WI all time XI vs Aus all time XI

[Slifer]

If one cant assume the outcome of these match ups then whats the point of starting these type of threads in the first place?? If one cant go by historical evidence what else should we go by?? Nowhere did i write that Australia would lay down but based on trends at Perth, they tend to lose to the WI. It happended throughout the 80s and even in 97 when Australia had McWarne and WI only had Lara, Ambrose and Walsh. So what u prefer this then:

Perth: Aust
Adelaide: Aust
MCG: Aust
SCG: Aust
Gabba: Aust.

Is that better???

 

[subshakerz]

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.

I think you are making too much of this supposed weakness to spin. First, those are only four matches out of an entire decade of dominance, including on spinning wickets in the subcontinent. Two of those occurred in dead rubber matches, while the other two were in drawn series. Second, Warne's record against the weaker West Indies of the 90s even when he was fit doesn't suggest that he can rip through this far better side at will. Third, having a track that spins square like Border's at the SCG would negate the four other Aussie pacemen, I find it hard that an Aussie side would stick to such a defensive tactic.

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

I'm assuming it will be Warne vs. the best of the best of the West Indies batsmen. Given the ability of those batsmen against spin, and Warne's somewhat dodgy record against good players of spin (not just Lara, but Tendulkar, Petiersen, Salim Malik, and Sidhu, among others), Warne's presence in the team could surprisingly turn out to be a liability. He may end up bowling flat like in India in 2004 against batsmen willing to use their feet freely.

Unlike spin, no batsman is ever 100% comfortable against pace, which is where the West Indies have the edge.

 

[Richard]

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....

Yup - The WACA assists quality seam-up bowlers. Simple as that. The best ones would be tall swing bowlers like Lillee or Hadlee, but a short swing bowler like Marshall could easily be every bit as successful.

You could even have success at a typical WACA pitch purely by bowling short and quick - the pitch was so bouncy, mostly, that it was genuinely possible to simply bounce batsmen out - have them caught on the long-leg boundary, caught short-leg. All regularly. And this is something that, anywhere else in The World, only ever happens on isolated occasions.

 

[aussie]

If one cant assume the outcome of these match ups then whats the point of starting these type of threads in the first place??

We are assuming all the time, that hasn't changed..

If one cant go by historical evidence what else should we go by??

Im not saying we can't go buy historical evidence. I am just saying we can't use all historical evidenct as a precedent to judge these all hypothetical match outcomes. The perth scenario is one.

Nowhere did i write that Australia would lay down but based on trends at Perth, they tend to lose to the WI. It happended throughout the 80s and even in 97 when Australia had McWarne and WI only had Lara, Ambrose and Walsh.

WI between 1976 to 2000 lost only once @ Perth yes. But in an All-time scenario where you have the best Australian bowlers ever together againts their batsman, they should be able to return the favour. Thus both batting-lineups would be facing extended chin music.

So that record doesn't give WI an automatic hypothetical win @ Perth at all..


Other examples would be. India having the fantastic group of spinners than they would likely prepare dustbowls for. Gives then automatic wins @ homes againts all nations.

Or (this depends on personal preference) certain post-war batsman of various sides given that didn't face certain 90 mph bowlers consistently are amatuers. Thus would be liabities.

So what u prefer this then:

Perth: Aust
Adelaide: Aust
MCG: Aust
SCG: Aust
Gabba: Aust.

Is that better???

Haa... ya read me wrong then shotta..

 

[Slifer]

Noboby is giving them an automatic win at Perth its more likely given:

A. WI teams have tended to win there (at Perth)
B. Ordinary Wi have beaten ordinary Aussie teams at Perth its logical to assume that an all time team would beat an all time Aussie team as well.
Its the same assumption i put forward for the SCg but i dont see u arguing against that. WI have tended to either lose or draw at the SCG so i dont think its far fetched to assume all time teams will do likewise as well.


In ne case my analysis still stands Australia to edge it 3-2 in Australia and WI to win it 2-1 in the WI. I'd like to see u argue that somehow Australia is goin to win against an all time WI in the WI esp with Shane Warne being a liability.

 

[aussie]

I think you are making too much of this supposed weakness to spin. First, those are only four matches out of an entire decade of dominance, including on spinning wickets in the subcontinent. Two of those occurred in dead rubber matches, while the other two were in drawn series. Second, Warne's record against the weaker West Indies of the 90s even when he was fit doesn't suggest that he can rip through this far better side at will. Third, having a track that spins square like Border's at the SCG would negate the four other Aussie pacemen, I find it hard that an Aussie side would stick to such a defensive tactic..

Well no i did not saying that because of these instances. It makes a Warne/O'Reilly combo likely to run through the WI. I was dispelling that notion, sorry if i wasn't clear.

I'm assuming it will be Warne vs. the best of the best of the West Indies batsmen. Given the ability of those batsmen against spin, and Warne's somewhat dodgy record against good players of spin (not just Lara, but Tendulkar, Petiersen, Salim Malik, and Sidhu, among others), Warne's presence in the team could surprisingly turn out to be a liability. He may end up bowling flat like in India in 2004 against batsmen willing to use their feet freely. .

Disagree here slightly. Firstly i think Warne's presence in an All-time XI would be a luxury, since in an All-time XI unless the Australian's play in the sub-continent or a really abrasive surface. I would think Warne would do limited 1st innings bowling but would strictly let loose in the 2nd innings (of course this could switch around if AUS bat second)

Don't want to be dragged to deep into a Warne argument. But the main reasons Warne failed in 98 & 2001 India, was because as it even was he was seen as the main wicket-taker in 98 lacked fast bowling support. While in 01 a mixture of superb-batting & injuries directly linked to poor test match form that dated back to WI 99, he struggled.

Such a role in those conditions since India has become a force in cricket in home conditions no spinner has never dominated them in their backyard.

What was different for Warne in 2004 was that he had the pace-trio to work on the top-order so he can work on the Indian middle-order & he had a solid series. He by no means bowled flat in 2004, check back the dismissal of Laxman in the 1st test in Bangalore, easily on the best deliveries of his test career...

Unlike spin, no batsman is ever 100% comfortable against pace, which is where the West Indies have the edge.

As i mentioned before just above that point:

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 i have disputed that point. I just think a Lara/Richards/Sobers VS Warne/O'Reilly or Benaud, is one of those dream battles that could go either way. They could get smashed for an hour & yet get dismissed by gems...

 

[aussie]

Noboby is giving them an automatic win at Perth its more likely given:

A. WI teams have tended to win there (at Perth)
B. Ordinary Wi have beaten ordinary Aussie teams at Perth its logical to assume that an all time team would beat an all time Aussie team as well.:

So doesn't this reasoning thus given the WI an automatic win?.

Of all the test matches played @ Perth between the two sides off my head (could me slightly wrong here). Only the 75/76, 92/93 & 96/97. Australian teams @ Perth could be considered competitive enough to the WI. So really in most cases it was Powerful WI teams vs average Australian sides.

In an All-time hypothetical match-up the gap evens up, because Australia's have the bowling attack to return the chin music & then batting to stand up.

Such a scenario as i said before makes both bowling attacks equally superior thus extended chin music for both batting sides. So WI record @ Perth really doesn't mean much.

Its the same assumption i put forward for the SCg but i dont see u arguing against that.

WI have tended to either lose or draw at the SCG so i dont think its far fetched to assume all time teams will do likewise as well.

I have dispelled the notion with subshakerz just now, that a Warne/O'Reilly or Benaud spin combo @ SCG or Adelaide would run through WI. I hold the same criteria with the Perth situation, that such records in All-time match-ups should no be held as the ultimate precedent as how these matches could go.

In ne case my analysis still stands Australia to edge it 3-2 in Australia and WI to win it 2-1in the WI. I'd like to see u argue that somehow Australia is goin to win against an all time WI in the WI esp with Shane Warne being a liability.

Na yo, i wouldn't dear do that.

But i do disagree again Warne would be a liability even in the WI, only Barbados & Jamaica are going have them batsmen skipping. He surely would/could be very dangerous on the abrasive Trinidad, the flat Bourda/Providence & ARG surfaces.

Sensing a bit of odd degrading of Warne's ability here...

 

[Slifer]

Please note that overall i would give the Aussie team the slight edge due to their overall superior batting line up. Just for the sake of arguments what do u think a hypothetical series (home and away) would end up between these 2 teams??

 

[Slifer]

So doesn't this reasoning thus given the WI an automatic win?.

Of all the test matches played @ Perth between the two sides off my head (could me slightly wrong here). Only the 75/76, 92/93 & 96/97. Australian teams @ Perth could be considered competitive enough to the WI. So really in most cases it was Powerful WI teams vs average Australian sides.

In an All-time hypothetical match-up the gap evens up, because Australia's have the bowling attack to return the chin music & then batting to stand up.

Such a scenario as i said before makes both bowling attacks equally superior thus extended chin music for both batting sides. So WI record @ Perth really doesn't mean much.



I have dispelled the notion with subshakerz just now, that a Warne/O'Reilly or Benaud spin combo @ SCG or Adelaide would run through WI. I hold the same criteria with the Perth situation, that such records in All-time match-ups should no be held as the ultimate precedent as how these matches could go.





Na yo, i wouldn't dear do that.

But i do disagree again Warne would be a liability even in the WI, only Barbados & Jamaica are going have them batsmen skipping. He surely would/could be very dangerous on the abrasive Trinidad, the flat Bourda/Providence & ARG surfaces.

Sensing a bit of odd degrading of Warne's ability here...

Not degrading his ability just that i think he would get owned in the WI. Hiwani and co (obviously arent in the same class as Warne) but whatever heroics they managed against the WI when they bowled in the WI they were slaughtered. Last time Warne bowled in the WI, well we all know what happened (see 99). Last WI grounds except for maybe QPO arent conduscive to spin and they are significantly smaller than grounds in Australia. Could see alot of Lara and co advancing to lift him out of our tiny grounds with out much fear.

 

[Burgey]

Please note that overall i would give the Aussie team the slight edge due to their overall superior batting line up. Just for the sake of arguments what do u think a hypothetical series (home and away) would end up between these 2 teams??

They'd probably square it tbh [/sore arse from fence sitting\].

One thing when talking about the make up of Australia's attack - when we've played 4 quicks in the past and excluded a spinner, we've been ****. Now, that's often been because the 4 quicks haven't been very good, but Australia has traditionally played its better cricket when we've had an attack which includes a quality spinner, it seems to work for us in terms of balance.

Now, on these boards we've had the arguments about a great quick > than a great spinner "any day of the week" (excluding, I suppose, when it's 40 degrees and the pitch is dead flat and you have to bowl 90 overs in a day, but never let reality get in the way of blowing a load over someone who can bowl quick), but as you may gather, I don't buy that. I believe Warne to be well in the mix as one of Australia's greatest ever bowlers, spin or fast, and imo I'd have him there.

But, that's what these threads are all about, the different opinions on who should be in .

 

[vic_orthdox]

If you were playing Miller as an all-rounder at 7, then Warne/other spinner has to play. Five quicks would be overkill.

However, if you were to only have four bowlers, then there could be an argument for all out pace. Still would disagree, but could see the argument.

 

[stephen]

If you were playing Miller as an all-rounder at 7, then Warne/other spinner has to play. Five quicks would be overkill.

However, if you were to only have four bowlers, then there could be an argument for all out pace. Still would disagree, but could see the argument.

With Gilchrist available to play there is no reason whatsoever not to pick Miller as an allrounder.

In fact the only real debates about the Australian team is:

Who gets picked for opener out of (really Hayden should be an automatic but some have irrational beliefs about batsmen good enough to dominate the best attacks of their day):
Hayden
Ponsford
Trumper
Simpson
Lawry

Who slots in after Bradman and Chappell out of:
Ponting
Waugh
Border
Harvey

Who is the forth strike bowler (after McGrath, Lillee and Warne) out of:
O'Reilly
Grimmett
Lindwall
Davidson
Spoffoth

The team should automatically look like:

xxx
xxx
Bradman
Chappell G
xxx
Gilchrist
Miller
Warne
xxx
Lillee
McGrath

 

[Richard]

One thing when talking about the make up of Australia's attack - when we've played 4 quicks in the past and excluded a spinner, we've been ****. Now, that's often been because the 4 quicks haven't been very good, but Australia has traditionally played its better cricket when we've had an attack which includes a quality spinner, it seems to work for us in terms of balance.

It's a bit of an urban myth, that. Australia have had occasional failures with said tactic and occasional successes. It's also true that they've had countless failures with three quicks and a spinner if that attack hasn't been good enough.

It's damn difficult to get four top-quality bowlers at once. Whether they're four seamers, three seamers and one spinner or two seamers and two spinners. Unless you have such a thing, you're going to have times when your attack is ineffective.

 

[aussie]

Please note that overall i would give the Aussie team the slight edge due to their overall superior batting line up. Just for the sake of arguments what do u think a hypothetical series (home and away) would end up between these 2 teams??

In Australia too close to call, In WI advantage to them given the pitches in JA & Barbados.

 

[aussie]

Not degrading his ability just that i think he would get owned in the WI.

Na. Remember Warne in WI, in a hypothetical bowling attack as i said would be a "luxury" option - or may not play at all. Given that the fast-bowler are going to be the main attack weapons he will only come into play in the last innings where on a wearing pitch he is ALWAYS be a threat.

Hiwani and co (obviously arent in the same class as Warne) but whatever heroics they managed against the WI when they bowled in the WI they were slaughtered.

Yea. I am not holding the performances of Hirwani, Qadir, Holland/Bennt, Border as a guide that spin would dominate the WI at all. I don't believe it one bit, none of the likely WI ATXI top 6 have weak records againts any spinner.

Last time Warne bowled in the WI, well we all know what happened (see 99). Last WI grounds except for maybe QPO arent conduscive to spin and they are significantly smaller than grounds in Australia. Could see alot of Lara and co advancing to lift him out of our tiny grounds with out much fear.

99 doesn't count yo. Warne was injured as the world knows. Only 95 & 96/97 counts & he held his own againts Lara especially. Only time Warne was ever smoked, was the 1st session of the Barbados test.

 

[aussie]

With Gilchrist available to play there is no reason whatsoever not to pick Miller as an allrounder.

In fact the only real debates about the Australian team is:

Who gets picked for opener out of (really Hayden should be an automatic but some have irrational beliefs about batsmen good enough to dominate the best attacks of their day):
Hayden
Ponsford
Trumper
Simpson
Lawry

Who slots in after Bradman and Chappell out of:
Ponting
Waugh
Border
Harvey

Who is the forth strike bowler (after McGrath, Lillee and Warne) out of:
O'Reilly
Grimmett
Lindwall
Davidson
Spoffoth

The team should automatically look like:

xxx
xxx
Bradman
Chappell G
xxx
Gilchrist
Miller
Warne
xxx
Lillee
McGrath

Would put McKenzie over him tbh..

 

[wfdu_ben91]

AUSTRALIAN ALLTIME XI.

Bill Ponsford
Matthew Hayden
Sir Donald Bradman (c)
Greg Chappell
Steve Waugh
Ricky Ponting
Adam Gilchrist (wk)
Keith Miller
Shane Warne
Dennis Lillee
Glenn McGrath

WEST INDIES ALLTIME XI.

Gordon Greenidge
Sir Conrad Hunte
Sir Vivian Richards
George Headley
Brian Lara
Sir Garfield Sobers (c)
Sir Clyde Walcott (wk)
Malcom Marshall
Michael Holding
Joel Garner
Curtly Ambrose

 

[SJS]

Anyone got a needle and thread? I've gotta sew my sides back together.

 

[bagapath]

dont want to miss out on all the fun. have resisted it for too long

openers

trumper
hayden
vs
hunte
greenidge

middle order

bradman
g.chappell
ponting
vs
headley
richards
lara

all rounder

miller
vs
sobers

wk

gilchrist
vs
dujon

bowlers

lillee
warne
oreilly
mcgrath
vs
marshall
ambrose
holding
gibbs

a six test series between these teams could easily end with a score of 3-3. and a five test series 3-2 in favor of australia. it is that close. with so many attacking batsmen and potent strike bowlers in both sides, i dont expect any game to end in a draw.

 

[SJS]

I am really amused at how Gilchrist gets chosen as Australia's greatest wicket keeper. Mind you I am not talking of his batting.

I have heard the argument of his having kept to Shane Warne as some kind of proof of his keeping abilities.

This inspite of Shane Warne himself rating Healy a better wicket keeper than Gilchrist.

I wonder how many people really know much about the other great Australian keepers like Tallon and Oldfield for example or how many people can make an assessment about a wicket keeper's abilities?