Who won these battles?

[capt_Luffy]

I don't know what it will take to convince you if the higher talent pool and the player testimony themselves of the intensity and greater professionalism of it don't sway you at all. Conversely you will consider the tests matches with sub par teams of the time more representative.

The player testimony??? Comeon man. They made their best bucks from WSC. No way in hell they were going to bad mouth it without any major issues.

 

[subshakerz]

The player testimony??? Comeon man. They made their best bucks from WSC. No way in hell they were going to bad mouth it without any major issues.

Dude that was part of it. Compared to intl cricket at the time paying peanuts this was considered more professional with better compensation as a result. The testimony of them all was that it was high standard cricket.

 

[sayon basak]

In RoW tour of ENG:-
10 innings; 338 runs @37.55

In WSC:-
8 innings; 554 runs @79.14

In Tests:-
7 innings; 508 runs @72.57

In Rebel tours:-
10 innings; 252 runs @28

Overall:- 1652 runs @51.62

Graeme Pollock in comparison:-

in Tests:-
23 matches; 2256 runs @60.97

In Rebel tours:-
16 matches; 1376 runs @65.52

In RoW tour of England:-
8 matches; 308 runs @22

In RoW tour of Australia:-
3 matches; 209 runs @41.8

 

[capt_Luffy]

Dude that was part of it. Compared to intl cricket at the time paying peanuts this was considered more professional with better compensation as a result. The testimony of them all was that it was high standard cricket.

That's what I am talking really. You don't talk **** about your best Employer and biggest paying Event, unless something went way off. There's a reason Great actors hype up mid films

 

[sayon basak]

That's what I am talking really. You don't talk **** about your best Employer and biggest paying Event, unless something went way off. There's a reason Great actors hype up mid films

Reminds me of Shakib Khan's password tbh.

 

[subshakerz]

That's what I am talking really. You don't talk **** about your best Employer and biggest paying Event, unless something went way off. There's a reason Great actors hype up mid films

Lol they were praising it well past the series.

Lloyd: 'But the biggest thing about World Series Cricket was that it taught us to be winners. Winning was so important for us. Not only did it help get rid of insularity within the Caribbean, it meant we got paid better.'

 

[capt_Luffy]

Lol they were praising it well past the series.

Lloyd: 'But the biggest thing about World Series Cricket was that it taught us to be winners. Winning was so important for us. Not only did it help get rid of insularity within the Caribbean, it meant we got paid better.'

As I said, no one bad mouths the biggest employment of their's for no reason whatsoever.

 

[Coronis]

As I said, no one bad mouths the biggest employment of their's for no reason whatsoever.

A post clearly written by someone with little to no experience in the workforce.

no offence bro

 

[kyear2]

The Rebel tours were literally full blown Test Series. Much closer to a Test series than WSC lol. But as Barry fluked them, sure carry on.....

You are pretty pathetic mate. The Early 70s was literally Gavaskar's Early Career and Barry's Prime. Sure those two stages are exactly equivalent to each other. And surely, everyone rates Barry higher except who didn't like Imran and Wasim. Btw, by every fast bowlers I believe you literally means Lillee and Snow...... But carry on ig.

What the hell are you on about? You're getting increasingly desperate to prove something that solely exists in your head.

You have never heard anyone rate the rebel tours anywhere near the same prestige of WSC or the ROW tours, you're simply just making this up.

Not to bring up that Barry was mostly retired at that point and pushing 40.

I'm referring to Dennis Lillee, John Snow, Mike Procter and Bob Willis who all played against and bowled to both of them.

Lillee didn't think he was elite, Holding a fair weather batsman, which was very much the take on him especially during the 70's.

Thing is my rating of Sunny isn't far off the consensus here and I have him either 10th or 11th all time.
He makes my 2nd all time world XI, the same one he makes for you and the community at large.

I don't hate him as a player, as a person, yeah, a racist horrible human.

What pisses you off for some reason is that I have Barry ahead of him as a batsman, yes. Barry was the best batsman on the world for the first 5 years of Sunny's career and rated ahead of him by everyone of that era. He was better vs fast bowling in quicker and swinging conditions and was more capable of escalating the tempo of an innings.

Barry makes my first team and without question ahead of him and everyone else bar Hutton because as I stated above, he was more highly rated against elite pace in challenging conditions, could provide impetus as an opener like no one else and was a top tier slip.
You are free to disagree but that's more than sound and viable logic and for someone who selects his entire bowling attack based on batting, you're in no position to criticize anyone I select.

 

[kyear2]

The player testimony??? Comeon man. They made their best bucks from WSC. No way in hell they were going to bad mouth it without any major issues.

Decades after?

Really?

You're reaching now.

 

[kyear2]

I believe this has been explained to you maybe… once before.

Most people here when picking all time test teams don’t consider non-test matches as any significant part of their choice.

Putting any quality argument aside… if its an ATG test side I’m (and most others) not considering FC/WSC/etc. performances.

Maybe this will make it easier - when talking about great NBA players I don’t bring up their olympic performances either.

FC performances / tour matches have always factored into how players were rated. It's actually quite a huge reason why even tour buddy Luffy has Grace in his all time team.

That aside, again I ask you.

Which was a higher quality of cricket, WSC or the "tests" that were played during that time. It's a simple question.

The ROW series in 1970 were also official tests when they were played.

His quality vs the best pacers of his day wasn't only stellar, but the pacers rated him exceedingly highly. The good gentleman was the best batsman in the world for 6 years.

We do not need to agree on this.

 

[subshakerz]

FC performances / tour matches have always factored into how players were rated. It's actually quite a huge reason why even tour buddy Luffy has Grace in his all time team.

That aside, again I ask you.

Which was a higher quality of cricket, WSC or the "tests" that were played during that time. It's a simple question.

The ROW series in 1970 were also official tests when they were played.

His quality vs the best pacers of his day wasn't only stellar, but the pacers rated him exceedingly highly. The good gentleman was the best batsman in the world for 6 years.

We do not need to agree on this.

Please don't mix defending WSC with defending Barry.

 

[Coronis]

FC performances / tour matches have always factored into how players were rated. It's actually quite a huge reason why even tour buddy Luffy has Grace in his all time team.

That aside, again I ask

Which was a higher quality of cricket, WSC or the "tests" that were played during that time. It's a simple question.

The ROW series in 1970 were also official tests when they were played.

His quality vs the best pacers of his day wasn't only stellar, but the pacers rated him exceedingly highly. The good gentleman was the best batsman in the world for 6 years.

We do not need to agree on this.

I don’t really care when rating test players.

Yes, its a factor in rating a cricketer like W.G.

Except as you may see often on this site, people will mention him as an ATG player outside of tests and very rarely would you see him in an ATG England test XI.

You just can’t seem to accept the word test for some reason. Specifically for this player.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Decades after?

Really?

You're reaching now.

I can't fathom how you guys don't see how much it's grabbing straws on taking players words which largely boils down to "we were paid well" and using arguments like they only wanted to win when clearly there was a high bias towards a certain type of cricket, "the showy" but less effective one.

What the hell are you on about? You're getting increasingly desperate to prove something that solely exists in your head.

You have never heard anyone rate the rebel tours anywhere near the same prestige of WSC or the ROW tours, you're simply just making this up.

Not to bring up that Barry was mostly retired at that point and pushing 40.

I'm referring to Dennis Lillee, John Snow, Mike Procter and Bob Willis who all played against and bowled to both of them.

Lillee didn't think he was elite, Holding a fair weather batsman, which was very much the take on him especially during the 70's.

Thing is my rating of Sunny isn't far off the consensus here and I have him either 10th or 11th all time.
He makes my 2nd all time world XI, the same one he makes for you and the community at large.

I don't hate him as a player, as a person, yeah, a racist horrible human.

What pisses you off for some reason is that I have Barry ahead of him as a batsman, yes. Barry was the best batsman on the world for the first 5 years of Sunny's career and rated ahead of him by everyone of that era. He was better vs fast bowling in quicker and swinging conditions and was more capable of escalating the tempo of an innings.

Barry makes my first team and without question ahead of him and everyone else bar Hutton because as I stated above, he was more highly rated against elite pace in challenging conditions, could provide impetus as an opener like no one else and was a top tier slip.
You are free to disagree but that's more than sound and viable logic and for someone who selects his entire bowling attack based on batting, you're in no position to criticize anyone I select.

OK


No way I am reading all that LoL

 

[peterhrt]

For Packer it was always about TV rights. His strategy was to weaken his main opponents, the ACB, as part of the negotiating process. Take away the best players (but not those from India, Australia's official opponents in 1977-78) and hope the crowds disappear. Whether or not they de-camped to his matches was of secondary importance. The game ran on gate receipts back then. As Gideon Haigh said: "WSC had looked suspiciously like a thrown-together entertainment package."

The players' union in England was strongly anti-Packer and moved to get his players banned. They didn't think he had their interests at heart. They also argued that county cricket was a more genuine measure of skill, with a lot more than money and TV rights at stake. Hookes having his jaw broken by a Roberts bouncer suggested that Packer matches were not just for exhibition purposes, but when Lillee argued that his WSC wickets should count towards his Test total, nobody took him seriously. That discussion only happened many years later.

 

[subshakerz]

I can't fathom how you guys don't see how much it's grabbing straws on taking players words which largely boils down to "we were paid well" and using arguments like they only wanted to win when clearly there was a high bias towards a certain type of cricket, "the showy" but less effective one.

OK


No way I am reading all that LoL

No you have already decided that it doesn't matter which quality of players are involved and what they say, because they are paid higher it means it must have been carnival cricket.

Yet at the same time you will allow the 1970 ROW series where they aren't even representing their own side in basically exhibition games to be counted.

 

[smash84]

No you have already decided that it doesn't matter which quality of players are involved and what they say, because they are paid higher it means it must have been carnival cricket.

Yet at the same time you will allow the 1970 ROW series where they aren't even representing their own side in basically exhibition games to be counted.

Will you have players' IPL records factor into their international T20 records? I wouldn't.

 

[smash84]

I don’t really care when rating test players.

Yes, its a factor in rating a cricketer like W.G.

Except as you may see often on this site, people will mention him as an ATG player outside of tests and very rarely would you see him in an ATG England test XI.

You just can’t seem to accept the word test for some reason. Specifically for this player.

It's a simple concept I am not sure why it is so difficult to understand.

And Barry was playing for Rest of the World XI. There is no national pride, no concentrated fan base, and no real legacy (in terms of official recognition of statistics) to play for either. So I am not sure why exactly they should be considered as a relevant criterion when judging them against test players.

 

[subshakerz]

By the way, all this hand wringing about the quality of WSC is irrelevant since Cricket Australia has already officially recognized those statistics in their own separate category back in 2015.

https://www.cricket.com.au/news/3267780

"World Series Cricket was clearly some of the most competitive, high-performing international cricket ever played," said Cricket Australia CEO James Sutherland.

Ian Chappell: "And in the case of World Series Cricket it was the toughest cricket that I’ve ever played."

Viv Richards: "Those Super Tests – 'Chappelli' (Ian Chappell) wouldn't give you an inch, didn't ask for one either I might add, and that was one of his traits. He played it hard, had a beer with you afterwards and he didn't ask for anything and didn't want you to give him anything.

"He played hard cricket, so did Clive Lloyd. So it was very tough cricket."

Yet Luffy would have us believe decades later they are only saying this because they got paid. Lol.

 

[subshakerz]

Will you have players' IPL records factor into their international T20 records? I wouldn't.

No I'm not arguing that. Just that the level of cricket was high enough for us to consider those performances when we do player assessments.