK is inferior to that of hadlee as well.

You cannot explain away Lillee's stats being inferior to hadlee's in the subcontinent because they both played in the subcontinent.

I fail to see how i am being inconsistent as you are alleging.

When Chappell had his run of outs against the WI in the early 80's and 4 ducks in a row, he was so strung out mentally it probably wouldn't have mattered who he played.

And ??
Every batsman faces a low patch in his career...thats no excuse.

I know performance over the entire time they've played against an opposition is the only criteria by which you say you judge players (as the above example shows, this isn't the case) but hey, that's my opinion on it.

performance over the entire careers while accounting for good performances and bad performances and looking for trends.
I do not limit my comparision to exact # of series to two comparing players.
But to analyse their WHOLE careers and see where they screw up and where they shine.
Lillee has not been a potent force on pitches that dont suit his kinda bowling....much less potent force than Hadlee and that is shown by his lack of touring of the subcontinent and not being good there at all.

 

[Top_Cat]

Every batsman faces a low patch in his career...thats no excuse.

It's as legitimate an excuse as yours explaining Chappell's success against the early (weaker) WI attack.

Whatever, mate. Everyone reading the threads will know what I'm talking about. Not only will you refuse to acknowledge where you're inconsistent but (which is the only thing that really annoys me) you incorrectly state what I was saying and have done so on a few occasions. The fact that you keep reverting to the Straw-Man Fallacy style of debate means I'm now done wasting my time with you.

 

[social]

Umm.
Lillee has not been a potent force on pitches that dont suit his kinda bowling.

Whilst I am not buying into the argument as to who was a better bowler (the answer is bound to be subjective), this statement is patently false. The reason why Lillee is so highly rated is because of his ability to overcome adversity and to adapt to conditions no matter how unfavourable. This is where opinions and anecdotes of contemporaries are more valuable than statistics.

 

[a massive zebra]

Whilst I am not buying into the argument as to who was a better bowler (the answer is bound to be subjective), this statement is patently false. The reason why Lillee is so highly rated is because of his ability to overcome adversity and to adapt to conditions no matter how unfavourable. This is where opinions and anecdotes of contemporaries are more valuable than statistics.

Care to explain his failure in India, where the pitches were doctored to neutralise his bowling?

 

[Top_Cat]

Care to explain his failure in India, where the pitches were doctored to neutralise his bowling?

Yes, Lillee failed to take a wicket in India in both ODI's and Tests but the main reason is this (and feel free to argue against this if you wish); he never played in India.

The groundsmen must have been so disappointed when he didn't turn up.

 

[a massive zebra]

Yes, Lillee failed to take a wicket in India in both ODI's and Tests but the main reason is this (and feel free to argue against this if you wish); he never played in India.

The groundsmen must have been so disappointed when he didn't turn up.

Oops.

Time to rephrase that... "Care to explain his failure in Pakistan, where the pitches were doctored to neutralise his bowling?"

 

[honestbharani]

I am sorry, but, Scallywag, I am sure even McGrath said that his contest with Lara is even, with no clear victor. If you think, after all the points being put out by CC, that Lara is still his bunny, then you will perhaps be the only one thinking so. And that 153* was rated as the second best innings of the century by more than 50 former cricketers. Unfortunately, I have never watched (or even heard) of that innings by Wood so far, but I have to say it has to be a mighty, mighty good knock to even be termed as better than Lara's at Barbados.

 

[Deja moo]

The term bunny is being used very loosely in recent threads.

Lara gets dimissed 1/3 times by McGrath, and he is supposed to be his bunny.

In the other thread, Gavakar being dismissed twice in six innings by Lillee was described as Lillee owning him.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Greg was great but not in Richards-tendy-lara class.

Now, in the "second greastest Australian batsman" thread, you pick Greg Chappell as the second best Australian batsman after Bradman. Does this mean then that you think Richards, Tendulkar and Lara are all better than any batsman Australia has ever produced, excluding Bradman?

 

[social]

Oops.

Time to rephrase that... "Care to explain his failure in Pakistan, where the pitches were doctored to neutralise his bowling?"

I assume from his statistics in this series that he didnt bowl particularly well there.

Although it might be helpful to know how many catches were dropped off his bowling and, likewise, how many dubious decisions went the way of the batsman.

 

[social]

Greg Chappell failed to live up to his standards once WI bowling attack was upgraded.

Given the fact that he had only one bad series against them and that he averaged 56 in WSC Supertests against 2 four-pronged pace attacks, your argument is hardly valid.

 

[Zinzan]

Arthur Morris
Brian Lara
Neil Harvey
Gary Sobers
Clive Lloyd - C
Greame Pollock
Allan Border
Adam Gilchrist - Wk
Wasim Akram
Alan Davidson
Hedley Verity

Don't mind the side, but would definately swap Sobers and Pollock around in the batting order.

Also your at least one batmen too many

 

[Beleg]

Zin,

Agree with the swapping.

Ah, yes, I know that I only have three front-line bowlers in there, but I figure that Sobers wouldn't mind turning over his arm a bit.