Who would you pick in a combined England-Pakistan XI?

[Scaly piscine]

Harmy and Freddy were both in the World XI. Akhtar wasn't even in the test team anyway.

*shrugs*

Not that anyone could find Akhtar anyway. Him and Inzi may as well not have bothered turning up.

 

[marc71178]

Afridi, Flintoff and Pietersen all together in one test team batting one after the other. That'd be entertaining, whether they all launched plenty of sixes or the bowler got a hatrick.

All caught Square Leg?

 

[marc71178]

That would be one hum-dinger of a side.Better than the world 11 imo

I'd disagree because of the likes of Dravid, Kallis, Lara, Murali...

 

[Fusion]

Not that anyone could find Akhtar anyway. Him and Inzi may as well not have bothered turning up.

But they sure did turn up in a series that actually mattered didn't they? Are you seriously belittling them (especially Inzi!) based on their performance in Super Series??

 

[nightprowler10]

1. Trescothick
2. Butt
3. Bell
4. Yousuf
5. Ul Haq
6. Flintoff
7. Akmal
8. Kaneria
9. Harmison
10. Hoggard
11. Ahktar

I'd have Hoggard and Akhtar batting much higher.

Here's mine:

Trescothick
Butt
Younis
Yousuf
*Inzamam
+Akmal
Afridi
Flintoff
Akhtar
Harmison
Kaneria

I originally had Bell at #4 but then had the problem of having just one spinner. So in comes Afridi mostly on bowling basis. I don't know if this team would win or not, but I wouldn't wanna bat against this attack.

 

[social]

How people can justify the inclusion of either Strauss or Vaughan in a combined side I dont know.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Just say it, "because he's English". I really can't see any other reason you'd want him in there.

Geraint might be many things, but English isn't one of them!

If I were picking a test XI to play, say, Australia in Pakistan tomorrow I'd go

Trescothick
Salman Butt
Younis Khan
Yousuf
Inzi*
Afridi
Flintoff
Akmal+
Shoaib
Harmison
Kaneria

Bell is maybe slightly unfortunate to miss out, I did consider playing him ahead of Younis. Naved is perhaps a shade unlucky too, but Harmy bowled some pretty decent stuff in the 3rd for absolutely no reward.

 

[Scaly piscine]

But they sure did turn up in a series that actually mattered didn't they? Are you seriously belittling them (especially Inzi!) based on their performance in Super Series??

The context was how a side with Inzi and Shoaib "would be better than world XI" - Inzi and Shoaib were awful in the last 'world XI' they played in, thus dismissing those two in the said "would be better than world XI" argument stated in the first post in this thread.

 

[Fusion]

The context was how a side with Inzi and Shoaib "would be better than world XI" - Inzi and Shoaib were awful in the last 'world XI' they played in, thus dismissing those two in the said "would be better than world XI" argument stated in the first post in this thread.

The rest of the World XI was just as pitiful as Inzi and Shoaib if I recall. I think most would agree that the result was NOT a true indicator of the players' true talent. The Super Series was a flawed concept. There were many reasons for the failure of the World XI (including Inzi/Shoaib). Lack of match practice, unfamiliarity with each other, wrong combination picked being just SOME of the reasons. I would contest that a Pak/Eng World XI that some have proposed here, if given ample time to practice together, would put a far better show than the Super Series World XI did. I'm not going to the extent that it would beat any other World XI side, but the Pak/Eng combination WOULD perform better. I think you are unjustifiably slighting Inzi by citing his performance from Super Series. He's a lot better player than his performance in that series indicated, as England would attest!

 

[Prince EWS]

1. Marcus Trescothick
2. Andrew Strauss
3. Younis Khan
4. Yousuf Youhana
5. Inzamam Ul Haq
6. Andrew Flintoff
7. Kamran Akmal
8. Shoaib Akhtar
9. Simon Jones
10. Steve Harmison / Matthew Hoggard
11. Danish Kaneria

 

[magsi23]

The context was how a side with Inzi and Shoaib "would be better than world XI" - Inzi and Shoaib were awful in the last 'world XI' they played in, thus dismissing those two in the said "would be better than world XI" argument stated in the first post in this thread.

im yet to see a comment from you that was not negative

 

[Matteh]

To defend my choices (that have been criticised about 2 pages ago):

Geriant - Yeah he may be quite average sometimes with the gloves - but he's got a load of stick for no reason( not like there's someone amazing to replace him with anyway) and well basically i like him,

Hoggard > Harmison - I've not seen Harmison really be anywhere near his best since the 1st Ashes test....A fit Simon Jones however would be above both these two...

Strauss > Butt - I just think he's a better player regardless

 

[SJS]

My team would be

Solanki
Hameed
F.Iqbal
Ed Smith
U.Afzal
A.Mcgrath
R.Clarke
J.Foster
A.Mahmood
S.Udal
M.Sami

I think that would have been a GREAT side if it also had Ronnie Irani

 

[nookie_lk]

r u playin afridi as bowler or batter nookie?

as both mate...

 

[pakster]

I'd disagree because of the likes of Dravid, Kallis, Lara, Murali...

Those washed up excuses for cricket players? Give me a break.

 

[iamdavid]

Im assuming everybody is fit and this is to play against Australia in Pakistan....

1.M.Vaughan
2.S.Butt
3.Y.Khan
4.Y.Youhana
5.Inzamam Ul-Haq*
6.K.Pieterson
7.A.Flintoff
8.K.Akmal+
9.S.Jones
10.S.Akhtar
11.D.Kaneria

Im sure someone will have a whinge about me sticking Vaughan in there at all...but Im of the belief that his dip in form over the last couple of years has alot to do with him not opening the innings any more, he thrived at being able to dicate terms from ball one and play with a clear head, he seemed a much more positive batsman when he opened whereas since taking up the responsibilities of captaincy and batting at three he has seemed far more tentative and his results have gone downhill....

Butt is positive and didnt seem troubled by Australia last season, I go for Younis over Strauss or Bell because I like his temperament..Inzy and Youhana pick themselves...and I wanna stick Pieterson despite how ordinary a couple of his dismisals lately have looked because he'll "get up 'em" and having being placed so low in such a formidable batting lineup would give him the latitude to attack...not that he wouldnt anyway....

With the ball Flintoff is the reliable workhorse while Jones and Shoaib would both be used for short sharp attacking burts and Kaneria is capable of sustaining pressure over long spells....

 

[andyc]

Those washed up excuses for cricket players? Give me a break.

Spot the troll

 

[Nate]

Trescothick
Butt
Younis Khan
Pietersen
Ul-Haq (c)
Afridi
Flintoff
Akmal (wk)
Akhtar
Harmison
Kaneria

Just to analyse...
Solid opening pair, Tresco is a gun, and I do believe that Salman is highly under-rated. Younis seems comfortable at number three, and then Kevin Psycho Pietersen to score a hundred at four. Inzy is in a class of his own, and would be a great captain. I believe Afridi to be a great test batsman, and Flintoff would benefit down the order a bit. Akmal picks himself, Jones isn`t quite there for mine. Akhtar to share the new cherry with Harmison, who I picked over Simon because of his consistency, and ability to bowl longer spells. Kaneria is a great leggie.

 

[Xuhaib]

If Inzi is captaining this side i wonder how the team talks will go and it would be funny watching him trying to motivate players like Flintoff and Petersen with his Multani English.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Hoggard > Harmison - I've not seen Harmison really be anywhere near his best since the 1st Ashes test....A fit Simon Jones however would be above both these two...

Harmison >>>>> Hoggard against Pakistan, especially as Hoggard repeatedly gets the new ball and best conditions to bowl.