The Non-Spamming Thread on the announcement of the greatest Aussie ODI team

[vic_orthdox]

Waiting for someone called "I Disagree" to sign up now, ITBT.

 

[Richard]

Richard, the argument that you raise (which has merits) isn't really relevant in this thread, because the topic at hand is a side that encompasses both "eras" of one-day cricket, thus discussing who people think will be named in that side need not be sidetracked by talk of picking two different teams.

But... I just don't think you can pick a side encompassing both eras. I don't think trying to do so makes sense.

 

[Richard]

Agreed.

Waiting for someone called "I Disagree" to sign up now, ITBT.

Get dontcloseyoureyes on the job... we can forgive him dual-accounts for a day, can't we?

Then have it under "Banned - duplicate account by dontcloseyoureyes". I mean, sledger's done a few stupid(ly funny) things in his time but that spanish vicente one - and the subsequent Banned legend - was one of the best.

 

[Matt79]

But... I just don't think you can pick a side encompassing both eras. I don't think trying to do so makes sense.

Richard I think you're taking the whole thing a bit too seriously. It doesn't have to be rigourously defensible in a court of law, or conform to anyone's idea of logic. The argument you raise is of course valid, and could be made about ANY effort to compile ANY all-time/greatest team. But doing that, or speculating how champions from different eras would have gone against each other is something lots of sports fans enjoy, not least because of the inponderables that are attached. Derailing any such discussion by insisting that people not make the attempt is not going to achieve anything. If it really bothers you, just don't open any thread discussing all-time teams...

 

[nightprowler10]

Richard I think you're taking the whole thing a bit too seriously. It doesn't have to be rigourously defensible in a court of law, or conform to anyone's idea of logic. The argument you raise is of course valid, and could be made about ANY effort to compile ANY all-time/greatest team. But doing that, or speculating how champions from different eras would have gone against each other is something lots of sports fans enjoy, not least because of the inponderables that are attached. Derailing any such discussion by insisting that people not make the attempt is not going to achieve anything. If it really bothers you, just don't open any thread discussing all-time teams...

Ditto.

 

[nightprowler10]

Similarly, Slats >>>>> Hayden in Tests.

No

No?

No

what, am I supposed to do something now?

Second classic CC moment of 2007.

 

[C_C]

Gilchrist
Mark Waugh
Ponting
Jones
Bevan
Symonds
O'Donnell
Warne
Lee
Lillee
McGrath

 

[Richard]

Richard I think you're taking the whole thing a bit too seriously. It doesn't have to be rigourously defensible in a court of law, or conform to anyone's idea of logic. The argument you raise is of course valid, and could be made about ANY effort to compile ANY all-time/greatest team. But doing that, or speculating how champions from different eras would have gone against each other is something lots of sports fans enjoy, not least because of the inponderables that are attached. Derailing any such discussion by insisting that people not make the attempt is not going to achieve anything. If it really bothers you, just don't open any thread discussing all-time teams...

O...K...

Why can't people just pick a 70s\80s team and a 90s\2000s team, tho? We had plenty do so successfully enough in a similar thread about England-all-time-ODIs not so very long ago...

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Picking all-time teams is always about comparing players to their contemporaries anyway. You can't compare Bradman with Sobers, but you can compare their achievements, their reputation and so on. I hardly see how this is any different.

Obviously you can't pick a player based on their economy rate when they played in the 70s and 80s, but you can certainly pick them based on their record as it stood at the time.

 

[Richard]

You can, yes. But I simply say the best - and "most fun" if you will, as that way you get to pick 22 players rather than 11 - thing to do is to pick one for each era. That way you get the best summation, rather than saying "he had an ER of 3.4-an-over rather than the abysmal 3.9-an-over", etc.

 

[Matt79]

Gilchrist
Mark Waugh
Ponting
Jones
Bevan
Symonds
O'Donnell
Warne
Lee
Lillee
McGrath

O'Donnell above Steve Waugh OR Hussey? Unusual selection...

 

[Richard]

O'Donnell > Stephen Waugh with the ball, TBH.

Though I'm a touch surprised that anyone would consider Symonds > Hussey.

 

[Matt79]

But O'Donnell was vastly inferior with the bat. And Waugh was a very good ODI bowler, particularly in the first half of his career.

People would be selecting Symonds as an allrounder - I know I am. His bowling is both useful and versatile and as mentioned he is surely among the best three or four fielders to have ever played the game - can be expected to save 10-20 runs in the field even compared to a fielder of Hussey's quality. And at the moment Hussey's record is better than Symonds as a batsman, but Symonds is somewhat handicapped by his average start in the format before he found his feet at the 2003 WC, whereas Hussey has yet to have a down patch - if he ever does, Symonds may well end up with the superior record. But yeah, its as an allrounder, rather than a batsman that I went for him.

 

[Richard]

IAH, I can't ever see Hussey averaging less than Symonds.
Even since WC2003, Symonds has averaged "just" 46. That's pretty pittance compared to Hussey's 65.

And as I've said before, Symonds is no all-rounder. Top-class batsman who can bowl - but not very well.

 

[Matt79]

He's certainly not a test allrounder, but he fits the criteria well enough in ODI terms - he'll reliably produce 10 overs for a decent economy rate and bob up with a wicket or two from time to time. His spin is at least as effective as Gayle or Jayasuriya (well, almost), and the team bank on him delivering the bulk of the 'fifth bowler's' overs. Add to that the fact he can bowl decent medium pacers and he fits the allrounder tag for ODIs in my book.

I'd be surprised if Hussey averages more than high 40s by the time he finishes his career - particularly if he begins to regularly bat at 5 or higher...

 

[adharcric]

Yeah, Symonds is merely a batsman who can bowl in test cricket. Clearly a genuine all-rounder in one-day cricket though.

 

[burr]

Jack asked for it - Cricket Australia will annouce the greatest As a PR gimmick a 30 strong "squad" was announced today, from which the team will be drawn. They are:
1. Terry Alderman
2. Michael Bevan
3. David Boon
4. Allan Border
5. Greg Chappell
6. Ian Chappell
7. Simon Davis
8. Adam Gilchrist
9. Jason Gillespie
10. Gary Gilmour
11. Matthew Hayden
12. Michael Hussey
13. Dean Jones
14. Brett Lee
15. Darren Lehmann
16. Dennis Lillee
17. Damien Martyn
18. Greg Matthews
19. Craig McDermott
20. Glenn McGrath
21. Tom Moody
22. Simon O'Donnell
23. Ricky Ponting
24. Bruce Reid
25. Paul Reiffel
26. Andrew Symonds
27. Doug Walters
28. Shane Warne
29. Mark Waugh
30. Steve Waugh

If I was choosing the XI, I'd have
Gilchrist
Mark Waugh
Ponting
Jones
Symonds
Bevan
Hussey
Warne
Lee
Lillee
McGrath

Can't believe I can't find room in the team for Steve Waugh, but Symonds hitting ability, and genius in the field just has him shading Steve IMO. Tugga is definitely 12th man/supersub however. Probably a bit biased towards modern times, but I think the way ODIs were played in Chappelli and Walters day is so different from today's game that its hard to include them. Lillee gets in because his record is decent, and because there isn't really another bowler in the list who I think makes an ironclad claim for that spot.

Deplore the absence of Michael Slater and Mick Lewis from the squad however, tbh

M Waugh is in there for sure, he was a great ODI player, miles better than Hayden could ever dream of being. Not to mention the fielding. I think G. Chappell should be in the best ever. Gilchrist, I guess, but really his record isn't that flash, espec. in world cups. I've always rated Gilly a far better test player than one-day batsman. He always seems to rush himself in the one-dayers and he has never been consistent enough. Opening is the PRIME posi in odis - as an opener I don't think he's done enough. Still I guess he has to be included.

Marto made the top thirty, awww, I'm happy

 

[Fiery]

Where's Glenn Trimble?

 

[Matt79]

Who would you have as keeper instead of Gilchrist though? Healy? Marsh? If you are going to play Gilchrist, he really has to play as keeper. His record is pretty good - probably not Ponting, Bevan good, but very good regardless, particularly his strike rate.

 

[Matt79]

Where's Glenn Trimble?

Haha - I used to play for an Indoor team called the Glenn Trimble All-Stars! Told my boss one day, adding "because he was crap - its a bit of a joke", only to get a tirade about how Trimble was underrated, and was simply unlucky with the opportunities he got...