So, Bradman's Invincibles or Waugh's unbeaten team of the early 00s?

[Kirkut]

Provided that the bats and equipment are the same for both sides then I can't see Waugh's team beating Bradman's team.

While Warne was a novelty during the 90s his impact against 1948 batsman would be minimal because they would encounter quality leg spinners all the time in Shield Cricket.

As classy as McGrath and Gillespie were they can be played successfully with a good straight technique and hold none of terrors found in a quartet consisting of Holding, Roberts, Garner, and Marshall. Brett Lee would be carted all over the park.

On the other hand, Hayden wouldn't last 30 minutes against Toshak who would simply take him apart. Slater had real problems against the swinging ball. He would not fair well against Lindwall and Johnston.

Langer, Waugh, Waugh, Ponting and Gilchrist is very strong. But it really isn't much better than the opposing middle-order. It would be interesting to see Ponting and Gilchrist take on Lindwall and Miller, but I think that they would end up having problems against the inevitable bouncers. It's all very well hooking and ducking the likes of Gough. But Lindwall wasn't nicknamed "Killer" for nothing, and Miller would be more unpredictable than any bowler they would have encountered before.

3-2 to Bradman's side as Bradman was every bit as ruthless as Waugh.

Excessive underrating.

 

[Camo999]

If the Invincibles still had to use inferior equipment, work full time jobs, had 50 years less knowledge of cricket advancements etc they would probably lose but if you could somehow neutralise these factors, I think they would win. Lindwall / Miller / Johnston is probably the strongest regular pace attack Australia has ever fielded and their 5 man attack (Toshack plus a spinner - Ring / Johnson / McCool) might shade Waugh's 4 man attack though Warne gives them an obvious spin advantage (though Johnston could switch to spin too). Both batting lineups look pretty awesome but I reckon Bradman, even at 40 years old would likely give his side a slight advantage.

 

[viriya]

I think Damien Martyn > Mark Waugh in Tests is not a crazy argument. Mark Waugh is consistently overrated (especially in Tests) and Martyn is consistently underrated imo.

 

[vcs]

I think Damien Martyn > Mark Waugh in Tests is not a crazy argument. Mark Waugh is consistently overrated (especially in Tests) and Martyn is consistently underrated imo.

Agreed, absolutely love Damien Martyn. Definitely not underrated in the vcs household

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Waughs team clearly as the other lot are dead.

 

[Red]

Neil Harvey's still around but it's a lot to expect of an 87yo

 

[Red]

I think Damien Martyn > Mark Waugh in Tests is not a crazy argument. Mark Waugh is consistently overrated (especially in Tests) and Martyn is consistently underrated imo.

Overrated based on his average? Cos there was a fair bit more to MWaugh than his average.

 

[TheJediBrah]

I can see people arguing that Mark Waugh faced some slightly tougher bowling on average during his career than Martyn

 

[AndrewB]

Provided that the bats and equipment are the same for both sides then I can't see Waugh's team beating Bradman's team.

While Warne was a novelty during the 90s his impact against 1948 batsman would be minimal because they would encounter quality leg spinners all the time in Shield Cricket.

As classy as McGrath and Gillespie were they can be played successfully with a good straight technique and hold none of terrors found in a quartet consisting of Holding, Roberts, Garner, and Marshall. Brett Lee would be carted all over the park.

Wouldn't Lee bowling at his pace be just as much of a novelty against 40s batsman as Warne was in the 90s?

 

[Gob]

Provided that the bats and equipment are the same for both sides then I can't see Waugh's team beating Bradman's team.

While Warne was a novelty during the 90s his impact against 1948 batsman would be minimal because they would encounter quality leg spinners all the time in Shield Cricket.

As classy as McGrath and Gillespie were they can be played successfully with a good straight technique and hold none of terrors found in a quartet consisting of Holding, Roberts, Garner, and Marshall. Brett Lee would be carted all over the park.

On the other hand, Hayden wouldn't last 30 minutes against Toshak who would simply take him apart. Slater had real problems against the swinging ball. He would not fair well against Lindwall and Johnston.

Langer, Waugh, Waugh, Ponting and Gilchrist is very strong. But it really isn't much better than the opposing middle-order. It would be interesting to see Ponting and Gilchrist take on Lindwall and Miller, but I think that they would end up having problems against the inevitable bouncers. It's all very well hooking and ducking the likes of Gough. But Lindwall wasn't nicknamed "Killer" for nothing, and Miller would be more unpredictable than any bowler they would have encountered before.

3-2 to Bradman's side as Bradman was every bit as ruthless as Waugh.

Argh this is just well never mind its watson

 

[the big bambino]

I think Damien Martyn > Mark Waugh in Tests is not a crazy argument. Mark Waugh is consistently overrated (especially in Tests) and Martyn is consistently underrated imo.

It is. Martyn was never preferred in a direct choice btwn the two.

 

[mr_mister]

It was leading that way though but he snuck into the team on his own accord when Slats got forced out


so it was just Boof instead of Martyn that got his eventual spot when the selectors finally realising Waugh coasting by on reputation. Literally averaged worse than nearly all his 90s and 00s peers, save Bev, Blewett and Elliott


I know stats arent everything or whatever but cmon

 

[watson]

Argh this is just well never mind its watson

Here is Keith Miller showing us how to bowl the outswinger at about the 6 minute mark. Bearing in mind that he was well retired at the time of filming one can only imagine how good he would have been in his prime.

Point being, Miller would have been a huge headache to all of the batsman in Waugh's team.

Btw To suggest that Martyn is better than Mark Waugh is just silly.

 

[Red]

Did you watch Mark Waugh bat. **** his average. Guy was brilliant.

Guy was the epitome of what a batsman should look like.

 

[Red]

 

[TheJediBrah]

Mark Waugh is consistently overrated (especially in Tests) and Martyn is consistently underrated imo.

Arguing for Mark Waugh on the basis of fielding is fair enough, but this thread is proving that this is correct

It is. Martyn was never preferred in a direct choice btwn the two.

Not really relevant as they're peaks didn't overlap at all, however actually was anyway.

When Mark Waugh was dropped Martyn directly took his number 4 position

 

[Red]

Argh this is just well never mind its watson

Don't be a ****

 

[mr_mister]

Red Hill I could post some Martyn innings that look just as good


doesn't prove a thing

 

[the big bambino]

Not really relevant as they're peaks didn't overlap at all, however actually was anyway.

When Mark Waugh was dropped Martyn directly took his number 4 position

Can you and Mr Mr get your stories straight? Was Waugh dropped for Martyn or Boof? A comparison of batsman is made everytime a test team is selected. There's a reason Waugh was preferred on almost every time he was available. Hint - its bcos he was better. Oh **** I've given it away.

 

[mr_mister]

i already stated he was riding on the reputation he had built in the 90s by then. there were calls for him to be dropped for most of the '00s


He was eventually dropped for Boof IIRC since Martyn was already in the team, but if Martyn hadn't broken thru in ashes '01 coz of Slater unexpectedly being tossed to the kerb(so Langer moved from middle order to opener, freeing up a spot) then I reckon Waugh would have had to step down for Martyn