Greatest ever South African XI

[aussie]

well had had a rethink, about the line-up & here a second shot:

1. Bruce Mitchell
2. Barry Richards
3. Graeme Pollock * - Captain
4. Dudley Nourse
5. Jaques Kallis
6. Aubrey Faulkner
7. Jock Cameron + - W/Keeper
8. Mike Procter
9. Hugh Tayfield
10.Vintcent van der Bijl
11. Allan Donald

unlucky to miss out now are: the Pollock's bowlers, the Kirsten Brothers, Bland, Lindsay, adcock, Barlow.

What would be nice to see is this team againts the supposedly all-time great WI team:

1. Roy Fredricks/Desmond Haynes/Conrad Hunte
2. Gordon Greednidge
3. Brian Lara
4. George Headley
5. Viv Richards
6. Sir Gary Sobers * - Captain
7. Jeff Dujon + - W/Keeper
8. Malcolm Marshall
9. Wes Hall
10. Michael Holding
11. Curtly Ambrose
12th man Lance Gibbs

 

[Zinzan]

well had had a rethink, about the line-up & here a second shot:

1. Bruce Mitchell
2. Barry Richards
3. Graeme Pollock * - Captain
4. Dudley Nourse
5. Jaques Kallis
6. Aubrey Faulkner
7. Jock Cameron + - W/Keeper
8. Mike Procter
9. Hugh Tayfield
10.Vintcent van der Bijl
11. Allan Donald

unlucky to miss out now are: the Pollock's bowlers, the Kirsten Brothers, Bland, Lindsay, adcock, Barlow.

What would be nice to see is this team againts the supposedly all-time great WI team:

1. Roy Fredricks/Desmond Haynes/Conrad Hunte
2. Gordon Greednidge
3. Brian Lara
4. George Headley
5. Viv Richards
6. Sir Gary Sobers * - Captain
7. Jeff Dujon + - W/Keeper
8. Malcolm Marshall
9. Wes Hall
10. Michael Holding
11. Curtly Ambrose
12th man Lance Gibbs

I think It would be a better balance for the windies for Gibbs to play in the 11 instead of 12th man, possibly at the expense of Wes Hall. People forget Gibbs was a great spinner in his own right, and if i'm not mistaken the 1st spinner to get 300 test wkts. I personally favour Joel Garner over Holding, but thats just my personal opinion.

 

[SJS]

Gibbs was a great spinner in his own right, and if i'm not mistaken the 1st spinner to get 300 test wkts. .

Only the second bowler ever to touch that mark after Trueman whose world record he broke.

 

[Pratters]

The thing is a very powerful Windies would have taken on a very powerful South Africa in the 70s, 80s had apartheid and the consequent banning of SA not occured.

 

[SJS]

1. Roy Fredricks/Desmond Haynes/Conrad Hunte
2. Gordon Greednidge
3. Brian Lara
4. George Headley
5. Viv Richards
6. Sir Gary Sobers * - Captain
7. Jeff Dujon + - W/Keeper
8. Malcolm Marshall
9. Wes Hall
10. Michael Holding
11. Curtly Ambrose
12th man Lance Gibbs

I would firm up on Hunte as opener, replace Marshall with andy Roberts and Ambrose with Gibbs.

Its so difficult as always to choose a Windies side. Imagine leaving out Worrell, Weekes and Walcott. Well with the trend as it is today, I would put in Walcott as keeper. He wasnt a disaster behind the stumps and averaged 56.7 with the bat - higher than most batsmen in that list.

 

[SJS]

REVISED WINDIES XI

1. Hunte (3245 @ 45.1)
2. Worrell (3860 @ 49.5)
3. Weekes (4455 @ 58.6)
4. Richards (8540 @ 50.2)
5. Lara (11204 @ 53.9)
6. Sobers (8032 @ 57.8)
7. Walcott (2190 @ 60.8)

I must stop and take a breath. This must be the greatest batting line up ever and WITHOUT BRADMAN !! A top SEVEN (seven mind you not five)

- 43000 PLUS RUNS
- 53 PLUS batting average
- 128 test centuries

The top six batsmen are all brilliant fielders with 487 catches in 478 tests between them !

They dont need bowlers but anyway.
8. Marshall (376 @ 20.9)
9. Roberts (202 @ 25.6)
10. Hall (192 @ 26.4)
11. Gibbs (309 @ 29.1)

Thats 1079 wickets at 25.1. Add Sobers' 235 to it and you have a staggering
1314 at 26.7.

Plus there is right arm leg spin of Worrell that brought him 69 test wickets including a best of 7 for 70. Not to count the great King Viv

One could take away the great Roberts and Hall and add the modern day fast bowlers from the Windies, it would greatly enhance the stats but in my humble opinion would take away two of the greatest fast bowlers the world has seen.

I wish tonight I dream of a match where this team is playing and dont wake up till it is over

 

[Pratters]

I wish tonight I dream of a match where this team is playing and dont wake up till it is over

I am glad your enthusiasm for the game is at such an awesome level.

 

[SJS]

I am glad your enthusiasm for the game is at such an awesome level.

You have no clue....

I would give up anything to be able to play at active level again, anything.

One of the main reasons why I am retiring early is to play a bit of cricket while I can still do it.

 

[marc71178]

The thing is a very powerful Windies would have taken on a very powerful South Africa in the 70s, 80s had apartheid and the consequent banning of SA not occured.

An interesting one - not sure the 2 sides would've overlapped by a great deal to be honest - it would've all depended on the new players in the mid 70s for SA.

 

[aussie]

REVISED WINDIES XI

1. Hunte (3245 @ 45.1)
2. Worrell (3860 @ 49.5)
3. Weekes (4455 @ 58.6)
4. Richards (8540 @ 50.2)
5. Lara (11204 @ 53.9)
6. Sobers (8032 @ 57.8)
7. Walcott (2190 @ 60.8)

commenting on the batting wht would you have Worrell opening wouldn;t Greenidge be a better option & i dunno leaving Headley out is a big call. Also before i did consider having Walcott as the keepr but at that time i was thinking about a specialist keeping to a 4-prong pace attack so i went for Dujon, but looking at your reasoning for having Walcott i am inclined to agree with that.

 

[grecian]

Would like to mention Garth Le Roux and Jimmy Cook as two others who performed brilliantly at first-class level.

 

[C_C]

My greatest RSA XI :

Barry Richards
Gary Kirstien
Graeme Pollock
Jacques Kallis
Clive Rice
Mike Procter
Jack Cameron
Peter Pollock
Hugh Tayfield
Alan Donald
Neil Adcock.

 

[archie mac]

My greatest RSA XI :

Barry Richards
Gary Kirstien
Graeme Pollock
Jacques Kallis
Clive Rice
Mike Procter
Jack Cameron
Peter Pollock
Hugh Tayfield
Alan Donald
Neil Adcock.

Why Jock Cameron? I would have thought under your criteria he would have played in the 'non pro age'

 

[SJS]

commenting on the batting wht would you have Worrell opening wouldn;t Greenidge be a better option & i dunno leaving Headley out is a big call. Also before i did consider having Walcott as the keepr but at that time i was thinking about a specialist keeping to a 4-prong pace attack so i went for Dujon, but looking at your reasoning for having Walcott i am inclined to agree with that.

You are absolutely right.

Having Worrell opening is a big compromise but I could 'twist' it a bit knowing I could always argue that he averages 49.5 at the top of the order and has a highest score of 191 not out as an an opener. But that would be trying to be clever . If you take away the 191 then he scored another 56 runs in 6 innings as opener. Having a specialist opener would be right. Greenidge is the obvious choice. I think leaving out as great a batsman AND one of the greatest leader of men seen on the cricket field seems such a shame, no ?

AND OH SH** !! I had no clue I had left Headley out. I normally include him in all time world XI's too. Its a slip. Who would he replace ? Either one of Lara, Richard and Weekes !!!

Eeenie, meenie....... take your pick.

I dont think it will make a difference to the side whichever of those three you left out. Lara is a left hander (the side already has Sobers), Richards is the most destructive top order batsman I have seen in 44 years of watching cricket and Weekes...well averaging 58.6 in not 10 or 20 but 48 test matches !! Tough call that. If forced to use better methods for selection than suggested above, I would drop Weekes.

1. Hunte
2. Greenidge
3. Richards
4. Headley
5. Lara
6. Sobers
7. Walcott
8. Marshall
9. Roberts
10. Hall
11. Gibbs

Thanks for pointing out

 

[SJS]

As a tribute to those I left out

The Greatest 2nd XI ever - if you disagree, go face those fast bowlers

1. Haynes - 7487 @ 42.3
2. Worrell - 3860 @ 49.5
3. Weekes - 4455 @ 58.6
4. Kanhai - 6227 @ 47.5
5. Richardson - 5949 @ 44.4
6. Lloyd - 7515 @ 46.7

7. Dujon - 3322 @ 31.9 AND 272 victims in 81 tests

8. Garner - 259 @ 20.9
9. Ambrose - 405 @ 21.0
10 Holding - 249 @ 23.7
11. Walsh - 519 @ 24.4


Worrell is opening not to fit him in the side (he could bat anywhere he wanted) but Windies havent had too many great openers so why not get in Richardson one of the most under rated batsmen in cricket history.

The batting looks weaker than the first side (surprise surprise - try picking a third Windies side and you may have to include - ugh- Chanderpaul) but that bowling is something else. The four fast bowlers have between them

1432 wickets at

22.7 each

and a wicket every 54 deliveries

Theoretically they would get you in 90 overs everytime for 227 runs. They could do with the second best batting line up

 

[Dasa]

SJS, you might want to visit this thread.

 

[C_C]

Why Jock Cameron? I would have thought under your criteria he would have played in the 'non pro age'

Dunno much about Saffie keepers - so i just went with him. Wouldnt mind if he is replaced though- RSA hasnt really had any outstanding keeper who could also hold a bat.

 

[archie mac]

Dunno much about Saffie keepers - so i just went with him. Wouldnt mind if he is replaced though- RSA hasnt really had any outstanding keeper who could also hold a bat.

True most people go Lindsay from the 60s. Their was one from many a year ago who captained, opened and kept wickets not a bad effort his name is P.W. Sherwell

 

[jot1]

I wish tonight I dream of a match where this team is playing and dont wake up till it is over

Wouldn't be much of a "dream" match if the opposition weren't equally strong, though.

 

[aussie]

Allan Lamb, would anyone consider him in this category?, after all if it weren't for isolation he would have definately played for SA.