Pick a winner: Composite OZ-WI teams

[C_C]

I am gonna include players since 1970s onwards.....no modification to the teams allowed....just pick a winner and justify your viewpoint(s):

TEAM # 1:

Desmond Haynes
Roy Fredericks
Greg Chappell
Brian Lara
Damien Martyn
Alan Border
Ian Healey
Malcolm Marshall
Denis Lillee
Michael Holding
Joel Garner

Team # 2 :

Justin Langer
Gordon Greenidge
Viv Richards
Steve Waugh
Ricky Ponting
Clive Lloyd
Dereyck Murray
Shane Warne
Curtley Ambrose
Andy Roberts
Glenn McGrath


Note: For obvious reasons, Gilly has been left out.

 

[archie mac]

I am gonna include players since 1970s onwards.....no modification to the teams allowed....just pick a winner and justify your viewpoint(s):

TEAM # 1:

Desmond Haynes
Roy Fredericks
Greg Chappell
Brian Lara
Damien Martyn
Alan Border
Ian Healey
Malcolm Marshall
Denis Lillee
Michael Holding
Joel Garner

Team # 2 :

Justin Langer
Gordon Greenidge
Viv Richards
Steve Waugh
Ricky Ponting
Clive Lloyd
Dereyck Murray
Shane Warne
Curtley Ambrose
Andy Roberts
Glenn McGrath


Note: For obvious reasons, Gilly has been left out.

Can you give us an idea of the pitch, Country and lenth of series, plus bumper rule?

 

[C_C]

Played in no-holds barred fashion, ie, bounce em away.
5 test series, one each in OZ and WI, pitch conditions like the 90s.
hope that helps.

 

[archie mac]

A cop out; 2 all in both series. But if I had to I would think team 2 with Warne may just have an advantage.

Would love to see Chappell and Lara batting together or Richards and Ponting.

Would not be surprised if Team two were a little shell shocked by the end of the Matches

 

[C_C]

HA!

I knew that someone is gonna bring up the Warney point, which is why i put him where he is, since Team #1 is pretty proficient in playing spin - Lara, Chappell, Haynes, Border, etc were all pretty good against spin and Lara is legendary in that department.

I am gonna go out on a limb and call team #1,simpy because they are likely to blunt Warne to a greater degree than team two would blunt anyone from team #1. Plus the 'no holds barred, bounce em away' rule aids Holding-Lillee-Marshall-Garner more than it aids McGrath-Ambrose-Roberts-Warne as a whole, since McGrath and Warne arnt the 'bounce em and make em dance' kinda bowlers.

 

[archie mac]

HA!

I knew that someone is gonna bring up the Warney point, which is why i put him where he is, since Team #1 is pretty proficient in playing spin - Lara, Chappell, Haynes, Border, etc were all pretty good against spin and Lara is legendary in that department.

I am gonna go out on a limb and call team #1,simpy because they are likely to blunt Warne to a greater degree than team two would blunt anyone from team #1. Plus the 'no holds barred, bounce em away' rule aids Holding-Lillee-Marshall-Garner more than it aids McGrath-Ambrose-Roberts-Warne as a whole, since McGrath and Warne arnt the 'bounce em and make em dance' kinda bowlers.

True, but you have included some pretty good players of speed in T-2 Viv would be the trump card, and Lloyd coming in late against a tired attack (hopefully) would be ideal. Also you have a couple of Lefties in T-1, with Warne bowling into the foot marks, could be interesting.

 

[marc71178]

Over the 10 games I'd shade it 6-4 in favour of team 2 (assuming timeless games) simply because there's going to be at least one game where we get a 4th innings turner.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

They are just incredibly evenly matched teams... I have no idea. I'd go for team two to shade it if a few of the wickets turned, if they were seamers though it's just so hard to say. The first team has a better bowling lineup on a seamer slightly, as I think Roberts is marginally the worst of the 8 bowlers, and they have four seamers, but McGrath and Ambrose are both almost unplayable on a seaming wicket too. On a turner, like say the SCG in the 90s, or even the Gabba or Adelaide on days 4 and 5, Warne would be damaging enough to tilt the game I think.

So, over 10 games, maybe 6-4 to team 2, as marc said.

 

[Swervy]

my gut feeling would be that team 2 would win more than team 1

 

[King_Ponting]

Yeh i believe that team 2 would defeat team one

 

[Beleg]

2-2 with the game at St. John's ending in a boring draw.

 

[aussie]

Over the 10 games I'd shade it 6-4 in favour of team 2 (assuming timeless games) simply because there's going to be at least one game where we get a 4th innings turner.

Gonna have to agree with Marc here....