All-Time World XIs: Discussion Thread

[Johan]

Lol please don't do this guilt by association thing again. You did it before with me and PC.

then sit down and be quiet, you really don't want to be in the same category as Sachin's fav cumdumpster ie @centurymaker

 

[subshakerz]

If you're facing such an ATG bowling attack I don't think Hadlee would make much of a difference either, not as much as McGrath can make against the ATG top order imo

Yeah except I showed over a dozen examples of 2000s Aus getting bailed out by their tail. So it applies even to the best teams.

 

[subshakerz]

then sit down and be quiet, you really don't want to be in the same category as Sachin's fav cumdumpster ie @centurymaker

Nah I'll keep saying what I want.

 

[centurymaker]

Smh, Centurymaker really proved himself the single most illiterate poster on CW today, love to see it.

Your words are hollow. They don't mean **** anymore.

 

[Johan]

Nah I'll keep saying what I want.

then I'll keep saying what I want, and that's you're a self contradicting moron.

 

[Johan]

You words are hollow. They don't mean **** anymore.

True, You lost the debate when your response was "but-but general Cricketing community!!! waaaah!" now sit out

 

[subshakerz]

then I'll keep saying what I want, and that's you're a self contradicting moron.

My friend, you clearly have an issue keeping up with your own standards and criteria. It's ok we can help reminding you.

 

[Thala_0710]

Yeah except I showed over a dozen examples of 2000s Aus getting bailed out by their tail. So it applies even to the best teams.

They will ofc get bailed out by their tail some times... Marshall and Warne are capable of doing that too... The point is, of the few times this will happen, how much will Hadlee add to that (compared to just Marshall, Warne saving the day)... This value vs the value of having McGrath every time you bowl, and his special ability to take top order wickets better than anyone else imo

 

[Johan]

My friend, you clearly have an issue keeping up with your own standards and criteria. It's ok we can help reminding you.

My friend, you clearly have an issue being consistent with your own standards and following through with your own logic, I'm simply giving you a push so you can be a better poster.

 

[centurymaker]

The @Johan Joker is behaving like one here with the kind of **** he is posting. His words only reflect the kind of environment he has grown up in. And he really needs a mirror since he is obsessed over Hutton and Hobbs- two old amateurs.

 

[subshakerz]

They will ofc get bailed out by their tail some times... Marshall and Warne are capable of doing that too... The point is, of the few times this will happen, how much will Hadlee add to that (compared to just Marshall, Warne saving the day)... This value vs the value of having McGrath every time you bowl, and his special ability to take top order wickets better than anyone else imo

Aus 2000s were bailed out against average teams. Against ATG sides, you need to raise the bar.

If you are facing an ATG side, you can't suffice with Marshall and Warne at no.8 and 9 and then two bunnies. The chance they will be scuttled under pressure is too high.

No Hadlee, Wasim or Imran at no.8 is a big liability. At the very least they can hang around against quality bowling to allow Sobers and Gilly to score more.

There is very little difference between Hadlee and McGrath as far as bowlers go. I could make a compelling case Hadlee is a better new ball bowler.

 

[Johan]

The @Johan Joker is behaving like one here with the kind of **** he is posting. His words only reflect the kind of environment he has grown up in. And he really needs a mirror since he is obsessed over Hutton and Hobbs- two amateurs.

I've grown up in a fine environment, I have a sharp tongue because I don't like going easy on clowns such as yourself, and Amateurs is irrelevant, I don't care where one has Hobbs or Hutton, I care about the double standard of 1970s. It's my job as an educated man to set donkeys such as yourself straight and put you in touch in with reality and I take it seriously

 

[Prince EWS]

I've make this observation and argument before. I don't see how you're the 3rd best player and either doesn't make the team or is the last one in along with Viv.

Imran being voted here the no. 3 player is very arguably more of a lack of consolidation of an alternative no. 3, than him clearly being actually the 3rd best player ever.

Outside of CW it's either one of Warne, Richards, Hobbs or Tendulkar.

But CW seems to have a odd affinity for bowling all rounders, as I can make just a strong an argument for Hammond and he's not in the discussion here.

This is your worst argument imo.

All time world teams don't matter in reality. They're two steps up from real cricket.

Ronnie Irani may have actually been the third best player in county cricket without deserving a spot in the England side at some periods. That's fine.

The thing we must always remember about these sides is that they aren't real and don't actually matter. If someone doesn't make one because or balance issues or what have you then it doesn't diminish how valuable they were in real games they played in.

Now I think Imran should be in the side anyway. But no, it's definitely possible to be the third best player at a lower level and not suit the balance of a combined side without making people have to rethink the former.

These imaginary time travel exercises are fun but if you actually think they should have a bearing on who was better in real life you need to touch grass.

 

[subshakerz]

Now I think Imran should be in the side anyway. But no, it's definitely possible to be the third best player at a lower level and not suit the balance of a combined side without making people have to rethink the former.

Pretty sure if someone came up with a side without Bradman and Sobers, the first response would be how can you make a side without the two best cricketers of all time.

 

[subshakerz]

My friend, you clearly have an issue being consistent with your own standards and following through with your own logic, I'm simply giving you a push so you can be a better poster.

I will take this comment in the most charitable interpretation.

 

[Johan]

I will take this comment in the most charitable interpretation.

Okay.

 

[centurymaker]

I've grown up in a fine environment, I have a sharp tongue because I don't like going easy on clowns such as yourself, and Amateurs is irrelevant, I don't care where one has Hobbs or Hutton, I care about the double standard of 1970s. It's my job as an educated man to set donkeys such as yourself straight and put you in touch in with reality and I take it seriously

You are THE clown of CW. Feeling the need to respond to everything and everyone. Fighting with every single person who disagrees. You need to grow up. You live in a bubble on CW. Reality is outside of CW. You don't know a single cricketer in person yet you make bold claims and opinions about every single thing to do with cricket.

 

[Johan]

stfu ignorant guy in his 20s. You are obsessed with history. I am not.

^ I knew this donkey started the hostilities, can dish it out but can't take it back, what a pathetic existence

 

[Thala_0710]

Aus 2000s were bailed out against average teams. Against ATG sides, you need to raise the bar.

If you are facing an ATG side, you can't suffice with Marshall and Warne at no.8 and 9 and then two bunnies. The chance they will be scuttled under pressure is too high.

No Hadlee, Wasim or Imran at no.8 is a big liability. At the very least they can hang around against quality bowling to allow Sobers and Gilly to score more.

There is very little difference between Hadlee and McGrath as far as bowlers go. I could make a compelling case Hadlee is a better new ball bowler.

I think the main difference we have is that McGrath for me is definitely the better new ball bowler (and vs the best bats) but is closer overall as bowlers. For me Marshall, Warne can hang there nearly as much as Hadlee/Wasim can (Imran ofc is much better) and this difference is exaggerated sometimes imo. Hadlee faced approx 34-35 balls per inns and Marshall 29, Warne 27-28 balls per inns (from the data I got from Cricinfo)
For example Hadlee's 100s are overplayed sometimes. One was in a dead draw vs a very poor SL team, and the other was when WI...

 

[kyear2]

He doesn't. If he had a spinner nearly as good as Warne or Murali, I can bet my house on the fact Lloyd's playing him every game

Yeah, and Harper actually seemed to give the win rate a slight boost.

If I already have 6 bowling options (better than Sobers), then I'd pick Sachin over Sobers yeah

Six? 4 man attack and Miller, who else?

In any event, there aren't 3 better options at 2nd in the cordon.

With this attack, don't think that's negotiable.

I'm reminded of a Mark Nicholas article where he wrote of the best batsmen since Bradman, which he narrowed down to 3, Barry, Sachin and Garry.



I don't even care about the bowling part, the less he does the better.