Best 11 of the decade in ODI and TEST

[aussie]

Cairns & Pollock weren't bad either

I reckon Cairns best days in ODIs was in the 90s TBF. Other than his peformances between 2000-2002 when NZ won the ICC knockout & VB Series 2002, he declined alot espescially in his bowling (due to injuries)

 

[Cruxdude]

Mine would be

Tests:

Hayden
Sehwag
Ponting
Sachin
Lara
Kallis
Gilchrist
Pollock
Warne
Murali
McGrath

ODIs:

Sachin
Gilchrist
Ponting
Yuvraj
Pietersen
Dhoni
Flintoff
Pollock
Lee
Murali
McGrath

 

[stephen]

puuuuuuuuuhlease

Johnson over the last year and a half has been a much better bowler than Flintoff ever was, even taking into account his two rubbish tests in the Ashes.

He's not quite as good of a batsman as Flintoff, but statistically they are very similar. The difference between their batting/bowling averages is almost identical for both players.

Like I said, in a year or two, provided Johnson's batting continues to improve then I think we could safely say that he was an all rounder on at least a par with Flintoff (though probably better as he is better at his primary discipline).

 

[GIMH]

I disagree that he was a better bowler than Flintoff ever was. At his peak Flintoff would never have served up some of the dross we saw from Johnson last year. Johnson bowled lots of filth but kept his average respectable with the odd pearlier. Flintoff clearly didn't bowl as many magic balls as Johnson but there was a complete lack of filth. Depends what you're looking for really.

 

[SJS]

For Tests my 12. . .

1. Hayden
2. Sehwag
3. Ponting
4. Tendulkar
5. Lara
6. Dravid
7. Gilchrist
8. Pollock
9. Warne
10. Steyn/Lee
11. Murali
12. McGrath

 

[SJS]

odi's...

1. Tendulkar
2. Hayden
3. Ponting
4. Pietersen
5. Kallis
6. Gilchrist
7. Flintoff
8. Pollock
9. Lee
10. Murali
11. McGrath

 

[aussie]

Johnson over the last year and a half has been a much better bowler than Flintoff ever was, even taking into account his two rubbish tests in the Ashes.

Nah man. Flintoff at the beginning of his zenith as bowler between Ashes 05 - IND 05/06 was much better than Johnson career so far.

He's not quite as good of a batsman as Flintoff, but statistically they are very similar. The difference between their batting/bowling averages is almost identical for both players.

Johnson wont be able to ever bat in the top 6 like Flintoff at his best IMO. Johnson's batting i'd say will be barely be able to be # 7 quality, a bit the last great lef-arm all-rounder AUS has had in Allan Davidson.

Like I said, in a year or two, provided Johnson's batting continues to improve then I think we could safely say that he was an all rounder on at least a par with Flintoff (though probably better as he is better at his primary discipline).

Johnson will always be a bowling all-rounder. I highly doubt he will be match Flintoff's peak as all-rounder, in which Freddie combined top 6 batting with WC bowling before injuries messed him up.

 

[stephen]

Nah man. Flintoff at the beginning of his zenith as bowler between Ashes 05 - IND 05/06 was much better than Johnson career so far.



Johnson wont be able to ever bat in the top 6 like Flintoff at his best IMO. Johnson's batting i'd say will be barely be able to be # 7 quality, a bit the last great lef-arm all-rounder AUS has had in Allan Davidson.



Johnson will always be a bowling all-rounder. I highly doubt he will be match Flintoff's peak as all-rounder, in which Freddie combined top 6 batting with WC bowling before injuries messed him up.

Flintoff's peak performance was against Australia in the 05 ashes series. In that 5 test series he made 402 runs at 40 with 1 century. He took 24 wickets at 27, giving him 4.8 wpm.

Johnson's peak performance so far was against South Africa. In those 6 tests (which effectively could be considered as a single series, given how close the tests were chronologically) he made 401 runs at 60 with 1 century. He took 33 wickets at 25, giving him 5.5 wpm.

Statistically there is very little to separate them at their peaks, except that Johnson got out less and took more wickets per match. Flintoff was always batting 1 spot too high and I think that Johnson bats 1 spot too low (though I wouldn't suggest swapping him with Haddin, who would possibly be a top 6 bat if it wasn't for his keeping).

Both Johnson and Flintoff were bowling all rounders and the only reason that Flintoff batted at 6 was because England never had a keeper who could bat 6 or a bowling attack that was good enough to take 20 wickets without 5 men. If Flintoff couldn't bowl there is no way he'd make any test match side, and he would have been picked for England even if his batting average was 4, which certainly makes him a bowling allrounder.

 

[Beleg]

Flintoff's peak performance was against Australia in the 05 ashes series. In that 5 test series he made 402 runs at 40 with 1 century. He took 24 wickets at 27, giving him 4.8 wpm.

Johnson's peak performance so far was against South Africa. In those 6 tests (which effectively could be considered as a single series, given how close the tests were chronologically) he made 401 runs at 60 with 1 century. He took 33 wickets at 25, giving him 5.5 wpm.

Statistically there is very little to separate them at their peaks, except that Johnson got out less and took more wickets per match. Flintoff was always batting 1 spot too high and I think that Johnson bats 1 spot too low (though I wouldn't suggest swapping him with Haddin, who would possibly be a top 6 bat if it wasn't for his keeping).

Both Johnson and Flintoff were bowling all rounders and the only reason that Flintoff batted at 6 was because England never had a keeper who could bat 6 or a bowling attack that was good enough to take 20 wickets without 5 men. If Flintoff couldn't bowl there is no way he'd make any test match side, and he would have been picked for England even if his batting average was 4, which certainly makes him a bowling allrounder.

quoted for truth

 

[bagapath]

Johnson's peak performance so far was against South Africa. In those 6 tests (which effectively could be considered as a single series, given how close the tests were chronologically)

no. you cant do that. those two series were played in two different countries, continents in fact. the host/tourist factor, home advantage/disadvantage element also will get mixed up if you try to see the two series as one.

on topic... i think johnson will be a bowling all rounder in the pollock/hadlee mode. flintoff was not a matchwinner with the ball. the few exceptions one can come with will prove the rule.

 

[tooextracool]

Here is my test team of the decade:

Hayden
Sehwag
Ponting
Lara
Kallis
Chanderpaul
Sangakkara
Warne
Bond
Muralitharan
McGrath

I've left Tendulkar out because he was below par for the good part of the first half of this decade and I have left Dravid out because he too had an ordinary time from 2006-08/09. Chanderpaul was far more consistent than either and even though he wouldn't rank on the same level as the other 2 he was more consistent this decade.

I dont rate Gilly as a batsman because I think he was the one to prosper most from the quality of the top 6 Australian batters and cashing in on attacks that had been demoralized. By the end of his career he had been worked out and was a dodgy player of spin throughout.

Pollock was half the bowler after he lost pace at the start of the decade, and I went with someone with real pace and good presence of mind.

 

[Jono]

I'll do mine.

Tests:

Hayden
Sehwag
Ponting (c) - no one else to captain really. Warne didn't captain so can't really select him.
Kallis
Lara
Dravid
Gilchrist+
Warne
Steyn
Murali
McGrath

Tendulkar's my favourite player but injuries hurt him too much from 04-06 to include him in the decade, and he had a woeful 2003. So that's 4 years out of 10. Chanderpaul, Sangakkara and Yousuf all stiff. I think Dravid had better innings than Chanderpaul and Yousuf, and Sangakkara was close but I just couldn't fit him in.

With the bowlers, I've chosen Steyn because I think he's been the better bowler than Pollock in the decade, and with Kallis already in the team, I don't think its vital to have another allrounder.

I have Lara at 5 instead of 4 because I figured I'd split Dravid and Kallis up.

ODIs

Tendulkar
Gilchrist
Ponting
Pietersen
Symonds
Hussey
Dhoni
Pollock
Lee
Murali
McGrath

There were plenty of top ODI players in this period, but I think that's a very good balanced team.

 

[tooextracool]

ODIs

Tendulkar
Gilchrist
Ponting
Pietersen
Symonds
Hussey
Dhoni
Pollock
Lee
Murali
McGrath

There were plenty of top ODI players in this period, but I think that's a very good balanced team.

You would pick 2 keepers and have Dhoni in as a specialist batter? Personally, I would have picked Chris Gayle at the top who can be as aggressive as Gilchrist but also scored runs at a better average. Would also provide a valuable 6th bowling option that I would think your side could use.

 

[aussie]

Flintoff's peak performance was against Australia in the 05 ashes series. In that 5 test series he made 402 runs at 40 with 1 century. He took 24 wickets at 27, giving him 4.8 wpm.

Yes that was his best & most memorable series. But he did back it up vs IND 05/06 when he averaged 52 with the bat & 30 with the ball.

Flintoff entire peak period as an all-round between Brdigetown 2004 to Mumbai 2006, where he combined quality top 6 batting & top class bowling he averaged 41 with the bat - 25 with the ball. I highly doubt Johnson could match this, as afomentioned at best i think Johnson would become an all-rounder in the Hadlee/Pollock/Davidson mode batting @ # 7 at best.

Johnson's peak performance so far was against South Africa. In those 6 tests (which effectively could be considered as a single series, given how close the tests were chronologically) he made 401 runs at 60 with 1 century. He took 33 wickets at 25, giving him 5.5 wpm.

- Firstly as already mentioned by poster bagapath can't group the series as one given the home/away advantage thing.

- Secondly i dont think Johnson's batting has exactly gotten worse since those 6 tests for you to consider that a peak period TBF. Johnson's batting is still on that level i'd say.

- Thirdly you can't compare his batting @ 8, to what Flintoff did at his peak.

Statistically there is very little to separate them at their peaks, except that Johnson got out less and took more wickets per match.

Thats because you got their peak periods especially Flintoff's wrong my friend...

Flintoff was always batting 1 spot too high and I think that Johnson bats 1 spot too low (though I wouldn't suggest swapping him with Haddin, who would possibly be a top 6 bat if it wasn't for his keeping).

Would have to disagree with both here. Flintoff at his best as a batsman definately was good enough to bat in the top 6 for ENG.

Johnson ATM although i'd agree that he is capable of batting @ 7 in test - he aint fully there yet. Since he aint better batsman than Haddin at all ATM.

Both Johnson and Flintoff were bowling all rounders and the only reason that Flintoff batted at 6 was because England never had a keeper who could bat 6 or a bowling attack that was good enough to take 20 wickets without 5 men.

Flintoff was a bowling all-rounder from SRI 06 to Ashes 09, in that period you could say Johnson was better than him. since that was the period after Freddie's peak, in which injuries severly affecting his game. So Johnson being a better "bowling-allrounder" than a consistenly injured Flintoff is the last stages of his career does say much.

His batting never was able to build on the great improvements he had made between Ashes 05 to IND 06 & although his bowling still remained ENGs best bowling option in tests during that period, it also regressed slightly which was the MAIN reason why Freddie never was able to take his bowling to next level & take more 5 wicket hauls.


Secondly as i showed above Flintoff clearly was capable of batting @ 6 during his peak, so the point about the keeper is irrelevant.

Thirdly why does it matter that ENG never had an attack capable of taking 20 wickets consistently without a 5-man attack?. No team outside AUS in the last decade with McGrath/Warne had the luxury, so i dont see the issue..

If Flintoff couldn't bowl there is no way he'd make any test match side, and he would have been picked for England even if his batting average was 4, which certainly makes him a bowling allrounder.

Ha no way sir, unfortunately i dont think you have followed Flintoff's career that well

 

[Jono]

You would pick 2 keepers and have Dhoni in as a specialist batter? Personally, I would have picked Chris Gayle at the top who can be as aggressive as Gilchrist but also scored runs at a better average. Would also provide a valuable 6th bowling option that I would think your side could use.

Yeah that's quite logical call.

I'll be first to admit bias on my part of the Tendulkar/Gilchrist opening partnership. I've mentioned a few times on this board that I find that my 'dream' opening partnership in ODI cricket.

 

[tooextracool]

Personally, I have always had a bias towards a Tendulkar/Lara opening partnership and I have picked them as my opening pair in many of my dream ODI sides. Really doesnt get more exhilarating than watching two of the most talented batsmen of my lifetime bat together with the field restrictions in their favor.

 

[Jono]

Haha true. If Lara had had a better decade in ODI cricket he would have definitely been in my team.

This 10 over a side game was a preview of what such a partnership would be:

Pakistan win despite Tendulkar fifty | International XI v Pakistan, The Oval Report | Cricket News | Cricinfo.com

They put on 72 opening together

 

[bagapath]

Personally, I have always had a bias towards a Tendulkar/Lara opening partnership and I have picked them as my opening pair in many of my dream ODI sides. Really doesnt get more exhilarating than watching two of the most talented batsmen of my lifetime bat together with the field restrictions in their favor.

tendulkar and gilly opening together with lara coming in at 3 makes it more exciting and keeps the greats in their favorite batting positions. u have to select a keeper anyway. might as well do it first and see the three most exciting batsmen kill the opposition.

 

[tooextracool]

tendulkar and gilly opening together with lara coming in at 3 makes it more exciting and keeps the greats in their favorite batting positions. u have to select a keeper anyway. might as well do it first and see the three most exciting batsmen kill the opposition.

Was 3 really Lara's favored position though? I think he would have opened more had WI had a more stable middle order during his time.

 

[slowfinger]

Here's my ODI

1.Brian Lara
2.Tendulkar.
3.Hayden
4.Yousuf
5.Punter (c)
6.Gilchrist +
7.Flintoff
8.Swanneh
9.Waqar
10.Murali
11.McGrath

I only put Swann in because of what he has put in now, maybe I should have put him in the next decade but couldn't help it.

Akhtar, Waugh and Pollock didn't get in because I didn't think they were just about good enough apart from at peak times. Kallis didn't get in because I didn't see anything too special.Yousuf got in because of his sucess in 07 and in subsequent years because he did perform well.