The best batsman and bowler of the 1990s

[Furball]

Anyway overall the best batsmen I have seen would be

1. Ponting / Tendulkar (can't split them)
3. Lara
4. Steven Waugh
5. Kallis

The thread is about the 90s.

 

[bagapath]

sorry... should have made myself clearer. team of 00s actually as december is just around the corner

 

[stephen]

sorry... should have made myself clearer. team of 00s actually as december is just around the corner

Hmmm 00s:

Hayden
Smith
Ponting
Tendulkar
Lara
Kallis
Gilchrist
Warne
Steyn
McGrath
Murali

EDIT: Plenty of deserving batsmen missing out, but had to go digging for the second quick. Settled for Steyn over Pollock and Akhtar as he offers more variety than Pollock and less drama than Akhtar (with a very similar record)

 

[Uppercut]

Hmmm 00s:

Hayden
Smith
Ponting
Tendulkar
Lara
Kallis
Gilchrist
Warne
Steyn
McGrath
Murali

EDIT: Plenty of deserving batsmen missing out, but had to go digging for the second quick. Settled for Steyn over Pollock and Akhtar as he offers more variety than Pollock and less drama than Akhtar (with a very similar record)

Hard to disagree with any of that- would switch Kallis and Lara's positions in the batting order though. Lara much better at batting with the tail.

The team pretty much picks itself itbt. I wonder if it still will when people look back on this decade in ten years.

 

[Ikki]

Hmmm 00s:

Hayden
Smith
Ponting
Tendulkar
Lara
Kallis
Gilchrist
Warne
Steyn
McGrath
Murali

EDIT: Plenty of deserving batsmen missing out, but had to go digging for the second quick. Settled for Steyn over Pollock and Akhtar as he offers more variety than Pollock and less drama than Akhtar (with a very similar record)

Tendulkar in the 00s? I don't think he should be there. Slot in Sehwag for Smith, Sangakkara for Tendulkar and I think that's about right.

 

[stephen]

90s.

Boon
Gooch
Tendulkar
Lara
De Silva
Waugh (c)
Healy (wk)
Warne
Akram
Ambrose
Donald

00s:

Hayden
Smith
Ponting
Tendulkar
Lara
Kallis
Gilchrist
Warne
Steyn
McGrath
Murali

Which side is better?

00s is more balanced, 90s has more firepower. 00s has a more impressive batting lineup.

 

[stephen]

Tendulkar in the 00s? I don't think he should be there. Slot in Sehwag for Smith, Sangakkara for Tendulkar and I think that's about right.

I disagree with both substitutions.

1) Smith has been tested far more technically than Sehwag and I feel is a better batsman.
2) Sangakkara is extremely good but Tendulkar I feel is more of a big game player.

Like I said there were a number of excellent batsmen in the 00s that missed out, just like there were a number of excellent bowlers in the 90s that missed out.

 

[Furball]

Not sure how you can ignore Dravid in any team of the 00s.

 

[Ikki]

I disagree with both substitutions.

1) Smith has been tested far more technically than Sehwag and I feel is a better batsman.

How did you decipher that? I think Sehwag's performance against Australia and particularly in Australia speak for itself. As far as testing conditions go, Smith's home record is pretty average/mediocre too. Not a great deal between them, though.

2) Sangakkara is extremely good but Tendulkar I feel is more of a big game player.

Like I said there were a number of excellent batsmen in the 00s that missed out, just like there were a number of excellent bowlers in the 90s that missed out.

Tendulkar's been very inconsistent. Take away minnows and he averages 47 for the decade. Sangakkara has been better.

 

[stephen]

Not sure how you can ignore Dravid in any team of the 00s.

Who do you drop for him? Tendulkar?

Ponting, Kallis and Lara all average higher than him for the decade. Tendulkar is the "weakest" middle order bat in this 00s team.

 

[Furball]

Who do you drop for him? Tendulkar?

Ponting, Kallis and Lara all average higher than him for the decade. Tendulkar is the "weakest" middle order bat in this 00s team.

Tendulkar just misses out for me.

edit: Lara doesn't average higher than Dravid for the decade.

Only Ponting, Kallis and Hayden have scored more runs.

 

[stephen]

How did you decipher that? I think Sehwag's performance against Australia and particularly in Australia speak for itself.

No true objective measure (except a few hundred more runs at a marginally higher average). More of a gut feel having watched both players. There is no doubt that Smith has had to bat on significantly more bowler friendly wickets than Sehwag though.

Tendulkar's been very inconsistent. Take away minnows and he averages 47 for the decade. Sangakkara has been better.

Andy Flower has the highest batting average for the decade, followed by Mohammed Yousef. That doesn't mean I'd rather one of those two over Ponting.

Having said that, I do like Sangakkara a lot and it really is a marginal call as to who should get the gig out of those two.

 

[stephen]

Tendulkar just misses out for me.

So do you play Dravid, Sanga or Yousef ahead of him?

 

[Ikki]

Not sure how you can ignore Dravid in any team of the 00s.

Whoa, yeh. Poor guy is off for a while and people forget about him. Dravid should probably get the Tendulkar spot. Which is good in a way as you can move Lara up and put him at 5.

 

[Ikki]

No true objective measure (except a few hundred more runs at a marginally higher average). More of a gut feel having watched both players. There is no doubt that Smith has had to bat on significantly more bowler friendly wickets than Sehwag though.

True, but Smith hasn't covered himself in glory there either. As aforesaid, his home record is pretty mediocre.

Andy Flower has the highest batting average for the decade, followed by Mohammed Yousef. That doesn't mean I'd rather one of those two over Ponting.

Having said that, I do like Sangakkara a lot and it really is a marginal call as to who should get the gig out of those two.

My point wasn't that simply Tendulkar averages less than them. But he has been very inconsistent and in a decade of higher averages and minnows his record looks better than it is. Anyway, I agree with Gingerfurball that Dravid is probably the best to take his spot.

 

[Furball]

Really hasn't been a great decade for bowlers though.

Only 10 bowlers this decade have managed 100+ wickets at a sub 30 average, only 5 of whom average less than 25.

In the 1990s there's 23 bowlers with more than 100 wickets at less than 30, 5 of whom average less than 22!

 

[stephen]

Whoa, yeh. Poor guy is off for a while and people forget about him. Dravid should probably get the Tendulkar spot. Which is good in a way as you can move Lara up and put him at 5.

I didn't forget about Dravid. It's hard to drop Tendulkar though. Such a good batsman over so long a time. I did forget about Jayawardene who really deserves to be talked about as well.

 

[stephen]

Really hasn't been a great decade for bowlers though.

Only 10 bowlers this decade have managed 100+ wickets at a sub 30 average, only 5 of whom average less than 25.

In the 1990s there's 23 bowlers with more than 100 wickets at less than 30, 5 of whom average less than 22!

One question I have is how much does this have to do with the pitches and how much to do with the bowlers themselves?

It seems like a chicken and egg thing. All of McGrath, Murali, Akhtar, Steyn, Pollock and Warne would have been champions in other eras. Who knows whether Ntini, Lee, Gillespie, Hoggard etc... might have been revered like Waqar, Bishop et al are these days had the pitches been more favourable in the 00s?

 

[Furball]

True, but Smith hasn't covered himself in glory there either. As aforesaid, his home record is pretty mediocre.

I'd have Smith waaaay ahead of Sehwag looking at their respective records in team victories.

Ditto when it comes to Dravid vs Tendulkar.

 

[Maximus0723]

Doesn't make sense for Lara to be there. He only played half of the decade.