-
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.
Why does cricket need a strong West Indies?
- Thread starter Langeveldt
- Start date
NZTailender
I can't believe I ate the whole thing
Yeah it's so weak, only 2 good teams really.
Flem274*
123/5
what?
you guys are glorifying the 90s and 00s imo. eras where australia, the west indies for a bit and south africa stuffed everyone else. england and new zealand couldn't even get their best sides on the park.
this is the strongest era right now imo. the teams are all close in quality and because of that the lesser players records get hurt more. for someone to have a good average someone else has to have a crap one.
you guys are glorifying the 90s and 00s imo. eras where australia, the west indies for a bit and south africa stuffed everyone else. england and new zealand couldn't even get their best sides on the park.
this is the strongest era right now imo. the teams are all close in quality and because of that the lesser players records get hurt more. for someone to have a good average someone else has to have a crap one.
Jono
Virat Kohli (c)
No its not about glorifying the 90s or any era and bagging the present. Cricket only has 8 proper teams (which is ludicrous). It just cannot afford having so many teams be a basketcase politically or selection wise or whatever reason. WI and Pakistan this year are two of the weakest big 8 nations I've ever seen enter a World Cup. Pakistan have some injuries of course, but both teams also lost their best ODI bowler for chucking. Not a good time.
Last edited:
Flem274*
123/5
Pakistan are a good test team, and the newfound strength of the minnows is great for the game.
As I said, I think the strength of the good ODI teams is exaggerating the bad in the others. In tests the top seven are all capable of beating each other, and if the West Indies remember to pick Little Bravo and Roach then they look ok.
Besides, back in the day we used to call a batsman averaging just over 30 Stephen Fleming, not the unwanted man Younis Khan.
As I said, I think the strength of the good ODI teams is exaggerating the bad in the others. In tests the top seven are all capable of beating each other, and if the West Indies remember to pick Little Bravo and Roach then they look ok.
Besides, back in the day we used to call a batsman averaging just over 30 Stephen Fleming, not the unwanted man Younis Khan.
Athlai
Not Terrible
3 of the top 10 ODI bowlers being out for chucking is not a great look for the game. That said I don't think anyone outside of Pakistan/West Indies are particularly 'weak' at the moment. Pakistan seem rather temporarily poor (and still capable of rocking anyone if a few players fire) and the West Indies has been hurt by quite a few things outside of just pure cricketing ability.
The minnows are stronger than they have ever been. Quite a few of the major nations aren't too far away from some of their better teams in history. I think the quality of international players is very high at the moment, but the subcontinent teams are in conditions that don't suit them and Australia, NZ and South Africa are in such a rich vein of form they're making okay teams look bad.
I think this is one of the most open world cups ever and I think this is one of the stronger periods for ODI cricket than we've seen in a long while.
The minnows are stronger than they have ever been. Quite a few of the major nations aren't too far away from some of their better teams in history. I think the quality of international players is very high at the moment, but the subcontinent teams are in conditions that don't suit them and Australia, NZ and South Africa are in such a rich vein of form they're making okay teams look bad.
I think this is one of the most open world cups ever and I think this is one of the stronger periods for ODI cricket than we've seen in a long while.
Jono
Virat Kohli (c)
Yeah you guys have raised some good points.
mohammad16
U19 Captain
Cricket is really lacking quality superstars. Just look at the 90s, you had Wasim, Lara, Warne, Murali, Tendulkar, Ambrose and Donald. These were some of the most exciting cricketers the world has ever seen. Who do we have now that even begins to compare to any of them? No one, perhaps only Steyn but he is just one. People would get far more excited to watch Lara bat or Warne bowl, no current cricketer has that sort of presence. There just isn't that mega superstar appeal drawing people to cricket, instead it is just hollow and superficial entertainment in the form of t-20 cricket and unconventional stroke play. None of these reverse flicks and sweeps can hold a candle to a Lara square cut or a Wasim yorker.
Last edited:
mohammad16
U19 Captain
Thats the issue, the best today don't compare to the best of the 90s. I would take a hostile Donald spell over any spell Johnson's ever bowled, any top Lara innings over AB and any Warne special over Narine/Ajmal/Ashwin. The great thing about Donald was that it wasn't just pace and bounce, he did it with genuine swing.
Last edited:
hendrix
Hall of Fame Member
Sangakkara is definitely up there with the 90s stars, some would argue even better. Ditto for Dale Steyn.
Kohli is perhaps not quite Tendulkar (although it could be argued in ODIs that he's even better at the same stage of their careers), but the lineup including Pujara, Rahane, and Rohit compares pretty decently with early versions of Dravid, Tendulkar, Ganguly.
andmark
International Captain
Yeah I think for the past few years cricket has lacked a mega star with the only exceptions being maybe Dhoni and the last couple of years of Tendulkar. But it seems like a transitional period which I'd like to think we're coming out of the end of. We are now seeing potentially the beginning of a great Australian side with the likes of Warner and Starc. AB has been a superman recently, a couple of Indian batsmen (Kohli etc) could fill the role also.
mohammad16
U19 Captain
Do they have the same kind of appeal though? I have never seen crowds lining up to see Sanga bat and leave the stadium when he gets out. I think people are forgetting the kind of appeal the likes of Lara, Tendulkar and Warne had in their prime, they were huge draws everywhere they went. Tendulkar in the latter parts of his career had lost a bit of that magic but the early years were fantastic. AB, Kohli and Steyn all are doing really well and have exceptional records, but I just wouldn't consider them on the level of their predecessors in terms of appeal. I guess I am being a bit unrealistic, Tendulkar, Lara, Wasim and Warne were once in a lifetime sort of players, in terms of the whole package (skill, style and competitive spirit). We were just spoiled in the 90s, it is a bit too much to expect that sort of brilliance replicated on a consistent basis.
Last edited:
Yeah, some serious rose-tinting going on here.
Jono
Virat Kohli (c)
Kohli is absolutely box office. KP was box office when he was playing too.
AB and Steyn are South African. They're always up against it in terms of fame just like the 90s South African guns were.
cnerd123
likes this
Yea it's like everyone has forgotten the huge number of exceptionally mediocre players that played so many matches in the 90s. Guys like Sanjay Manjrekar, Keith Arthurton, Andrew Hudson, Pat Symcox, Tom Moody, Pramodya Wickramasinghe, Chris Lewis...
People are going to look back at the 2011 - 2020 decade and see this as one of the most exciting eras, with guys like Steyn, ABDV, Williamson, Kohli, Southee, Warner, coming of age and guys like Herath, Sanga, Misbah, MSD, Anderson, Chanderpaul all still going strong.