WI all time XI vs Aus all time XI

[Richard]

Well it's been a good pitch recently rather than a juicy pitch.

What is a "good" pitch? "Good" depends on who you are. Good for a batsman is easy-paced, no seam, no turn; good for a spinner is cracked (uneven in pace and bounce) and dry (allowing the ball to grip); good for a seamer is green and hard (seam and high bounce). No such thing as a pitch that suits all.

Still, Warne liked it because he valued the bounce he could extract.

Any bowler, of any type, values bounce. High bounce is always a huge asset to a good accurate bowler (and an asset to the batsmen against inaccurate bowlers).

You cannot forget that Australia would be playing (at the very minimum) McGrath and Lillee on the same deck (and Miller and Davidson too probably) who would enjoy the wonderful conditions.

The WACA is a different matter alltogether. This deck favours the taller, bouncier bowlers and Warne never did very well on it. It would suit your Ambrose, Garner and McGrath types, giving slightly less assistance to Marshall and Lillee type bowlers (shorter).

I don't think The 'Gabba and WACA are enormously different at all. As I say, any bowler, tall or short, slow or quick, values high bounce, and traditional decks at The 'Gabba offered good bounce and those at The WACA sensational bounce (far more than anywhere else on the planet). The 'Gabba apparently used to seam all over the place, and The WACA tends to be more assisting to swing bowlers (who are prepared to bowl into the Fremantle Doctor).

Either way, if so much as one of Marshall, McGrath, Ambrose, Lindwall, Holding, Lillee, Garner or Miller failed to enjoy conditions at both 'Gabba and WACA, enormously, I'd be astonished. That applies, too, to Sabina Park and Kensington Oval, which were also traditionally fast, bouncy seamers.

The lack of a Great spinner is the weakness of the WIndies team, and that would possibly show in the forth innings.

Precious few pitches in Australia or West Indies - except The SCG - are\were really known for becoming spin-friendly having not been earlier. That was more in England in the days of uncovered wickets that that used to happen. If a spinner isn't going to be in the game at the start, he's not going to be in it at the end.

 

[sammy2]

CW voted ponting into the list of top 20 batsman in cricketing history, i'm susprise he didn't make the aussie 11. It's obvious CW has so little credibility when it comes to judging players. Naive enough to think old time players with good records could sustain the pressure facing 3 quick bowlers who avg 20 in test cricket and the great micheal holding. You believe extremely aggressive batsman who dominated bowlers would just crumble because of mcgrath, warne lillee, etc ? Do you realize that in the WI batting line up there are two players who held the highest score in test cricket ? and one still do ? Viv richard the player who scored quick runs to set up games after afters so WI could win ? and don't forget headley - the WI bradman.WI doesn't have a toy team...and the openers ? Their record together speak for them.

 

[aussie]

Why, oh why, does anyone bother...

Where is your imagination yo..

 

[sammy2]

The fact is you can always laugh at me, I don't mind I have my smiles too whenever I see the 5 - 0 ass whopping Lloyd and his pack of comical players gave the mighty teams packed with the great english and aussie players. You babies need to understand that WI had the greatest team to ever play cricket. Medium, slow bowling got beat out of the rest of the world bowling attack. Those two type of bowlers could never win a game against the comical WI team of the 80s. If players like lara, viv faced the bowlers bradman face they would make 501* everytime. WI had a team so superior to any other team to have played cricket the only reason WI decline in because of the adaption of england style of cricket. Coaches telling players to play like girls, front foot ? NO! remove it and hit the ball like viv and sobers. Most of the posters here have no idea, all they do is study stats without realizing those stats were made in tooday's equivalence to county cricket. Its like comparing a canon gun to an atomic bomb.

 

[aussie]

The fact is you can always laugh at me, I don't mind I have my smiles too whenever I see the 5 - 0 ass whopping Lloyd and his pack of comical players gave the mighty teams packed with the great english and aussie players. You babies need to understand that WI had the greatest team to ever play cricket. Medium, slow bowling got beat out of the rest of the world bowling attack. Those two type of bowlers could never win a game against the comical WI team of the 80s. If players like lara, viv faced the bowlers bradman face they would make 501* everytime. WI had a team so superior to any other team to have played cricket the only reason WI decline in because of the adaption of england style of cricket. Coaches telling players to play like girls, front foot ? NO! remove it and hit the ball like viv and sobers. Most of the posters here have no idea, all they do is study stats without realizing those stats were made in tooday's equivalence to county cricket. Its like comparing a canon gun to an atomic bomb.

Right on dawg,

Note: I am laughing because although yor synopsis is very wrong, but mainly at the tone & style. You sound like a true West Indian arguing here... "Coaches telling players to play like girls, front foot ? NO! remove it and hit the ball like viv and sobers"..Brilliant 2 bumbaclathhh!!!

 

[zaremba]

Sammy, you need to know this: you're embarrassing yourself again.

 

[Matt79]

Sammy2 = ****** imo.

Just putting it out there.

 

[ret]

I thought I explained myself quite well. Never suggested these two where the strongest sides available. Just statistically a solid two XI's if this hypothetical series was to ever take place.

I found it very interesting that the ending statistical XI's ended up relatively similar to the All Time Greatest XI.

I understand that .... I am commenting on your selection criteria as may be some of those players could have notched up higher averages by having a good series or playing against a relatively weak side for e.g. Hayden and Ponting didn't get to play the famous WI attack and their averages are high not only because they are good but also because the current WI attack is not that great. As for bowling, Gillispie and Lee didn't get to bowl against a strong WI batting line up

Ofc, this is not to imply that they wouldn't have done well if the opposition had been stronger but am pointing out that as per your selection criteria they have an advantage over those who bowled and batted against stronger WI teams

 

[Burgey]

The fact is you can always laugh at me, I don't mind I have my smiles too whenever I see the 5 - 0 ass whopping Lloyd and his pack of comical players gave the mighty teams packed with the great english and aussie players. You babies need to understand that WI had the greatest team to ever play cricket. Medium, slow bowling got beat out of the rest of the world bowling attack. Those two type of bowlers could never win a game against the comical WI team of the 80s. If players like lara, viv faced the bowlers bradman face they would make 501* everytime. WI had a team so superior to any other team to have played cricket the only reason WI decline in because of the adaption of england style of cricket. Coaches telling players to play like girls, front foot ? NO! remove it and hit the ball like viv and sobers. Most of the posters here have no idea, all they do is study stats without realizing those stats were made in tooday's equivalence to county cricket. Its like comparing a canon gun to an atomic bomb.

Wi never beat Australia 5-0, even when they (WI) were at their best. They came awfully close though.

 

[KiWiNiNjA]

Sammy2 = ****** imo.

Just putting it out there.

You might be onto something.....

 

[aussie]

Actually, anyone is free to use whatever criteria they want, so long as they explain what they are. Doesn't mean that their team will be "better" or "worse" than teams chosen with different criteria, but given they're all hypothetical, such concepts are pretty rhetorical.

You got to strike a balance although its hypotetical though. If you just picking respective XI's just based on who was the most influential opener, middle-order bat, all-rounder keeper, fast-bowler or spinner of their respective era's. Without the intention of a hypotetical match-up then yes there is no need for criteria.

But if you are though. You have to place criteria. For example.

With England. Syd Barnes has the best record for any bowler & just for his record & contribution during his time, thus making a must pick in a "Hall of fame England All-time XI".

But in a hypotetical match-up where although his record is great, its hard to see how could pick a bowler of his style over Trueman/Snow/Statham to bowl againts the superb batitng XI's of the other sides.


With NZ. Dempster has a lovely story behind him & his pears rate him highly. Another perfect "Hall of fame pick". But i can't see how you could pick him over John Wright in hypotetical match-up to partner Glenn Turner.

Also with India's 1930s pace-man Nissar & Amar Singh vs Srinath & the rejuvenated Khan. As Kapil Dev's pace- bowling partners.

 

[aussie]

Thats a fair point. It could be the whole chicken and egg thing. Did Miller benefit from the generally poor state of world cricket in the immediate post war years? Or was it simply that his peak co-incided with some poor teams and poor bowlers? Or both? Difficult to say either way, although it should be clear where I stand, but I do think that some of the lustre around Miller is due to his personal impact against the backdrop of a post war Britain marked by privation and austerity.

A bit harsh that reasoning i feel. Leaning a bit too stats based i feel. In a way i guess we can never saw with 100% certainty. But in my time of reading, watching clips of Miller, views of those who played with him i have always held the opinion that:

- his stats dont do him justice, although very good on the eye.

- his best years where lost the war. Especially as a batsman.

 

[aussie]

He played 8 tests against them when fully fit, and only once went roughshod over the West Indies

8 or 9?. Since Warne @ his peak vs them in the 90s was the 4th test WI 95 & 5 test AUS 96/97. In which he held his own againts Lara especially very well indeed.

The only time he was smashed about i believe was the first session before lunch of the Barbados test.

 

[stephen]

Think Lillee did pretty well at the WACA actually...

I realise that. Lillee is an all time great and it was his home ground.

My point was that the pitch probably assists the taller quick bowlers even more than the slightly shorter ones.

 

[Matt79]

I realise that. Lillee is an all time great and it was his home ground.

My point was that the pitch probably assists the taller quick bowlers even more than the slightly shorter ones.

Don't know whether that's true however....

 

[Slifer]

WI vs Australia probable out come:

In Aust.

Gabba: WI
SCG: Aust.
Adelaide: Aust.
MCG: Aust.
WACA: WI

In WI

Sabina: WI
Kensington: WI
Bourda: Draw
ARG: Draw
QPO: Aust. (maybe)

Overall: 4/4. IMHO

 

[aussie]

WI vs Australia probable out come:

In Aust.

Gabba: WI
SCG: Aust.
Adelaide: Aust.
MCG: Aust.
WACA: WI

In WI

Sabina: WI
Kensington: WI
Bourda: Draw
ARG: Draw
QPO: Aust. (maybe)

Overall: 4/4. IMHO

One thing that i think which is an inaccurarte precieved notion. Is that the WI 4-prong in this hypothetical match-up in a game @ Perth or Sabina Park would blow the Aussies away.

Australia with Lillee/Lindwall/McGrath/Miller would cause equal problems really. So both batting-lineups would blazed out.


While Australia because of Warne/O'Reilly would do the same @ SCG, Adelaide, QPO. Based on what Qadir, Hirwani, Border did to them in the 80s.

You can't use the WI team history in this scenario. You got to gauge how the likely XI players performed againts spinners in their respective careers. Especially Lara, Richards & Sobers & well no spinner has ever dominated them .

So a hypothetical battle with Warne & O'Reilly/Benaud againts these giants on a turning surface really would go either way.

 

[Slifer]

One thing that i think which is an inaccurarte precieved notion. Is that the WI 4-prong in this hypothetical match-up in a game @ Perth or Sabina Park would blow the Aussies away.

Australia with Lillee/Lindwall/McGrath/Miller would cause equal problems really. So both batting-lineups would blazed out.


While Australia because of Warne/O'Reilly would do the same @ SCG, Adelaide, QPO. Based on what Qadir, Hirwani, Border did to them in the 80s.

You can't use the WI team history in this scenario. You got to gauge how the likely XI players performed againts spinners in their respective careers. Especially Lara, Richards & Sobers & well no spinner has ever dominated them .

So a hypothetical battle with Warne & O'Reilly/Benaud againts these giants on a turning surface really would go either way.

History says that WI have only lost one test (when at their weakest) to Australia at Perth. Even in 75-76 when WI were decimated 5-1 by the likes of Lillee and co their solitary win was at Perth so Aussie please come again!! TBH i wouldnt use what Hirwani et al did to the WI to make ne conclusions, they never resulted in a WI loss (series loss ie).

For the record, i never stated that my results were set in stone. BTW what exactly is ur argument ne way?

 

[Matt79]

I think simply that the Windies winning at Perth might not be a lay-down misere, as the WI batsmen would likely find an attack of Lillee/Lindwall/McGrath and Miller as difficult on a WACA pitch as the Aussie batsmen would the WI bowling attack.

 

[aussie]

History says that WI have only lost one test (when at their weakest) to Australia at Perth. Even in 75-76 when WI were decimated 5-1 by the likes of Lillee and co their solitary win was at Perth so Aussie please come again!!

All-true. But as i said in these hypothetical match-up i don't think one can hold historical performances in all facets. As the underlying factor in judging the outcome of these matches.

In that 75/76 Australia bowling attack of Lillee/Thompson/Gilmour/Walker/Mallet is pretty damn good. But comparitvely to what an AUS ATXI would look like at their respecitve peaks Lillee/Lindwall/McGrath/Miller/Warne....its a HUGE gap in quality. With Only Lillee being himself in both instances.

So really they really should be giving the WI a taste of their own medicine back for once. Thats why the record @ Perth really shouldn't matter.

TBH i wouldnt use what Hirwani et al did to the WI to make ne conclusions, they never resulted in a WI loss (series loss ie).

Agreed. Thats why again it shouldn't just like the Perth scenario.

For the record, i never stated that my results were set in stone. BTW what exactly is ur argument ne way?

That not all historical records, should be used as firm guide to how the outcome of these matches could go.