• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Left handed XI

kyear2

Cricketer Of The Year
No way is Sangakkara ranked higher that Border and its borderline with Harvey, but to me Harvey just edges him out. Sanga would have to make it as a keeper over Gilchrist and that is stretch as well.
 

watson

Banned
No way is Sangakkara ranked higher that Border and its borderline with Harvey, but to me Harvey just edges him out. Sanga would have to make it as a keeper over Gilchrist and that is stretch as well.
Border is probably the first amoung equals with respect to those 3 batsman.

But again, it depends on the needs of your middle-order. If you need a defensive batsman then Border. If you need a batsman who can throttle an attack then Harvey. And if you need an allround batsman who can construct a really big score then Sanga. It all depends on who is batting above and below them on the batting order.

For example, in an ATG team I would hesitate putting 3.Barrington, 4.Edrich, 5.Border, and 6.Leyland together as we'd all fall asleep if we had to watch them. However, Harvey at No.5 would transform that line-up
 

watson

Banned
01. Fredericks
02. Lawry
03. Lara
04. Pollock
05. Border
06. Sobers
07. Gilchrist
08. Davidson
09. Akram
10. Verity
11. Johnston
 

Migara

Cricketer Of The Year
No way is Sangakkara ranked higher that Border and its borderline with Harvey, but to me Harvey just edges him out. Sanga would have to make it as a keeper over Gilchrist and that is stretch as well.
Sangakara is on par with Gilchrist as a keeper. Easily exchangable. If regarded as a pure batsman, his 65+ average puts him even above Pollock and Sobers.
 

Jager

International Debutant
Sangakara is on par with Gilchrist as a keeper. Easily exchangable. If regarded as a pure batsman, his 65+ average puts him even above Pollock and Sobers.
That argument of his average without the gloves means nothing to me. It's far more likely that he hit his peak after he gave up the gloves, instead of him being the second best batsman ever which I feel you're suggesting...

Sangakkara's keeping isn't too flash, I'd take Gilchrist anyday
 

Migara

Cricketer Of The Year
That argument of his average without the gloves means nothing to me. It's far more likely that he hit his peak after he gave up the gloves, instead of him being the second best batsman ever which I feel you're suggesting...

Sangakkara's keeping isn't too flash, I'd take Gilchrist anyday
But his stats with gloves matter when it comes to keeper batsman, and that's when the cpomparison gets hypocritical. Sanga with gloves as good or better than Gilchrist, especially on spinning conditions.
 

ankitj

Hall of Fame Member
Totally forgot about Flower. Don't know who he would replace in middle order though. Probably using makeshift openers will make it an insane batting order, allowing us to accommodate both Sanhakkara and flower
 

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
Totally forgot about Flower. Don't know who he would replace in middle order though. Probably using makeshift openers will make it an insane batting order, allowing us to accommodate both Sanhakkara and flower
Yeah I'd think about opening with Sanga. Funnily enough I'd open with Sanga if I had to pick a World XI right now (without handedness restrictions); I was thinking about it yesterday.
 

kyear2

Cricketer Of The Year
Sangakara is on par with Gilchrist as a keeper. Easily exchangable. If regarded as a pure batsman, his 65+ average puts him even above Pollock and Sobers.
Two points.
1)Sangakkara was not as good a wicketkeeper as Gilchrist and few are capable as the destructive batting he produced in sometimes tough conditions. Gilchrist is with out doubt the greatest wicket keeper batsman of all time and if he were to be challenged it would be from Knott or Ames, not Sanga.

2) Sangakkara is not in the same class as Pollack or Sobers or for that matter Lara (or Border) no matter his average with or without the gloves. By your averages argument Barrington is better than Richards, Chappell, Lara and Ponting, and we all know simply that is not the case.
 

watson

Banned
That argument of his average without the gloves means nothing to me. It's far more likely that he hit his peak after he gave up the gloves, instead of him being the second best batsman ever which I feel you're suggesting...

Sangakkara's keeping isn't too flash, I'd take Gilchrist anyday
I agree. Sanga with keeping duties is an entirely different proposition to Sanga as a specialist batsman. I think that it is obvious that the burden of keeping all day and then propping up the Sri Lankan batting was too much pressure.

Gilchrist by a moderate, but siginificant margin.
 

watson

Banned
:wub: Best post.
Should we be concerned about a singular Test match century and a bowling Strike Rate of 95.4 ?

Or is Goddard a classic case where the sum of the parts is way greater than the whole?

In other words, he's a ***y cricketer, end of story.
 
Last edited:

kingkallis

International Coach
My Lefties

Matthew Hayden
Graeme Smith
Brian Lara
Graeme Pollock
Allan Border ( c )
Garry Sobers
Adam Gilchrist ( + )
Alan Davidson
Wasim Akram
Derek Underwood
Brett Schultz

12th man : Trevor Goddard
 
Last edited:

Migara

Cricketer Of The Year
Two points.
1)Sangakkara was not as good a wicketkeeper as Gilchrist and few are capable as the destructive batting he produced in sometimes tough conditions. Gilchrist is with out doubt the greatest wicket keeper batsman of all time and if he were to be challenged it would be from Knott or Ames, not Sanga.

2) Sangakkara is not in the same class as Pollack or Sobers or for that matter Lara (or Border) no matter his average with or without the gloves. By your averages argument Barrington is better than Richards, Chappell, Lara and Ponting, and we all know simply that is not the case.
On the points you have mentioned, Gilchrist may be better than Sanga with gloves, but that is offset with his significant superior batting abilities than Gilchrist. And It's not Knott aor Ames that challenges him, Sanga and Flower as batsmen wicketkeepers.

#2, Average do matter, otherwise people would claim Ramiz Raja was better than Sachin Tendulkar. Average of 65+ with the bat is too significant to be left out, especially when comparing with Border and Harvey. And on Barrington, he was a bloody good player, ATG for sure if not fore his health issues later in his career.
 

watson

Banned
My Lefties

Matthew Hayden
Graeme Smith
Brian Lara
Graeme Pollock
Allan Border ( c )
Garry Sobers
Trevor Goddard
Adam Gilchrist
Alan Davidson
Wasim Akram
Derek Underwood
Your batting is already choc-a-block all the way down to at least Gilchrist. This makes Goddard's skills with the bat over-kill. So why not choose a bowler with a better Strike Rate than Goddard's 95 balls and give the bowling a boost?

Also, Underwood's record against the Windies is pretty ordinary. Unlike the Aussies they tended to treat him like a medium pacer and thrash him through mid-wicket/mid-on. As it turns out a much better idea than trying to hit him through the off-side.
 

Top