Best Team of 1970 to 1990 Vs Best Team of 1990 to 2010

[smash84]

I remember the 80s very well, and I remember how Qadir bowled and how he was rated. He was, obviously, bloody good. I think his run up and delivery are aesthetically joint best along with Shane Warne's for a leg spinner (Imran FTW among pacers).

Having said that he was not this genius that some cricket experts, including Benaud, make him out to be post his retirement.

It is true that he kept the embers of spin bowling alive in a world of fast men. But during his playing days the Indians treated him like a club bowler, like they always treat spinners. He was not a threat to Sri Lankans as well. In fact he was not a threat anywhere outside of Pakistan. He was probably as good a bowler and match winner as Harbhajan would be 15+ years later.


On his days he would get bucket loads of wickets. But those days were not regular. Just because the Englishmen could not handle spin bowling, they made him out to be a mystical genius. He was not. Definitely not good enough to replace Hadlee in the team. From the 70s I would rate Chandra, Bedi, Prasanna, Gibbs and Underwood way above him.

This

 

[Engle]

Benaud and Imran rate Qadir highly. I would think these 2 gentlemen know a thing or two about the game or are we saying that Benaud and Imran don't know what they're talking about ?

The Indian spin quartet (or trio) operated well in tandem. We’re not sure how well each of them would perform if singled out from amongst their supporting cast.

 

[bagapath]

Benaud and Imran rate Qadir highly. I would think these 2 gentlemen know a thing or two about the game or are we saying that Benaud and Imran don't know what they're talking about ?

The Indian spin quartet (or trio) operated well in tandem. We’re not sure how well each of them would perform if singled out from amongst their supporting cast.

Imran is capable of serious bias. He thinks Zaheer Abbas is on par with Tendulkar. And that Inzy was more talented than Tendulkar and Lara. He used to compare Mohammad Sami with Malcolm Marshall, until someone pointed out to him that it was a punishable offense in most civilized countries including Pakistan.

Benaud chose not to include any of the off spinners including Laker and Murali in his dream team (and the B team) because he believed leg spinners by nature were more useful. That is his opinion.

Qadir was as good as Harbhajan or Saqlain or McGill. None of them would push Hadlee out of a team; actually no one can. Let's not fall for this Anglo centric rose tinted view that Qadir was a world beater. He was easy meat for any decent batter of spin bowling, England didn't possess any during his career. So he became too big for them to handle.

 

[Slifer]

Benaud and Imran rate Qadir highly. I would think these 2 gentlemen know a thing or two about the game or are we saying that Benaud and Imran don't know what they're talking about ?

The Indian spin quartet (or trio) operated well in tandem. We’re not sure how well each of them would perform if singled out from amongst their supporting cast.

Really? Imran was his team mate and Benuad was an ex world class spinner. And Benaud wasn't much of a fan of the wi quartet (kinda hypocritical). Plus as has already been stated, Qadir was the only decent spinner of the 80s. But that's as far as it goes really. Qadir averaged 47 away from home; 47 !!! Qadir's best average away vs any team was 38. Contrast thisvwith Underwood who went for a respectable 27 away and was only really bad vs wi and pakistan. There's more but this is getting really tedious seeing people trying to rate Qadir as something that he's far from being ie a great spinner. He wasn't.

Lol the wi fast bowlers performed great in tandem but when they all retired and Walsh (for example) only had Ambrose as his only real world class foil, he still performed greatly and vice versa for Ambrose. Therefore, i reckon that if the Indian were broken up theyd still perform well. Certainly better than Qadir who averaged 47 away and 32 overall.

 

[akilana]

Since the most contentious points of the picks are the bowling attack of the 70s-90 team and the openers for the 90s-10 team I'll throw in my 2c.

Bowlers:
Imran
Marshall
Lillee
Qadir

You need a spinner or you're at a huge disadvantage on many tracks and in the 4th innings. You're also at risk of over rate penalties and you can be less reliant on your part time bowlers.

Imran is amazing and needs to be in the team. He plays as bowler for mine. Marshall ams Lillee pick themselves (Lillee was the bowler of the 70s).

Openers

IMO you pick specialists for the position. Hayden as the aggressor and Smith add the more defensive. We've been over the wrong arguments about Hayden being a FTB enough times I'm not going to bother. But he did well against the best fast bowlers in the world after his recall including a century vs Donald and Pollock and being Australia's best bat on his final series in SA which was a bowler-dominated series.

I am struggling as to why you'd pick Kallis over Waugh when you have Warne, McGrath, Ambrose and Donald in your attack.

I don’t know where you got the Smith defensive, Hayden agressive idea. Smith was an attacking player who could also play for a draw. Both have an SR of 60. Hayden was a FTB. He scored a hundred vs a broken Donald was your example?
Kallis was the better batsman and better player than S Waugh.

 

[akilana]

Anyways I forgot you only watch matches involving Australia

 

[Engle]

Really? Imran was his team mate and Benuad was an ex world class spinner. And Benaud wasn't much of a fan of the wi quartet (kinda hypocritical). Plus as has already been stated, Qadir was the only decent spinner of the 80s. But that's as far as it goes really. Qadir averaged 47 away from home; 47 !!! Qadir's best average away vs any team was 38. Contrast thisvwith Underwood who went for a respectable 27 away and was only really bad vs wi and pakistan. There's more but this is getting really tedious seeing people trying to rate Qadir as something that he's far from being ie a great spinner. He wasn't.

Lol the wi fast bowlers performed great in tandem but when they all retired and Walsh (for example) only had Ambrose as his only real world class foil, he still performed greatly and vice versa for Ambrose. Therefore, i reckon that if the Indian were broken up theyd still perform well. Certainly better than Qadir who averaged 47 away and 32 overall.

Good debate...but...

1. Imran was not just Qadir's team mate, he fought for his selection. He put his words and credibility on the line and gave the cricket world a refreshing dimension.
I recall reading complaints about Imran, even while he was hoisting the WCup - there's no end.


2. When you put numbers out, these are not absolute numbers to be applied across all eras. The numbers have to be contextualized.

Prior to Qadir, we had Gibbs, Underwood, Bedi, Chandra, Prasanna, Venkat....

After Qadir we had Warne, Murali, Kumble, Harbajan, McGill, Kaneria, Mushy, Swan, on and on....

But nobody of note during Qadir's time, especially not a LBG bowler.


3. In any event, I would never have 4 fasties in my ATG XI. How boring is that ?

 

[Engle]

70s & 80s

01. Sunil Gavaskar
02. Barry Richards
03. Viv Richards
04. Graeme Pollock
05. Greg Chappell
06. Allan Border
07. Imran Khan *
08. Alan Knott +
09. Malcolm Marshall
10. Abdul Qadir
11. Dennis Lillee

12th. Derek Underwood


Very close choice between B.Richards and Greenidge.
Felt that Greenidge complemented Gavaskar barely better than B.Richards.
However, with Viv coming in at # 3 whose batting style is similar to Greenidge, we could afford to dispense with Greenidge.

# 4 had to be a left-hander. G.Pollock had natural flair and power.

# 5 G.Chappell did exceptionally well in World XI cricket including WSC.

#6 A. Border who brings to the table an extraordinary set of experiences

#7 Imran Khan who had the ability to raise his game to meet the challenge. Tough choice between him and Border for the captaincy. Imran get’s it by sheer force of personality.

# 10 Qadir. If I were to pick just 1 spinner from the 70’s – 80’s, I’d go for the mysterious Qadir. Not only does the cricket world does owe him some gratitude, but when you compare cricketers across eras, you measure how far they stood out amongst their peers.

# 11 Lillee. A fast bowlers fast bowler, Lillee exemplifies aggression with ability. The fast bowler not only has to get wickets, he has to uplift his team whilst intimidating the opposition. Here’s why he wins out against Hadlee.

12th Man. Qadir bowling with Bedi would be a sight to behold. But I must go with Underwood, as he brings a different dimension to the game.

 

[Slifer]

Who cares about boredom. If your 4 best bowlers are pacers then play em. Worked for WI home and away for almost 20 years and they literally won every where. Ideally, it would be nice to have at least a decent spinner in the team but if Qadir is the option to replace one of Hadlee, Imran, MM or even Lillee (who I think is overrated) then nope not worth it. Qadir was trash outside of Pakistan everywhere including England where as the pacers above were great world wide. From the dust bowls to the overcast conditions in the uk.

If u HAVE to have spinner then there are much better options available. Hell I would even take mustaq Muhammed over Qadir, atleast he could bat.

 

[Slifer]

Sensible Team of the 70s/80s:

Gavaskar
Greenidge
Viv
G Chappell
Miandad
Border
Imran*
Knott /Dujon+
Hadlee
Marshall
Lillee /Underwood

 

[Engle]

90s & 2000's

01. Virender Sehwag
02. Graeme Smith
03. Brian Lara
04. Sachin Tendulkar
05. Jacques Kallis
06. Steve Waugh *
07. Adam Gilchrist +
08. Wasim Akram
09. Shane Warne
10. Curtley Ambrose
11. Glenn McGrath
12th. Mutiah Muralitharan



One of the first cricketers I would pick is the battle-hardened warrior Steve Waugh as leader, who would jell the team into a fighting force.

 

[Starfighter]

But nobody of note during Qadir's time, especially not a LBG bowler.

As both Bagapath and I have pointed out in the earlier part of his career there was Iqbal Qasim who generally outperformed Qadir overall.

And we are picking from both the seventies and eighties. Some people seem to be treating it as if we are picking spin bowlers from just the eighties.

3. In any event, I would never have 4 fasties in my ATG XI. How boring is that ?

I won't pick McGrath in an all time eleven. He was too boring.

# 10 Qadir. If I were to pick just 1 spinner from the 70’s – 80’s, I’d go for the mysterious Qadir. Not only does the cricket world does owe him some gratitude, but when you compare cricketers across eras, you measure how far they stood out amongst their peers.

I'd rather pick someone on how well they performed. If you stand out from rubbish you might still be only mediocre.

# 11 Lillee. A fast bowlers fast bowler, Lillee exemplifies aggression with ability. The fast bowler not only has to get wickets, he has to uplift his team whilst intimidating the opposition. Here’s why he wins out against Hadlee.

Hadlee managed to basically raise his entire team from being rubbish to being competitive, so he has that going for him.

 

[Tom Flint]

Kallis is a better bat than waugh. Sometimes i swear killis being a decent bowler makes people overlook how good a bat he was. He is seen as an all rounder yet should make the team on his batting alone.
Would have shiv above waugh too. I love s. Waugh but not quite good enough for this xi.

 

[stephen]

I don’t know where you got the Smith defensive, Hayden agressive idea. Smith was an attacking player who could also play for a draw. Both have an SR of 60. Hayden was a FTB. He scored a hundred vs a broken Donald was your example?
Kallis was the better batsman and better player than S Waugh.

There are loads of examples of Hayden scoring important runs on wickets that have movement. But because we've been over this a hundred times in not going to go through his entire record. He had a poor start and looked clueless vs Ambrose in 1996 and people still hold this against him despite him making runs against Wasim, Waqar, Donald, Pollock and many more top shelf bowlers.

Also, Kallis was a very good batsman. But he was no Steve Waugh. Waugh faced stronger attacks and was one of the three best batsman in the world during the 90s (alongside Lara and Tendulkar) when there were great bowlers in nearly every country.

The only reason to pick Kallis is if you want him to bowl 20+ overs per test. In a team that has Warne + 3 ATG quick bowlers I don't think you need that.

Anyways I forgot you only watch matches involving Australia

Because everybody watched every test ever played. How many neutral tests have you genuinely watched the majority of? It's not like I ignore neutral tests, I still follow them and watch highlights, much like what I expect most people on here do.

Kallis is a better bat than waugh. Sometimes i swear killis being a decent bowler makes people overlook how good a bat he was. He is seen as an all rounder yet should make the team on his batting alone.
Would have shiv above waugh too. I love s. Waugh but not quite good enough for this xi.

You dramatically underrate Waugh if you put Chanderpaul above him. If you ignore the years he played before he was ready, he averaged 55 from 1991 until his retirement in 2004. In that time he averaged 45+ in every country except Sri Lanka and faced Ambrose, Bishop, Walsh, Wasim, Waqar, Donald, de Villiers, Pollock and Murali.

Kallis was great but Waugh was better.

 

[stephen]

I'm fine if people don't like Qadir but you do need a spinner. If Underwood was better then pick him.

Teams that don't have a spinner find things very difficult if they can't make a breakthrough with their quicks. A spinner gives a captain the ability to change the tempo of the game and possibly break a batsman's concentration.

 

[smash84]

I'm fine if people don't like Qadir but you do need a spinner. If Underwood was better then pick him.

Teams that don't have a spinner find things very difficult if they can't make a breakthrough with their quicks. A spinner gives a captain the ability to change the tempo of the game and possibly break a batsman's concentration.

We're not talking of some ordinary pacers. These are some of the finest to have ever played the game and we're superb on all sorts of wickets and all conditions.

 

[Red]

All teams should have a spinner. I'd take Deadly here because he can dry things up if that's what's needed, but if the pitch gives him any assistance at all he'll devastate the opposition. If the pitch was an absolute seamer's dream with zero chance of change, I'd include Hadlee.

S. Gavaskar
G. Greenidge
V. Richards
G.Chappell
J. Miandad
A. Border
I. Khan
A. Knott +
M. Marshall
D. Underwood
D. Lillee


Donald or Wasim/Waqar could come in for either Warne/Murali.


G. Smith
J. Langer
R. Ponting
S. Tendulkar
B. Lara
J. Kallis
A. Gilchrist +
S. Warne
C. Ambrose
M. Muralitharan
G. McGrath

 

[Slifer]

Idk, if i must include a spinner in the 70s/80s team it certainly won't be at the expense of sir Richard .Hadlee was certainly in the same class as any of the other atg bowlers, with only imran being a better batsman. And the opposition has Gilchrist at 7, therefore you need all the batting you could get. Sir Richard excelled on all wickets in all conditions including the 4th innings where pitches supposedly favored the spinners. Imo: Hadlee, Marshall, Imran , Deadley if you must have a spinner.

 

[stephen]

All teams should have a spinner. I'd take Deadly here because he can dry things up if that's what's needed, but if the pitch gives him any assistance at all he'll devastate the opposition. If the pitch was an absolute seamer's dream with zero chance of change, I'd include Hadlee.

S. Gavaskar
G. Greenidge
V. Richards
G.Chappell
J. Miandad
A. Border
I. Khan
A. Knott +
M. Marshall
D. Underwood
D. Lillee


Donald or Wasim/Waqar could come in for either Warne/Murali.


G. Smith
J. Langer
R. Ponting
S. Tendulkar
B. Lara
J. Kallis
A. Gilchrist +
S. Warne
C. Ambrose
M. Muralitharan
G. McGrath

There's no way I'd play Ambrose, McGrath and Murali all together. Murali is superfluous but if you must pay him drop Ambrose for Wasim.

 

[Slifer]

I'm fine if people don't like Qadir but you do need a spinner. If Underwood was better then pick him.

Teams that don't have a spinner find things very difficult if they can't make a breakthrough with their quicks. A spinner gives a captain the ability to change the tempo of the game and possibly break a batsman's concentration.

Didnt stop the WI of the 80s from dominating their era. But certainly, if WI had a spinner of the Warne/Murali or even Saqlain class they'd have picked him. But they didn't ,so as Lloyd intimated, if your 4 best bowlers are pacers, you go with them. You don't pick a spinner for the sake of variety (whatever that means) and certainly not a mediocre spinner like Qadir.