WI all time XI vs Aus all time XI

[Zinzan]

My teams would be:

West Indies XI:
Gordon Greenidge
Viv Richards
George Headley
Brian Lara
Everton Weekes
Garry Sobers*
Clyde Walcott+
Malcolm Marshall
Joel Garner
Curtly Ambrose
Michael Holding

Reserves: Lawrence Rowe, Frank Worrell, Jeff Dujon, Andy Roberts, Lance Gibbs

Australia XI:
Victor Trumper
Clem Hill
Donald Bradman*
Greg Chappell
Steve Waugh
Keith Miller
Adam Gilchrist+
Shane Warne
Bill O'Reilly
Dennis Lillee
Glenn McGrath

Reserves: Matthew Hayden, Allan Border, Don Tallon, Clarrie Grimmett, Alan Davidson

Really well thought out sides. The only change I'd make for the Windies is swapping Weekes & Richards around in the batting order,

For Australia, I'd have Hayden marginally ahead of Hill & since Warne would offer enough as the lone spinner you could replace O'Reilly with Davidson to strengthen both the batting & the balance of the bowling attack with the left arm variation.

As for the winner...eek....so tough ..as others have mentioned. the Windies have the edge with their pace bowling attack while Gilly & Warne give Aust another dimension. Oner thing I don't agree with is Sober's being any more valuable than Miller (that's how highly I rate Miller). So Aust ever so slightly in most conditions.

 

[Spark]

The deciding factor for me is Bradman, tbh. The other sort of even out to fairly small advantages one way or another, but Bradman just blows it apart.

 

[vcs]

How about WI's dominant '80's team vs. Australia's dominant '00's team?

 

[Zinzan]

The deciding factor for me is Bradman, tbh. The other sort of even out to fairly small advantages one way or another, but Bradman just blows it apart.

Haha, I can't believe I failed to mention Bradders in my summary He wasn't the worst batsman, was he

 

[weldone]

Really well thought out sides. The only change I'd make for the Windies is swapping Weekes & Richards around in the batting order,

For Australia, I'd have Hayden marginally ahead of Hill & since Warne would offer enough as the lone spinner you could replace O'Reilly with Davidson to strengthen both the batting & the balance of the bowling attack with the left arm variation.

As for the winner...eek....so tough ..as others have mentioned. the Windies have the edge with their pace bowling attack while Gilly & Warne give Aust another dimension. Oner thing I don't agree with is Sober's being any more valuable than Miller (that's how highly I rate Miller). So Aust ever so slightly in most conditions.

Thanks.

I personally think Richards has a better chance of succeeding at the top against the best of pacers (and taking the attack to the opposition) than Weekes, though Weekes was very good against pacers too. IMO Weekes was a better player against spin than Richards, too.

Hill and Trumper were not only the 2 best openers of their era, but also the 2 best batsmen of their era for a long long time (after Ranji retired). Hayden, though was the best opener of his era along with Sehwag, never managed to be the best batsman of his era for a substantial period of time. Hence Hill and Trumper over Hayden for me.

I personally rate O'Reilly higher than Warne. And they were completely different types of spinners from each other. However, picking Davidson for one of them to strengthen the batting seems OK to me. It's mainly Davidson's batting and left-arm fast variety for which I've taken him as a reserve. Otherwise, I rate Lindwall as a better bowler.

I think that the Australian team has a slight edge over the Windies team overall.

 

[hang on]

nice sides, weldone. but walcott was a woeful keeper. his batting wouldn't make up for his keeping in a match up of this sort.

 

[weldone]

nice sides, weldone. but walcott was a woeful keeper. his batting wouldn't make up for his keeping in a match up of this sort.

agreed.

But Dujon's batting won't help at all in this kind of a match either. The fact that West Indies has never produced a wicketkeeper-batsman of ATG class is a big disadvantage in this kind of a matchup, I believe.

 

[The Sean]

Hill and Trumper were not only the 2 best openers of their era, but also the 2 best batsmen of their era for a long long time (after Ranji retired). Hayden, though was the best opener of his era along with Sehwag, never managed to be the best batsman of his era for a substantial period of time. Hence Hill and Trumper over Hayden for me.

Without wishing to piss all over your hard work like a prick, Clem Hill - champion though he was - opened the batting a grand total of zero times in Test cricket.

 

[smash84]

Without wishing to piss all over your hard work like a prick, Clem Hill - champion though he was - opened the batting a grand total of zero times in Test cricket.

 

[weldone]

Without wishing to piss all over your hard work like a prick, Clem Hill - champion though he was - opened the batting a grand total of zero times in Test cricket.

 

[Furball]

The deciding factor for me is Bradman, tbh. The other sort of even out to fairly small advantages one way or another, but Bradman just blows it apart.

Small sample size etc etc but because of his Bodyline record I don't think Bradman's edge is as great if he's going to be facing an ATG West Indies pace battery.

 

[Spark]

Small sample size etc etc but because of his Bodyline record I don't think Bradman's edge is as great if he's going to be facing an ATG West Indies pace battery.

Still averaged 55+ tbh, and could easily have averaged more based on the anecdotal evidence (even dodgier, I know) had he wanted to.

 

[Spark]

How about WI's dominant '80's team vs. Australia's dominant '00's team?

Yeah this is much more even. In this case, as I've said before, I reckon it comes down to the conditions - or more generally the "era" in which it's played. Who ever gets the home ground/era advantage would have a higher change of taking it IMO.

 

[Furball]

Still averaged 55+ tbh, and could easily have averaged more based on the anecdotal evidence (even dodgier, I know) had he wanted to.

That's my point though, Bodyline Bradman, whilst still giving you an edge, doesn't give as great an edge as averaging 99.94 Bradman.

 

[weldone]

Small sample size etc etc but because of his Bodyline record I don't think Bradman's edge is as great if he's going to be facing an ATG West Indies pace battery.

Tbh

1. Bradman averaged 56.57 in the Bodyline series, including a match-winning unbeaten century.
2. Among the 7 times Bradman was dismissed in the series, he fell to the spinner Hedley Verity twice.

 

[Debris]

Small sample size etc etc but because of his Bodyline record I don't think Bradman's edge is as great if he's going to be facing an ATG West Indies pace battery.

It could equally be the case that his edge would be even greater. It might be that all the other batsmen from both sides would suffer facing such phenomenal bowling line-ups but his talent is such that even a bowling line-up like the WI would not adversely affect him.

 

[Debris]

And if we are talking about facing the WI, Walters should definitely be considered for the Australian side.

 

[GotSpin]

Tbh

1. Bradman averaged 56.57 in the Bodyline series, including a match-winning unbeaten century.
2. Among the 7 times Bradman was dismissed in the series, he fell to the spinner Hedley Verity twice.

Bradman was also unusually aggressive during the bodyline series because although he knew he could survive the onslaught his team mates probably couldn't so he was fairly active in constructing onorthodox methods to counter the bodyline attack.

Anyway it's pretty irrelevant because a bodyline style attack is illegal today. Then you would also have to ask whether modern day equipment would be used and what pitches. These hypothetical line ups against each other always seem a little silly to me.

 

[hang on]

agreed.

But Dujon's batting won't help at all in this kind of a match either. The fact that West Indies has never produced a wicketkeeper-batsman of ATG class is a big disadvantage in this kind of a matchup, I believe.

in such a match up, where dropping someone would have such enourmous consequences, u need the best keeper. dujon was an excellent keeper and a decent batsman. walcott was a super batsman but an abysmal keeper.

 

[weldone]

in such a match up, where dropping someone would have such enourmous consequences, u need the best keeper. dujon was an excellent keeper and a decent batsman. walcott was a super batsman but an abysmal keeper.

True.

Though I personally think Dujon has absolutely zilch to contribute with the bat against such bowlers, still considering how good a keeper he was especially against the fast bowlers it seems rather common-sensical to keep him in the team.

Blame my inability to drop even one of those batsmen - Greenidge, Richards, Headley, Lara, Weekes, Sobers, Walcott - it'll be a tough job to decide whom to drop!