• 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.

All-Time World XIs: Discussion Thread

R

Randomfan

U19 Vice-Captain
subshakerz said:
Miller made it. Awesome! We officially have a superior bowling attack to the first ATG XI.

Ambrose - Tall, miserly
Barnes - Mystery seam spin
Imran - Reverse and inswing master
Miller - Sharp and fast conventional swing
Murali - Most dangerous spinner ever

Compare this to the first XI. It's simply better on pace friendly tracks, better on flat tracks and better on spinning surfaces.
Click to expand...
Barnes is a weak spot here. Steyn here would have made it much better.
 
R

Randomfan

U19 Vice-Captain
Johan said:
Ah Yes, take the inferior bowler who bowls much less overs on top, makes sense
Click to expand...
Barnes played one major test nation Aus. He has 20 tests against Aus at Avg of 21-22.

Too few tests and nothing extra ordinary here to cover for too few tests. Barnes does not make a case to stand with bowlers who have really proven themselves in different conditions with far bigger sample size. Counted among greats for historic reason is very different and putting some one like Barnes over Steyn.

Does not pass the sniff tests despite glorification.
 
R

Randomfan

U19 Vice-Captain
Thala_0710 said:
First time I've ever seen Barnes being called a weak spot in a bowling line up
Click to expand...
Weak spot compared to choices available. No one alive has seen him bowling. Dodgy pitches and one major test opposition with 20 tests with avg of 21-22. Not sure, historic reason for being great can be pushed to make a case over some one proven in all conditions with large sample size. No one will doubt Steyn, but for Barnes, plenty of questions.

Anyway, lets agreee wto disagree. Some of you rate Barnes along side Ambrose, Steyn etc. I don't.
 
Johan

Johan

Hall of Fame Member
Randomfan said:
Barnes played one major test nation Aus. He has 20 tests against Aus at Avg of 21-22.

Too few tests and nothing extra ordinary here to cover for too few tests. Barnes does not make a case to stand with bowlers who have really proven themselves in different conditions with far bigger sample size. Counted among greats for historic reason is very different and putting some one like Barnes over Steyn.

Does not pass the sniff tests despite glorification.
Click to expand...
He averages 21 against Australia having played most of his games on good batting wickets, and takes 3 wickets an innings, so a huge point for him. Steyn averages 27 against Australia and 31 against England, nothing exceptional eother.

On Top, against South Africa he has 83 wickets in 7 games, has the greatest series a bowler ever had, anywhere, anytime, in the 150 years history of the game, in South Africa in 1913. Was also unarguably regarded as the greatest bowler of all time until those who saw him died and the entire century until those who saw him died. His skill allowed him to obliterate test standard sides well into his 50s.

Steyn is beaten on all accounts, a more dominant home record for Barnes, superior record in Australia and has the greatest series of all time in South Africa, even after era equalisation Barnes emerges as superior in raw numbers, Barnes bowled miles more, Barnes had miles better peer reputation and was the best in the world in his 50s, a feat unimaginable for anyone else in history – Before or after Barnes. the only real thing Steyn has over him is the Asia record, Should have used that to beat Ambrose.
 
Last edited:
capt_Luffy

capt_Luffy

Hall of Fame Member
Johan said:
He averages 21 against Australia having played most of his games on good batting wickets, and takes 3 wickets an innings, so a huge point for him. Steyn averages 27 against Australia and 31 against England, nothing exceptional.

On Top, against South Africa he has 83 wickets in 7 games, has the greatest series a bowler ever had, anywhere, anytime, in the 150 years history of the game in South Africa in 1913. Was also unarguably regarded as the greatest bowler of his era and the entire century until those who saw him died. His skill allowed him to obliterate test standard sides well into his 50s.

Steyn is beaten on all accounts, a more dominant home record for Barnes, superior record in Australia and has the greatest series of all time in South Africa, even after era equalisation Barnes emerges as superior in raw numbers, Barnes bowled miles more, Barnes had miles better peer reputation and was the best in the world in his 50s, a feat unimaginable for anyone else in history – Before or after Barnes. the only real thing Steyn has over him is the Asia record, Should have used that to beat Ambrose.
Click to expand...
+7 WPM. Can't make that **** up.
 
Johan

Johan

Hall of Fame Member
Randomfan said:
Yes, with 20 tests. That's simply not enough to belong in discussion with Steyn/Amrbose etc.

SA was from all account a minnowish team. Difference between Barnes record against Aus and SA is huge.
Click to expand...
20 Tests over a 15 period is more than enough to judge him against high class units, looks like his ceiling on flat wickets against a strong unit is 21 at 6WPM, impressive.

South Africa beat England twice at home so no, they weren't minnowish, they again toured in 1929 with proper bats and were extremely competitive with England, and Barnes was 56 years old and took 19 wickets in 2 games with a 7 bowling average. He's a peer to Marshall, McGrath and Hadlee, not Ambrose and Steyn.
 
subshakerz

subshakerz

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Johan said:
He averages 21 against Australia having played most of his games on good batting wickets, and takes 3 wickets an innings, so a huge point for him. Steyn averages 27 against Australia and 31 against England, nothing exceptional eother.

On Top, against South Africa he has 83 wickets in 7 games, has the greatest series a bowler ever had, anywhere, anytime, in the 150 years history of the game, in South Africa in 1913. Was also unarguably regarded as the greatest bowler of all time until those who saw him died and the entire century until those who saw him died. His skill allowed him to obliterate test standard sides well into his 50s.

Steyn is beaten on all accounts, a more dominant home record for Barnes, superior record in Australia and has the greatest series of all time in South Africa, even after era equalisation Barnes emerges as superior in raw numbers, Barnes bowled miles more, Barnes had miles better peer reputation and was the best in the world in his 50s, a feat unimaginable for anyone else in history – Before or after Barnes. the only real thing Steyn has over him is the Asia record, Should have used that to beat Ambrose.
Click to expand...
To me Barnes is the wild card since he has such a unique set of skills that if he gets going, he can potentially wreck any side. But if he doesn't live up to his billing we have four other worldclass bowlers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top