Your country's all time ODI and test teams?

[Perm]

McCullum = Smith, Smith/McCullum > Lees

Smith and McCullum are both better than Lees by quite a margin IMO. I rate Smith above McCullum at the moment, although that will likely change.

[Flem274*]

I have a gut feeling that McCullum will be our best keeper ever. He's been in the side a while and still has alot of years to come. I must admit I didn't think he was much when I first saw him but now I think he is as good as any.

[Flem274*]

My New Zealand test team:
1. Turner
2. Wright
3. Jones
4. Crowe
5. Sutcliffe
6. Fleming (c)
7. Cairns
8. McCullum (wk)
9. Vettori
10. Hadlee
11. Bond
12th man: Richardson (very close call)
The four bowler look was mainly because i don't think another NZ bowler deserves to be in there.

Fleming at six? That would be interesting.

I've had Dion Nash in my mind for a bit now, but I don't know who to drop in my 11 to bring him in.

[Perm]

I have a gut feeling that McCullum will be our best keeper ever. He's been in the side a while and still has alot of years to come. I must admit I didn't think he was much when I first saw him but now I think he is as good as any.

He was quite a poor wicket keeper early in his career, but that aspect of his game has improved markedly. I have no doubt he'll be our best ever, because his prowess with the bat will surpass Smith, even though Smith was a better gloveman.

[Swervy]

McCullum = Smith, Smith/McCullum > Lees

Warren lees had a better tache though

[Matt79]

Ponting's average is already > 10 better than Harvey's and he's scored far more runs. Ponting would have to go into a serious slump spanning years for his average to become lower than Harvey's

You right re the average - although in all likelihood Ponting's average will significantly decline before he retires - I'd predict he'll end with an average around 53. And given how badly he'd have to slump, he would likely be dropped before it reached the high 40s. If it doesn't that will be brillant and I'd love for that to be the case, because then he WILL have established he's the best since Braddles. But at the moment, its a case of comparing a player at his absolute peak to the overall career, including the declining years, of another player.

And although I don't subscribe to the Richard et al argument that achievements in this period mean little because of poor bowlers and benign pitches, in a direct comparison of this type Harvey deserves credit for playing in an era of uncovered and matting wickets against genuine greats like Alec Bedser, Fazal Mahmoud, Brian Statham, Fred Trueman, Wes Hall, Laker, Lock, etc etc etc. There's an account I remember of the Aussies playing Pakistan on a matting wicket that hadn't been properly tightened and fastened, so was coming loose. Unsurprisingly Mahmoud was lethal in these conditions with his accuracy, swing and ability to make the ball cut when it could find purchase. Harvey was the only Aussie in an otherwise pretty handy team to be able to deal with the conditions. Now, Ponting can only do what he can do, in terms of the opponents and conditions he has to compete in, and he's performed absolutely brilliantly but he's certainly had generally more benign conditions. If, as I predict, at the end of his career the difference in average is more like 4 or 5, rather than 10, then I think different factors like that become pretty relevant.

[Flem274*]

You right re the average - although in all likelihood Ponting's average will significantly decline before he retires - I'd predict he'll end with an average around 53. And given how badly he'd have to slump, he would likely be dropped before it reached the high 40s. If it doesn't that will be brillant and I'd love for that to be the case, because then he WILL have established he's the best since Braddles. But at the moment, its a case of comparing a player at his absolute peak to the overall career, including the declining years, of another player.

And although I don't subscribe to the Richard et al argument that achievements in this period mean little because of poor bowlers and benign pitches, in a direct comparison of this type Harvey deserves credit for playing in an era of uncovered and matting wickets against genuine greats like Alec Bedser, Fazal Mahmoud, Brian Statham, Fred Trueman, Wes Hall, Laker, Lock, etc etc etc. There's an account I remember of the Aussies playing Pakistan on a matting wicket that hadn't been properly tightened and fastened, so was coming loose. Unsurprisingly Mahmoud was lethal in these conditions with his accuracy, swing and ability to make the ball cut when it could find purchase. Harvey was the only Aussie in an otherwise pretty handy team to be able to deal with the conditions. Now, Ponting can only do what he can do, in terms of the opponents and conditions he has to compete in, and he's performed absolutely brilliantly but he's certainly had generally more benign conditions. If, as I predict, at the end of his career the difference in average is more like 4 or 5, rather than 10, then I think different factors like that become pretty relevant.

I think Ponting is excellent. The standard of bowling today is'nt THAT bad either. Bond, McGrath, Malinga, Murali, Jones, Pollock, Harmison when he bowls straight etc

[Perm]

You right re the average - although in all likelihood Ponting's average will significantly decline before he retires - I'd predict he'll end with an average around 53.

I get the feeling he will slay these mediocre attacks repeatedly, hence I think this average will be above 60 when he retires.

[Fiery]

You right re the average - although in all likelihood Ponting's average will significantly decline before he retires - I'd predict he'll end with an average around 53. And given how badly he'd have to slump, he would likely be dropped before it reached the high 40s. If it doesn't that will be brillant and I'd love for that to be the case, because then he WILL have established he's the best since Braddles. But at the moment, its a case of comparing a player at his absolute peak to the overall career, including the declining years, of another player.

And although I don't subscribe to the Richard et al argument that achievements in this period mean little because of poor bowlers and benign pitches, in a direct comparison of this type Harvey deserves credit for playing in an era of uncovered and matting wickets against genuine greats like Alec Bedser, Fazal Mahmoud, Brian Statham, Fred Trueman, Wes Hall, Laker, Lock, etc etc etc. There's an account I remember of the Aussies playing Pakistan on a matting wicket that hadn't been properly tightened and fastened, so was coming loose. Unsurprisingly Mahmoud was lethal in these conditions with his accuracy, swing and ability to make the ball cut when it could find purchase. Harvey was the only Aussie in an otherwise pretty handy team to be able to deal with the conditions. Now, Ponting can only do what he can do, in terms of the opponents and conditions he has to compete in, and he's performed absolutely brilliantly but he's certainly had generally more benign conditions. If, as I predict, at the end of his career the difference in average is more like 4 or 5, rather than 10, then I think different factors like that become pretty relevant.

You know your cricket...good to see. It is very hard to compare players of different generations so fair enough if you rate Harvey higher. In picking an all-time team I would still go with Ponting.

[Matt79]

I think Ponting is excellent. The standard of bowling today is'nt THAT bad either. Bond, McGrath, Malinga, Murali, Jones, Pollock, Harmison when he bowls straight etc

Not calling them mediocre, they're all good-to-very good. But none of them apart from Murali and MAAAYBE Bond, when he's fit and if you judge on what-might-have-been, fall into the all-time great category. (Remembering he hasn't had to bat against McGrath).

Bedser and Mahmoud on uncovered or matting wickets are as lethal bowlers as there have ever been. Statham and Trueman are England's all time best fast bowling partnership by some distance.

I rate Ponting, currently, at #6 for Australian batsmen: Bradman, Chappell, Harvey, Border, S. Waugh, Ponting. That's still placing him ahead of many many greats. And he has the opportunity to raise himself higher in my eyes still in the years of his career that are left to him.

For the purpose of selecting the XI, besides the fact I think he's better overall anyway, the fact that Harvey is the only left hander in my top six makes a difference as well.

[howardj]

Tests
Morris
Trumper
Bradman
Chappell
Ponting
Miller
Gilchrist
Davidson
Warne
Lillee
McGrath

Honourable mentions to Lindwall, Border and Harvey.

[Matt79]

I get the feeling he will slay these mediocre attacks repeatedly, hence I think this average will be above 60 when he retires.

I don't think they're mediocre, I think they're good, but not really 'great'. And I hope he does exactly what you say.

[Flem274*]

Not calling them mediocre, they're all good-to-very good. But none of them apart from Murali and MAAAYBE Bond, when he's fit and if you judge on what-might-have-been, fall into the all-time great category. (Remembering he hasn't had to bat against McGrath).

Bedser and Mahmoud on uncovered or matting wickets are as lethal bowlers as there have ever been. Statham and Trueman are England's all time best fast bowling partnership by some distance.

I rate Ponting, currently, at #6 for Australian batsmen: Bradman, Chappell, Harvey, Border, S. Waugh, Ponting. That's still placing him ahead of many many greats. And he has the opportunity to raise himself higher in my eyes still in the years of his career that are left to him.

For the purpose of selecting the XI, besides the fact I think he's better overall anyway, the fact that Harvey is the only left hander in my top six makes a difference as well.

Fair enough, isn't it nice to be able to leave someone of the calibre of Ponting out of the all time team?

[Perm]

Not calling them mediocre, they're all good-to-very good. But none of them apart from Murali and MAAAYBE Bond, when he's fit and if you judge on what-might-have-been, fall into the all-time great category. (Remembering he hasn't had to bat against McGrath).

Bit harsh on Pollock there IMO. He had declined over the last few years but is still one of the greatest fast bowlers. A lesser version of McGrath.

[Matt79]

Yeah, fair enough. Overall he'd be a great, but for much of Ponting's career, he's only been very very good.