Who will win this battle of champs?

[bagapath]

Can one of the Computer wizs in this forum simulate a test match between the following teams and predict who would win?

Of course, once it is done we can get into modifying the teams. For the first game please try and use these teams as they are.

Best of WIndies from 75 to 85

greenidge
haynes
richards
lloyd (c)
richardson
gomes
dujon (wk)
marshall
holding
garner
roberts

Best of Aussies from 95 - 05

hayden
langer
ponting
m.waugh
martyn
s.waugh (c)
gilchrist (wk)
warne
lee
gillespie
mcgrath

PS: Did these teams ever take the field in reality? May be the aussies. But I dont think richardson, gomes and roberts played in a test together leave alone all the eleven mentioned above.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

You don't need to be a computer wiz, just download the simulator and feed in the info. As long as you don't get bored easily anyone can do it.

 

[welshplato]

You were right about Gomes, Richardson and Roberts not playing together - but only just! Roberts played in Gomes' debut v England (Nottingham/June 76) and played with him many times after including his last game in the 6th test v India at Madras in Dec. 1983. That India series was when Richardson made his debut - so all three were on tour together - however, while Gomes played in all 6 tests, Richardson only played in 1, at Bombay - a match that Roberts didn't play.
Personally, without computers, I'd go with the W.Indies. They are obviously very close, but the Windies don't have as comparitively weak a bowler as Gillespie, or as comparitively weak a batsman as Martyn.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

If it's best of team from those years I would put in Kallicharran instead of Gomes.

 

[silentstriker]

That pace lineup for the WI is downright nasty. Everyone one of those bowlers is worthy of all time great status, while Lee and Gillespie are nowhere near there. And since pace bowlers win Test matches, it has to be the WI.

I mean Holding, Garner, Robers, Marshall? You need to have a Bradmanesque advantage in batting to consistently score more runs against those guys.

 

[silentstriker]

Basically, there is NO ONE to release the pressure, while Gillespie and Lee (comparatively) would release the pressure. Australia are better in batting, but nowhere near to make up the disadvantage in pure pace bowling. That lineup is seriously scary.

 

[Ikki]

Australia.

Openers are about equal; middle-order is slightly Australia; wicket-keeping is definitely Australia; and the bowling is pretty equal, but I'd bet on Warne and McGrath to do it by themselves and Gillespie is not a shabby 3rd bowler at all, Lee can be helpful too.

Of course, I am biased .

 

[pasag]

If you look it at it from the other perspective, the weaker Australian bowling line up only needs to face a weaker WI batting line up though, so it evens out.

 

[Ikki]

That pace lineup for the WI is downright nasty. Everyone one of those bowlers is worthy of all time great status, while Lee and Gillespie are nowhere near there. And since pace bowlers win Test matches, it has to be the WI.

I mean Holding, Garner, Robers, Marshall? You need to have a Bradmanesque advantage in batting to consistently score more runs against those guys.

It's truly a great line-up, but some of the batsmen of Australia are very good, if not great players of pace. Whilst I'd be hesitant to say the Windies are as adept at playing spin.

There is only 10 wickets to take an innings and I think McGrath and Warne are more than enough to trouble and Gillespie is very good to pick off an odd wicket. In the line-ups, I'd say only Warne, McGrath and Marshall can truly vouch for being the #1 test bowler of all time and two of them play for 1 side.

Basically, there is NO ONE to release the pressure, while Gillespie and Lee (comparatively) would release the pressure. Australia are better in batting, but nowhere near to make up the disadvantage in pure pace bowling. That lineup is seriously scary.

What pressure? Gillespie, Warne and McGrath all keep a lot of pressure on bowlers. Pressure is bowling very well, which all 3 do and keeping the run rate down which all 3 do very well. Only guy who is out of place is Lee. Lee might be a bit expensive, but he has a great SR. Also, if there is something that Thomson proved is that the Windies couldn't handle his devastating speed. Lee would be the modern-day Thomson in that regard.

Pace-wise, I'd agree the Windies are better, overall I'd say it's pretty evenly matched, although I'd have to side with Australia - I rate Warne the greatest test bowler of all time and McGrath 3rd, so I'm compelled .

 

[silentstriker]

It's truly a great line-up, but some of the batsmen of Australia are very good, if not great players of pace. Whilst I'd be hesitant to say the Windies are as adept at playing spin.

There is only 10 wickets to take an innings and I think McGrath and Warne are more than enough to trouble and Gillespie is very good to pick off an odd wicket. In the line-ups, I'd say only Warne, McGrath and Marshall can truly vouch for being the #1 test bowler of all time and two of them play for 1 side.



What pressure? Gillespie, Warne and McGrath all keep a lot of pressure on bowlers. Pressure is bowling very well, which all 3 do and keeping the run rate down which all 3 do very well. Only guy who is out of place is Lee.

The worst bowler in the WI lineup is the second best pace bowler in the Aussie lineup. The batting is weaker, but not weak enough to make up that difference.

 

[Ikki]

The worst bowler in the WI lineup is the second best pace bowler in the Aussie lineup. The batting is weaker, but not weak enough to make up that difference.

Worst bowler in the WI lineup being who? And they're equal to McGrath?

 

[silentstriker]

It's truly a great line-up, but some of the batsmen of Australia are very good, if not great players of pace. Whilst I'd be hesitant to say the Windies are as adept at playing spin.

There is only 10 wickets to take an innings and I think McGrath and Warne are more than enough to trouble and Gillespie is very good to pick off an odd wicket. In the line-ups, I'd say only Warne, McGrath and Marshall can truly vouch for being the #1 test bowler of all time and two of them play for 1 side.



What pressure? Gillespie, Warne and McGrath all keep a lot of pressure on bowlers. Pressure is bowling very well, which all 3 do and keeping the run rate down which all 3 do very well. Only guy who is out of place is Lee. Lee might be a bit expensive, but he has a great SR. Also, if there is something that Thomson proved is that the Windies couldn't handle his devastating speed. Lee would be the modern-day Thomson in that regard.

Pace-wise, I'd agree the Windies are better, overall I'd say it's pretty evenly matched, although I'd have to side with Australia - I rate Warne the greatest test bowler of all time and McGrath 3rd, so I'm compelled .

I'd say that the WI ability to play quality spin is superior than someone like Hayden's ability to play quality pace.

 

[silentstriker]

Worst bowler in the WI lineup being who? And they're equal to McGrath?

McGrath is the second best pace bowler in the Aussie lineup? Who is first?

 

[Ikki]

McGrath is the second best pace bowler in the Aussie lineup? Who is first?

Sorry, pace, it's late . Gillespie isn't really that inferior to any person on that list except for Marshall IMO. Slightly here and there, but largely no. Quite easily comparable.

The average wicket-taking ability of McGrath, Warne and Gillespie alone is enough to take all the Windies wickets. It's not much of a gap at all.

Same thing with the batting too. Australia might be a bit better, but it's not much a gap at all and it would depend on the day who was performing better for this comparison to matter.

But I guess, looking at those names, looking for an all-round quality and that which befits a champion side, I think the Aussie one looks a bit better.

 

[silentstriker]

Sorry, pace, it's late . Gillespie isn't really that inferior to any person on that list except for Marshall IMO. Slightly here and there, but largely no. Quite easily comparable.

You don't think Gillespie is inferior to Holding, Garner and Roberts? Are you kidding?

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Sorry, pace, it's late . Gillespie isn't really that inferior to any person on that list except for Marshall.

 

[Ikki]

You don't think Gillespie is inferior to Holding, Garner and Roberts? Are you kidding?

I think each one has a case of being better, varying as to much how much, but the difference being small. For example, one side might have Imran Khan and the other Allan Donald. Really, the difference is small and in my mind when I simulate the match, the form is more important than the skill because the difference between them is small.

 

[silentstriker]

Yea. I mean Gillespie was a good bowler, but Holding, Garner and Roberts? I mean....really they weren't in the same class.

 

[silentstriker]

I think each one has a case of being better, varying as to much how much, but the difference being small. For example, one side might have Imran Khan and the other Allan Donald. Really, the difference is small and in my mind when I simulate the match, the form is more important than the skill because the difference between them is small.

Umm, Allan Donald and Imran Khan are comparable in stats and stature. Gillespie and Garner/Holding/Roberts are not, and are nowhere near. Come on.....

 

[Ikki]

Umm, Allan Donald and Imran Khan are comparable in stats and stature. Gillespie and Garner/Holding/Roberts are not, and are nowhere near. Come on.....

Stats yes, stature no.

The same with the latter comparison. Stats-wise, Gillespie is comparable, stature-wise no.

I know what you are saying, but you're trying to make the difference, which is small, essentially mean and decide the match? IMO, it just won't do it. Gillespie himself is the 3rd best bowler in the Aussie line-up. If we were talking about Warne or McGrath, then yeah, I'd agree.

The way I see it the trio of Warne, McGrath and Gillespie is at least equal to than any of the 3 Windies aforementioned.