Barnes in this match revealed himself once more as one of the most remarkable bowlers that this country has ever produced. He has a positively wonderful command of the leg break.... His great height makes it difficult for the batsman to follow the flight of the ball. He is useful on every kind of wicket, whereas few bowlers of his pace are able to bowl on a sticky wicket. - JACK HOBBS, 'My Cricket Memories' (1924)
True, although he did play some games as a fifth bowler.
Mohammad Nissar and Amar Singh deserve to be in the bowling debate.
I'm not so keen on Gupte, Chandra and Mankad all taking the ball across RH bats. I would be picking someone who spins the ball the other way such as Prasanna, most likely instead of Gupte.
Excellent points by rvd and Nufan with regard to the Indian bowling options. S.A not getting enough respect as I belive that they are easily better than England.
They are ten batsmen overall, and seven middle order batsmen who are legitimate challengers to be called the best after Bradman. Four of the seven middle order challengers are in the West Indian line up. Also we are picking players are at their best, and the only advantage Bradman had was that he maintained his form through out his career.
As far as bolwers go, Lillee and Holding are equal, so are Ambrose and Mcgrath and their is no competition between Miller and Marshall. Gibbs is not on the level of O'Reilly and Warne, but he is in the level right below. The openers are under rated and Walcott was a very good keeper. Great team that.
Hutton* | Hobbs | Bradman | Richards^ | Tendulkar | Sobers5^ | Gilchrist+ | Khan3 | Marshall1 | Warne4^ | McGrath2
Sutcliffe | Gavaskar* | Headley | Chappell^ | Lara^ | Kallis5^ | Knott+ | Hadlee3 | Ambrose2 | Lillee1 | Muralitharan4
Greenidge | Richards^ | Ponting^ | Pollock | Hammond^ | Worrell5* | Waite+ | Akram3 | Steyn1 | Holding2 | O'Reilly4
Morris | Simpson^ | Sangakkara | Weekes^ | Border*^ | Walcott+ | Faulkner5 | Laker4 | Trueman1 | Garner3 | Donald2
Cracking side. Steyn not far off.
Ponting or Harvey
Warne or O'Reilly
...and Aust would have 3 legitimate contenders (plus THE MAN AT 3) as well.
Last edited by Monk; 12-09-2012 at 06:39 AM.
Devillier has the ability to show ball the right path, there are two ways to do so, 1. form where the ball is coming, 2 where the ball is going to
Amla can just hit the ball harder with the use of timing and strock
Devilliers is younger so he will learn with the passage of time
Devilliers plays in all the situations and conditons while all amla is a powerplay player
So Devillieris can be said as better
Last edited by watson; 12-09-2012 at 07:08 AM.
And smalishah's avatar is the most classy one by far Jan certainly echoes the sentiments of CW
Yeah we don't crap in the first world; most of us would actually have no idea what that was emanating from Ajmal's backside. Why isn't it roses and rainbows like what happens here? PEWS's retort to Ganeshran on Daemon's picture depicting Ajmal's excreta
On balance - about the same strength I suppose.
Amar Singh | Cricket Players and Officials | ESPN Cricinfo
Still hard to leave out Javagal Srinath/Zaheer Khan though because of their proven, although not brilliant, track records.
Last edited by watson; 12-09-2012 at 07:45 AM.
Who are the three contenders Monk, to me the only middle order batsmen who can be seen as a legitimate contender for the title of best after Bradman are : Wally Hammond, Sachin Tendulkar, George Headley, Brian Lara, Viv Richards, Garry Sobers, Graeme Pollock, Greg Chappell.
Last edited by kyear2; 12-09-2012 at 08:12 AM.
Australian XI with a twist:
RIP Craig Walsh (Craig) 1985-2012
Proudly supporting the #2 cricketer of all time.
Let's address the controversial picks one by one in descending order of crazy.
Why the **** is Bradman opening?
Because nobody can decide who should open in this Australian side, and we have we far, far, too many middle order ATGs to leave out, especially in light of the insistence on two specialized non-ATG openers and the forum-wide hard-on for Miller.
Here's a flimsy argument by anecdote, by no less than The Don's well-known BFF Jack Fingleton:
'It was said of Bradman that he could not bat on a sticky. That is of course nonsense. Bradman could bat better than anyone on any sort of wicket.'
In that same vein, why would Bradman batting one position higher not still make him the best batsman, and by extension the best opener, of all time? It might shave 5-10 runs off his average, but 89.94 is regardless a heckuva lot more than his closest rival Barnes, and closest feasible rival Hayden.
Look at it this way: would you prefer Simpson batting for your life in his preferred position, or Bradman doing the same while out of position?
Why the **** did you pick Taylor as his partner?
He played in the era of the most vicious and diverse pace bowling of all time, even from England in Gough, and still averaged 44 despite a spectacular form slump (three less than Morris). I think that merits a little sympathy to his average on his part.
Moreover, at the risk of sounding English, he was tactically the best Test captain Australia has ever had, and that's worth far more to a team than people give it credit for (England won matches with Brearley batting FFS).
Why Border and Waugh over more talented players like Harvey and Trumper?
Their personal record of partnerships together was utterly jawdropping, and considering Border's decade long spell of being Australia's one-man act and Waugh facing the same bowling as Taylor while doing even better, it would be horribly demoralizing to any side to try and break that partnership, or even see one of them still there - given their records of marshalling the tail to score more runs than they otherwise would is also exemplary. Their respective records against the West Indies go without saying.
Why Davo over Lindwall?
Davidson offers variety to the attack as a left-armer, was an utter miser with his economy rate (giving Lillee and Warne license to bowl constantly aggressive Iines and capitalise on pressure built) and obviously could bat a bit. A secondary consideration: bowling stump-to-stump as a left armer would create a lot of footmarks right outside off-stump, which makes Warnie's job much more fun in the second innings - as opposed to him aiming for normal foot marks two meters outside leg where he almost always got padded away.
He's a liability in the middle order, averaging a good twenty less than everyone else, and I have absolute trust in the four front liners to take 20 wickets (it's also worth noting that Davidson had exceptional stamina bowling long spells, which was noticed during a tour of India). He can play at 12, I'm feeling magnanimous.
- Tremendous slip cordon with Taylor at first, Ponting at second and Chappell at third.
- High standard of sledging with Waugh, Warne, Chappell and Lillee (assuming mental disintegration is factored into simmed matches).
Last edited by LongHopCassidy; 12-09-2012 at 08:15 AM.
"The Australian cricket captain is the Prime Minister Australia wishes it had. Steve Waugh is that man, Michael Clarke is not." - Jarrod Kimber
RIP Fardin Qayyumi and Craig Walsh - true icons of CricketWeb.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)