You know... I love learning about South Africa. Their team in the late 90s was one of, if not my favorite, team to watch. And really, on paper, they looked like the best team in the world... although they didn't conquer Australia. Even looking at the 1992 World Cup they had an awesome team that should've been in the final.
But today it's the 1969 team I was looking at... and wow! This leads me to my thread - people talk about the 1981/82 West Indies as being the best ever:
But if we look at the 1969 South African side that killed the Aussies:
There were a few bowlers and even a few keepers who were dropped in that 1969, but as far as I know... these were the main stays.
It's a pretty competitive team if you ask me, when compared to the Windies. I think its obvious the only thing the West Indies have over South Africa is a superior bowling attack. Reportedly, Peter Pollock wasn't as good in 1969 as he was earlier on but was still awesome Mike Proctor sounded awesome with the ball. Those two can't be too far behind the best two West Indies. That's no excuse as four awesome quickies slaughters the South African attack.
But the batting side of things, in my opinion, beats the West Indies batting and that's no mere feat. Don Bradman himself thought Graeme Pollock was the best left handed batsmen he ever saw or at least was as good as Sobers with the bat. Barry Richards has to be up there with the best openers ever and it better than Greenidge or Haynes etc. Proctor sounded awesome and many think he was in the same league as the big four all-rounders of the 80s.
For me, it's close. I think the Windies are better... but can we all agree that South Africa crica 1969 were one of the top five best cricket teams ever?