All-time Northern vs. Southern Hemisphere

[GotSpin]

Miller was a folk hero due to dynamic nature but surely when you have Ponting, G. Pollock and Gilchrist in your side thats covered.

Isn't that a bit of a contradiction...Because of Ponting etc already there, Miller's bowling abilities are far more important

 

[Athlai]

Morris averaged under 40 with the blade once Bradman retired. No way is he better then Hayden. Hayden's stats blow Trumper's out of the water.

Different eras. etc.

 

[SeamUp]

Isn't that a bit of a contradiction...Because of Ponting etc already there, Miller's bowling abilities are far more important

Lets be honest...if Hadlee, Lillee, McGrath and Warne don't take the majority of wickets then they shouldn't be in the side (I'm sure they would take the wickets as well). I think Kalllis as the 5th bowler with 250 test wickets covers the 5th bowler.

 

[wfdu_ben91]

Different eras. etc.

Yeah, doesn't get any better then being a batsman and playing in the same team as Bradman. I wonder why Clem Hill doesn't get as much credit as Trumper, considering he averaged more. Also wonder why no other cricketer in the history of the game, has the last name Bradman?

 

[GotSpin]

Lets be honest...if Hadlee, Lillee, McGrath and Warne don't take the majority of wickets then they shouldn't be in the side. I think Kalllis as the 5th bowler with 250 test wickets covers the 5th bowler.

Why need Kallis for batting when you have bradman. would rather take millers lower bowling average

 

[Zinzan]

Thats a bit harsh on Kallis tbh....the guy has been one of the most consistently great players of all time. I find it hard to believe how he doesn't get the credit he deserves.

He had the best test average of all test batsman from 2000-2010 and still bowled as well on top of all the other great batsman of the era.

Dude, selecting him as 12th-man in the all-time greatest SH team is pretty decent recognition isn't it?

 

[Athlai]

Yeah, doesn't get any better then being a batsman and playing in the same team as Bradman. I wonder why Clem Hill doesn't get as much credit as Trumper, considering he averaged more. Also wonder why no other cricketer in the history of the game, has the last name Bradman?

Well Jayawardene averages more than Lara and Waugh.

 

[SeamUp]

Dude, selecting him as 12th-man in the all-time greatest SH team is pretty decent recognition isn't it?

No, I respect your opinion mate and I'm not saying that you are incorrect because you can't be when its your opinion.

I'm just trying to make a case for Kallis who always seems to be not given the full credit he deserves.

I just feel with his standing in the game he deserves to make that side.

Kallis and Sobers are untouchable as all-rounders in the history o the game. They're on a pedastal.

Then as I say from 2000-2010 Kallis out performed Ponting and Tendulkar with the bat and even had to still bowl which they didn't.

 

[Athlai]

Hobbs => B. Richards
Gavaskar => Trumper IMO
Richards << Bradman
Tendulkar => G. Chappell
Lara <= G. Pollock
Sobers => K. Miller
Knott (wk) <= Gilchrist (with the bat, Knott with the gloves)
Imran (c) => Hadlee (Hadlee better bowler, Imran the far superior bat)
Marshall => Lillee (very little in it)
Murali = Warne (consistency vs. occasional magic)
Trueman = McGrath (nothing in it)

Bradman is the difference, Northern are probably the ever so slightly better side if we excluded him though.

 

[Ikki]

Lets be honest...if Hadlee, Lillee, McGrath and Warne don't take the majority of wickets then they shouldn't be in the side (I'm sure they would take the wickets as well). I think Kalllis as the 5th bowler with 250 test wickets covers the 5th bowler.

Kallis' batting is overkill when you have Bradman and Gilchrist, really. The bowling is more important to improve. 4 prong attack plus Warne, it just doesn't get better than that; 5 genuine match winners with the ball. Also, Miller was no mug and is the best of the bowling all-rounders with the bat.

Kallis and Sobers are untouchable as all-rounders in the history o the game. They're on a pedastal.

TBF, Miller, Imran and Botham are on that same pedestal.

 

[SeamUp]

Hobbs => B. Richards
Gavaskar => Trumper IMO
Richards << Bradman
Tendulkar => G. Chappell
Lara <= G. Pollock
Sobers => K. Miller
Knott (wk) <= Gilchrist (with the bat, Knott with the gloves)
Imran (c) => Hadlee (Hadlee better bowler, Imran the far superior bat)
Marshall => Lillee (very little in it)
Murali = Warne (consistency vs. occasional magic)
Trueman = McGrath (nothing in it)

Bradman is the difference, Northern are probably the ever so slightly better side if we excluded him though.

To me Hadlee and Imraan are also very difficult to say that one was better than the other to me.

Like you say Imraan was the superior batsman but to me Hadlee beats Imraan the bowler and batting at number 8 we are looking for the bowler.

 

[Zinzan]

No, I respect your opinion mate and I'm not saying that you are incorrect because you can't be when its your opinion.

I'm just trying to make a case for Kallis who always seems to be not given the full credit he deserves.

I just feel with his standing in the game he deserves to make that side.

Kallis and Sobers are untouchable as all-rounders in the history o the game. They're on a pedastal.

Fully agree about Kallis not always getting his just desserts, but I make a distinction between batting & bowling all-rounders.

For me;

Greatest batting all-rounders - Kallis & Sobers
Greatest bowling all-rounders - Imran & Miller
.

 

[Athlai]

To me Hadlee and Imraan are also very difficult to say that one was better than the other to me.

Like you say Imraan was the superior batsman but to me Hadlee beats Imraan the bowler and batting at number 8 we are looking for the bowler.

Well Imran would actually bat 7 and Knott 8.

 

[Avada Kedavra]

You obviously didn't see what I saw then. I mean Lara being better than G. Pollock??? Lara was brillaint but doesn't touch Pollock. All I say is watch clips of G. Pollock. Rad articles on G.Pollock and in particular his Trent Bridge innings in England in 1965.

Oh and what happened to Kallis at 6. Kallis eats Miller up. Comparin Kallis to Sobers is also diffcult because statistically they are the best all-rounders of all-time but their styles are completely different.

Murali is not better than Warne and it is proved when he went to play in Aus.

McGrath was better than Ambrose.

I'm not so sure Jack Hobbs was better than Barry either.



I agree with the rest probably.

I was not the one who removed Miller,zinzan and ikki did.Not that it makes a big difference,if anything they cancel each other out.


I do not like rating players on 5 games or 20 games or whatever.Hussey after 20 games averaged 80.Had he retired then you would have called him the second best after Bradman?

I have read all about Pollock but nothing suggests that 'Lara doesn't touch him'.If for nothing else,Lara gets the nod for playing about a zillion matches more and maintaining his high standards over that period.

Murali vs Warne and Ambrose vs Mcgrath is very debatable.Feel free to disagree

 

[Athlai]

I do not like rating players on 5 games or 20 games or whatever.Hussey after 20 games averaged 80.Had he retired then you would have called him the second best after Bradman?

I have read all about Pollock but nothing suggests that 'Lara doesn't touch him'.If for nothing else,Lara gets the nod for playing about a zillion matches more and maintaining his high standards over that period.

Murali vs Warne and Ambrose vs Mcgrath is very debatable.Feel free to disagree

Pollock also played FC cricket for 17 years, close to the same amount Lara did while maintaining an impressive average of 54. Sure this isn't the best indicator of Test success but it does warrant some kudos IMO.

 

[Ikki]

Hobbs => B. Richards
Gavaskar => Trumper IMO
Richards << Bradman
Tendulkar => G. Chappell
Lara <= G. Pollock
Sobers => K. Miller
Knott (wk) <= Gilchrist (with the bat, Knott with the gloves)
Imran (c) => Hadlee (Hadlee better bowler, Imran the far superior bat)
Marshall => Lillee (very little in it)
Murali = Warne (consistency vs. occasional magic)
Trueman = McGrath (nothing in it)

Bradman is the difference, Northern are probably the ever so slightly better side if we excluded him though.

IMO

Hobbs => B. Richards
Gavaskar => Simpson
Richards << Bradman
Tendulkar <= G. Chappell
Lara => G. Pollock
Sobers = K. Miller
Knott (wk) < Gilchrist
Imran (c) => Hadlee
Marshall => Lillee bowling+batting
Murali <= Warne bowling+batting
Trueman = McGrath

 

[SeamUp]

Kallis' batting is overkill when you have Bradman and Gilchrist, really. The bowling is more important to improve. 4 prong attack plus Warne, it just doesn't get better than that; 5 genuine match winners with the ball. Also, Miller was no mug and is the best of the bowling all-rounders with the bat.



TBF, Miller, Imran and Botham are on that same pedestal.

Can't argue with the top lot I guess.

Thats the beuty of cricket...these sorts of conversations because there are so many varying opinions.

Miller, Imran, Botham, Hadlee and S. Pollock are chasing those 2 as all-rounders to me but all are magnificent.

If SA was playing during the 70's and 80 it would have been the era of all-rounders...because Rice, Barlow and Procter would have all been playing in the era of Botham, Imraan and Hadlee. I don't think there is another era to touch it..

 

[Avada Kedavra]

Pollock also played FC cricket for 17 years, close to the same amount Lara did while maintaining an impressive average of 54. Sure this isn't the best indicator of Test success but it does warrant some kudos IMO.

Not knocking him down - it is just the way I look at it.By all accounts he was brilliant,but only 20 tests,for whatever the reason,is too little to judge a player on.

 

[Athlai]

IMO

Hobbs => B. Richards
Gavaskar => Simpson
Richards << Bradman
Tendulkar <= G. Chappell
Lara => G. Pollock
Sobers = K. Miller
Knott (wk) < Gilchrist
Imran (c) => Hadlee
Marshall => Lillee bowling+batting
Murali <= Warne bowling+batting
Trueman = McGrath

I rate Sobers higher since I consider him in the top 3 batting of all time, Miller a more all round all-rounder but not close to the best batsman or best bowler ever. In a team like this I think the one specialty would be far more valuable. As all-rounders its a different argument. Warne's batting wasn't a factor I included, good point.

 

[SeamUp]

I was not the one who removed Miller,zinzan and ikki did.Not that it makes a big difference,if anything they cancel each other out.


I do not like rating players on 5 games or 20 games or whatever.Hussey after 20 games averaged 80.Had he retired then you would have called him the second best after Bradman?

I have read all about Pollock but nothing suggests that 'Lara doesn't touch him'.If for nothing else,Lara gets the nod for playing about a zillion matches more and maintaining his high standards over that period.

Murali vs Warne and Ambrose vs Mcgrath is very debatable.Feel free to disagree

G. Pollock was a genious and he had Bradman purring when he saw him. Even Bradman said he was the best left-hander he had seen.

Its not only that he played 23 tests...don't forget none of which were over the age of 24 where he was still to hit his peak but the manner in which he scored his runs and type of runs he scored.

G. Pollock is firmly down in my books as the 3rd best batsman of all time behind Bradman and Sobers.