Top Test Teams of all time

[subshakerz]

Came across this article and it makes for interesting reading. I agree on the first five choices but after that I'm not so sure about the rankings. Imran's side seem to be overachievers and the batting is brittle, think Ponting's side should be ranked higher. What say you all?

Simon Wilde's top 10 Test teams - Times Online

 

[hang on]

khan's lot and vaughan's lot seem to be too high.

and what is wilde smoking if he really thinks that greenidge, haynes and richards makes the best top 3 of all time!? any top 3 with bradman beats that one since it essentially has an extra player.

what about hobbs, sutcliffe and a.nother. or langer, hayden, ponting. or sehwag, gambhir, dravid.

 

[wpdavid]

Lloyd's side should really go back to 1980, when they took over the top spot by winning in Australia.

And whilst it's probably wise to ignore sides pre-WW1 because the game was so different, Warwick Armstrong reckoned that the 1902 Aus side was superior to the team he led in 1920-21.

 

[smash84]

Imran Khan's Pakistan side says more about Viv Richards's WI than Pakistan

 

[kyear2]

I think that the S.A team could have been ranked a little higher.
And yes there have been better top 3's than Greenidge, Haynes and Richards. But also acknowledge that G&H are among the top 3 opening partnerships of all time, and Viv is a first team all time great.

 

[weldone]

khan's lot and vaughan's lot seem to be too high.

and what is wilde smoking if he really thinks that greenidge, haynes and richards makes the best top 3 of all time!? any top 3 with bradman beats that one since it essentially has an extra player.

what about hobbs, sutcliffe and a.nother. or langer, hayden, ponting. or sehwag, gambhir, dravid.

Yeah, Vaughan's lot should be nowhere near all-time top 10; while Imran's Pakistan should be near the all-time top 10 but just outside.

And let alone Bradman, a top 3 of Hobbs, Sutcliffe and Hammond played quite a few matches for England and should beat Haynes, Greenidge and Richards hands down (arguably even on one-on-one).

Sobers-Worrell-Hunte-Kanhai-Hall-Griffith-Gibbs' West Indies should definitely be in the top 10. The 1900-1905 Aussie side isn't a bad shout either (neither is the current Indian team, though they are still under testing time).

 

[smash84]

Imran's Pakistan can scrape into the top 10 IMO because under Imran Pakistan played outstanding cricket. He took the players under him at another level.

But Imran's Pakistan should be below Ponting's Aus IMO

 

[weldone]

Imran's Pakistan can scrape into the top 10 IMO because under Imran Pakistan played outstanding cricket. He took the players under him at another level.

But Imran's Pakistan should be below Ponting's Aus IMO

Fair enough. They can be kept just outside the top 10 also, arguably.

 

[smash84]

of course.....scraping in does mean that they can be kept out as well

 

[weeman27bob]

Is Steve Waugh’s Australia really better than Don Bradman's Australia?

 

[smash84]

probably

 

[BlazeDragon]

Ponting's team seems quite underrated because of the final 2 years.

 

[miscer]

someone posted this before with the icc official method applied with teams before 03 as well

143 Australia 2007-08
134 Australia 1959-60
133 Australia 1951-52
132 West Indies 1985-86
131 West Indies 1964-65
130 India 2010-11
130 Australia 1924-25
127 England 1890
125 Australia 1935-36
125 South Africa 1969-70

seems pretty good but idk about the legitimacy of it. apparently howstat did it before but the link is gone. and 143 for australia holy fk. 130+ is supposed to signify a "high degree of dominance" then idk what 140+ signifies. Probably "playing a league below where they should be."

 

[Agent Nationaux]

I would say that Strauss's England team is better than Vaughan's England.

 

[John Blaze]

Wow for a team with only one good bowler, India do seem to be very high on that list.

 

[Flem274*]

Vaughan's England should not be on that list.

 

[BlazeDragon]

Wow for a team with only one good bowler, India do seem to be very high on that list.

You mean West Indies? India is not there.

 

[Burgey]

Ridiculous of Wilde to attempt to downplay the achievement of Armstrong's 1921 side because of the effect of WWI on England. The AIF suffered the highest casualty rate of any allied army in that conflict.

Would certainly say there's an element of truth to the notion wrt the 1948 side though.

 

[howardj]

Peak of the Waugh period was 2002 in South Africa where we crushed the Saffies by an innings in one of the Test there with the following side:

Langer
Hayden
Pootang
MWaugh
SWaugh
Martyn
Gilchrist
Warne
Lee
Gillespie
Macca.