Rest of World XI

[silentstriker]

The lack of Vaughan in anyone's team except mine is a bit of a surprise IMO.

* He's a successful test opener - the position most people are struggling to fill in their lineups.
* His captaincy is superb and he managed to successfully lead a team to a series victory against Australia.
* SS said the game was to be played in Australia - Vaughan's record in Australia is absolutely brilliant. He clearly likes the true and exaggerated bounce.

His injury concerns would be the only reason I could see people leaving him out - but yet some people have selected Trescothick...

Only reason I'd leave him out is the lack of playing time since the last Ashes. How many tests has he played? I left out Tresco for the same reason (and the fact that his career is possibly over, internationally at least).

 

[haroon510]

i agree with Goughy. the world of cricket lacks a quality pair of openers. i am not surprise to see people even picking kallies to open along with dravid. starting with pakistan all teams have opening problem now days. only i see Sir Lanka whose openers are kind of stable with jayasuriya still there along with uppal thronga. therefore it is hard to pick a opening pair from the teams.

my team would be
test match

1 Voughan *
2 tendulakar
3 Kallies
4 Lara
5 yousuf
6 Peiterson
7sangakara +
8 Pollock
9 Flintof
10 Murli
11 Asif

12 Nitini
13 akhter
very strong batting line up here. the numbers could change as Sangakara can open with voughan or Flintof can bat on 8 in place of pollock.

One day

1 Smith*
2 Chris Gayle
3 Trescothick
4 Inzi
5 Lara
6 Yousuf
7 Sangakara+
8 Pollock
9 Afridi
10 Shoaib
11 Nitini

12 Asif
13 Bond

 

[Matt79]

Test:
Gayle
Vaughan (c)
Dravid
Pietersen
Yousuf
Kallis
Flintoff
Boucher
Ntini
Bond (making the large assumption he's fit - otherwise Hoggard)
Murali

Vaughan isn't a good enough opener to deserve a berth, but having him in the team for his captaincy is necessary given the captaincy abilities the rest of the team (doesn't) possess. Better alternatives aren't thick on the ground either, lots of people are mentioning Smith which is mystifying to me. Lara is unlucky to miss out, but he's past his best, and at the moment you couldn't justify leaving one of Pietersen, Yousuf or Kallis out. Sanga doesn't keep anymore, so I went for Boucher, who's a quality competitor and certainly handy at 8. They'd lose against Australia in Australia but it would be close - elsewhere they'd probably beat Australia (with Warne and McGrath) 6 times in ten, and without the McWarne combo, 8 times in ten.

ODIs:
Gayle
Chanderpaul
Fleming(c)
Pietersen
Collingwood
Sanggakara+
Oram
Flintoff
Pollock
Vettori
Bond

 

[Prince EWS]

Oram in ODIs is a very, very strange call. Especially batting above Flintoff!

 

[Matt79]

if you want a team to beat the Aussies you have to load it with match winners - simply solid players won't do the job. Oram has shown he has the goods when he comes off. I put him up because I think he's better coming in around over 35 than 45 - if he can get an over or two to get his sites, he'll end up with a strike rate well over 100 and can play a match winning hand. He's had to throw away his wicket in the last few game - he's a better batsman than Flintoff at the moment.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Gayle
Chanderpaul
Fleming(c)
Pietersen
Collingwood
Sanggakara+
Oram
Flintoff
Pollock
Vettori
Bond

Seems to be very much picked on form.

I'd have to argue with Collingwood, Oram and Fleming to be honest. It has that feel of a team of someone who suddenly rates a player after they do well when they've been watching recently.

 

[oz_fan]

Test
1. Gayle
2. Dravid*
3. Pietersen
4. Lara
5. Yousuf
6. Kallis
7. Sangakarra+
8. Flintoff
9. Pollock
10. Muralitharin
11. Ntini

ODI's
1. Gayle
2. Chanderpaul
3. Pietersen
4. Lara*
5. Kallis
6. Sangakarra+
7. Flintoff
8. Pollock
9. Vaas
10. Muralitharin
11. Ntini

 

[chaminda_00]

M Vaughan (c)
K Sangakara (wk)
R Dravid
J Kallis
B Lara
K Pietersen
M Yousuf
A Flintoff
M Muralitharan
M Ntini
M Asif

Dravid to open if Sangakara has kept for too long. Vaughan plays as specialist captain.

 

[adharcric]

Agreed that opening is a specialist position, but there is not a single world class opener outside Australia in world cricket today. With that much crap opening the batting, I'd very much consider Kallis or Dravid as an opener. The question is can Kallis do a better job opening than Strauss or Trescothic? I think he can. And secondly, is there another middle order guy who can step up and do a decent job in the middle order? The answer is yes.

Finally, someone speaking sense regarding Kallis as an opener.

 

[Prince EWS]

Finally, someone speaking sense regarding Kallis as an opener.

I think Dravid would be a better option opening. I'm not sure if Kallis has ever actually done it.. Dravid has and with relative success, too.

 

[C_C]

Tests:

Sehwag ( better than Smith - people forget that Sehwag's run in tests have been just fine and he's had just a couple of bad series- Simth's been flopping in tests for a long time now)
Trescothik
Dravid (c)
Lara
Pietersen
Kallis
Sangakkara (wkt)
Flintoff
Vaas/Kumble(if pitch favours spinners)
Ntini
Muralitharan


With McWarne gone, OZ doesnt have the firepower to dismiss this team twice consistently and i'd put money on this team beating OZ in OZ 3-2 if given time to gel.

In ODIs:

Tendulkar
Gayle
Sangakkara+
Youhana
Pietersen
Dravid (c)
Flintoff
Pollock
Vaas
Ntini
Muralitharan

 

[adharcric]

I think Dravid would be a better option opening. I'm not sure if Kallis has ever actually done it.. Dravid has and with relative success, too.

That works too. I only opted for Kallis because Dravid is the best #3 batsman in the game today, outside of Ponting.

 

[Goughy]

That works too. I only opted for Kallis because Dravid is the best #3 batsman in the game today, outside of Ponting.

The problem with that though is that Kallis is a #4. He doesnt like even batting at 3 and therefore moving him to open, which is a position completely alien and awkward to him, makes no sense. Especially as he would probably make the middle order on merit.

This type of thinking is why the World XI is and will continue to be a failure. There seems to be an attitude of trying to squeeze as many big names in as possible rather than building a functioning team.

The more I think about it the more I think Sangakkara opening in tests is a viable option, as I think someone earler mentioned. If you dont want guys like Cook, Trescothick, Strauss etc then he could do it. Opeing and keeping is tough but he would have to make a plan to deal with it.

 

[silentstriker]

The problem with that though is that Kallis is a #4. He doesnt like even batting at 3 and therefore moving him to open, which is a position completely alien and awkward to him, makes no sense. Especially as he would probably make the middle order on merit.

Then put Dravid there. The fact is that there are no openers in the World that really deserve to be there on merit. The ones that are picked are there only because there is no one of real quality opening the batting in world cricket. There are a lot more middle order bats to choose from.

Can Dravid or Kallis bat at #1 as well as they could in the middle order? Maybe not, but they can do a better job than the guys who are there. But there are guys in the middle order who might be able to do the same job as Dravid or Kallis, especially if the openers give them a good start.

You do what your team needs you to, TBH. If you like batting at six, but you're needed to open...too bad. You shut up and you open.

 

[Goughy]

Then put Dravid there. The fact is that there are no openers in the World that really deserve to be there on merit.

Depends how you look at it and attribute merit. If you want all the stars and big names regardless of position then no.

However, I would view merit as if they are the best openers in the world then they open. As simple as.

If they are the best openers then they are there on merit.

 

[silentstriker]

Depends how you look at it and attribute merit. If you want all the stars and big names regardless of position then no.

However, I would view merit as if they are the best openers in the world then they open. As simple as.

If they are the best openers then they are there on merit.

I wouldn't say that since they are still not great, and there are other non-openers who would likely do a better job. When Murali and Kumble go, there really won't be any world class spinners left. At that point, you'd probably pick a team with four pacers or you'd have to include a sub-par spinner. So you pick a pace bowler who can do the spinners job, and hopefully do it better. That's what you're faced with. You either select sub par openers or select a side with more middle order bats who'd be able to do a opener's job better.

I'd create the team with four pacers, because that's what you're dealt with. I realize that its a specialist position, but I don't buy that its so alien that guys with good techniques like Dravid or Kallis can't adjust. And as long as they can adjust, your problem is solved.

 

[Goughy]

I wouldn't say that since they are still not great, and there are other non-openers who would likely do a better job. When Murali and Kumble go, there really won't be any world class spinners left. At that point, you'd probably pick a team with four pacers or you'd have to include a sub-par spinner. So you pick a pace bowler who can do the spinners job, and hopefully do it better. That's what you're faced with. You either select sub par openers or select a side with more middle order bats who'd be able to do a opener's job better.

I'd create the team with four pacers, because that's what you're dealt with. I realize that its a specialist position, but I don't buy that its so alien that guys with good techniques like Dravid or Kallis can't adjust. And as long as they can adjust, your problem is solved.

Obviously I disagee with all that. As Ive said before, the problem with this World XIs is that specialists that fulfill important team functions are left out in order to include more "world class" players. Also the tern "sub-standard" is insulting to many of the openers named. All are very good players.

Putting a middle order batsman to open is a bad idea, as its a difficult position to adapt to, and a terrible use of their abilities.

Also the spin bowler analogy doesnt work as you dont need spinners. Going in with 4 fast bowlers isnt an issue. Its not like you are going to ask Ntini to bowl leg spin.

The role of spin is context specific, opening the batting is non-negotiable. It has to be done.

Anyway, we are obviously going around in circles and disagree. Happy if you respond but Ill leave it after this post.

 

[silentstriker]

Sub-standard in a ROW side, that doesn't mean they aren't decent players in a normal side. Meaning they are quite substandard compared to the middle order that follows them (Dravid, Kallis, Lara, etc).

Which means they'd be the weak link that batting lineup.

 

[marc71178]

Tests:

Sehwag ( better than Smith - people forget that Sehwag's run in tests have been just fine and he's had just a couple of bad series- Simth's been flopping in tests for a long time now)
Trescothik
Dravid (c)
Lara
Pietersen
Kallis
Sangakkara (wkt)
Flintoff
Vaas/Kumble(if pitch favours spinners)
Ntini
Muralitharan


With McWarne gone, OZ doesnt have the firepower to dismiss this team twice consistently and i'd put money on this team beating OZ in OZ 3-2 if given time to gel.

Have to say it's only the Vaas/Kumble option that would make me worry.

Leaves the team a bit short of opening bowlers to partner Ntini IMO

 

[adharcric]

Putting a middle order batsman to open is a bad idea, as its a difficult position to adapt to, and a terrible use of their abilities.

Not necessarily. Some middle-order batsmen (Dravid, Kallis) have the technique to succeed as openers. Temperament is required but that wouldn't be an issue with such batsmen.