I know. But we are trying to make a team for 80 s -90 s. keeping the years 78,79,80,01,02 only to make sure the spillovers are not missed out. But gilchrist or boycott would be obvious misfits. So the rule about debut and retirement dates. Shud make the selections tougher. But I don't want to see a team that reads Sehwag, Hayden, Gilly etc etc representing an era that they had nothing to do with.
But there is a slight problem here, isn't there? If they scored heavily (few centuries, good average), how did they not have anything to do with that era? I mean, Hayden had his watershed moment in India in 2001, so did Laxman. Dravid had already made quite a mark, so had Ponting, to a lesser degree. Kallis was a very fine all-rounder, since his bowling was at its peak. Maybe if you kept the date at 31 Dec 2000 (before we hit the new millennium), then we would not have those elements you speak of.
This millennium started on 1-1-2000, not on 1-1-2001.
All those guys made their debuts in mid 90s. Hayden started even earlier. Sure, they belong to that era.
Couldn't believe he was still available.
Nah. Not better than Wasim.The greatest fast bowler of all time, Malcolm Marshall
Surely you jest in a moments harlequinesque whimsy.Nah. Not better than Wasim.
Of course not.
Picked Warne because I thought there are comparable fast bowlers that can be picked later, but spinners are scant.
