Best Test XI from each nation (that you have seen)

[Richard]

Interesting. Especially because Benjamin last played for West Indies in the mid-90s IIRC. You must mean Kenny Benjamin, in which case you have a point.

Winston Benjamin's career basically came in 1988 and was briefly resurrected in 1993 and 1993/94, then he had a bad year 1994-1995 and was dropped. Kenneth Benjamin was basically straight after Winston's useful time ended - he was quality between the series' against England in 1994 and 1995 and pretty hopeless in a couple of very brief stints thereafter. Overall I've always had a tough job working-out which of them was the better - there was honestly precious little between them.

Only realised recently that the two of them are both Antiguan as well.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Test
CH Gayle
SL Campbell - a personal fav
BC Lara
S Chanderpaul
CL Hooper
JC Adams
RD Jacobs (wk) - absolute legend
CEL Ambrose
M Dillon - comfortably better than Taylor and Collins, considering performance, not potential
D Ramnarine
CA Walsh

Collymore strongly considered.

I know this is a Test thread, but ODI ftr:

CH Gayle
RD Jacobs (wk)
S Chanderpaul
BC Lara
CL Hooper
RR Sarwan
DJ Bravo
JE Taylor
CEL Ambrose
RD King
CA Walsh

Sarwan down the order because he was such a good finisher when he played that role. Chanders at 3 because he just misses out on opening. Jacobs opening because he's awesome.

Drakes, Bradshaw and Cuffy strongly considered.

 

[aussie]

Test
CH Gayle
SL Campbell - a personal fav
BC Lara
S Chanderpaul
CL Hooper
JC Adams
RD Jacobs (wk) - absolute legend
CEL Ambrose
M Dillon - comfortably better than Taylor and Collins, considering performance, not potential
D Ramnarine
CA Walsh

Collymore strongly considered.

I know this is a Test thread, but ODI ftr:

CH Gayle
RD Jacobs (wk)
S Chanderpaul
BC Lara
CL Hooper
RR Sarwan
DJ Bravo
JE Taylor
CEL Ambrose
RD King
CA Walsh

Sarwan down the order because he was such a good finisher when he played that role. Chanders at 3 because he just misses out on opening. Jacobs opening because he's awesome.

Drakes, Bradshaw and Cuffy strongly considered.

Sensing some Trinidad bias there

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Sensing some Trinidad bias there

Um no. Ramnarine was clearly one of the best bowlers West Indies have featured since 1999, when I started watching. Dillon took 131 Test wickets. He deserves to be there. He played 9 games more than Taylor has and took 49 more wickets. And 6 more than Collins for 25 more wickets.

I'd like to hear your argument for Collins and Taylor being better, actually.

 

[Camo999]

Aus

Boon
Hayden
Ponting
Border (c)
Jones
S. Waugh
Gilchrist
Warne (vc)
Hughes
McDermott
McGrath

Gotta have Merv & Deano in there!!

 

[aussie]

Um no. Ramnarine was clearly one of the best bowlers West Indies have featured since 1999, when I started watching. Dillon took 131 Test wickets. He deserves to be there. He played 9 games more than Taylor has and took 49 more wickets. And 6 more than Collins for 25 more wickets.

I'd like to hear your argument for Collins and Taylor being better, actually.

I'm not debating Ramnarine was clearly one of the best bowlers to play for WI in that time period you started watching cricket nor mind (since its very close first time i saw WI play was vs ENG 98) - he was clearly the best spinner. I just to think he should be there best XI.

Collins & Taylor where by FAR superior bowlers at their best in both forms of the game based on what i've seen, its hardly even a contest IMO. The only time i remember Dillon bowling well in tests was vs IND 2002 & at times in ODIs - other than that he was pretty average.

 

[nick-o]

Ind

Gavaskar
Sehwag
Dravid
Tendulkar
Viswanath
Dhoni * +
Shastri
Kapil
Kumble
Srinath
Harbhajan

Eng

Gooch *
Boycott
Gower
Pietersen
Thorpe
Botham
Knott +
Flintoff
Gough
Underwood
Willis

aus

hayden
langer
ponting
jones
border *
s.waugh
gilchrist +
warne
lillee
mcgrath
reid

.......

I reckon Bagapath and I must be near contemporaries -- I'd go with almost all his selections exactly.

Except: I would definitely find a space for Greg Chappell for Australia -- that's the biggest surprise. I think I'd try to fit Bedi into the India side -- not sure who to drop. I'm also a bit conflicted about including Flintoff for England -- I'm wondering if Greig doesn't offer more options.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

I'm not debating Ramnarine was clearly one of the best bowlers to play for WI in that time period you started watching cricket nor mind (since its very close first time i saw WI play was vs ENG 98) - he was clearly the best spinner. I just to think he should be there best XI.

Collins & Taylor where by FAR superior bowlers at their best in both forms of the game based on what i've seen, its hardly even a contest IMO. The only time i remember Dillon bowling well in tests was vs IND 2002 & at times in ODIs - other than that he was pretty average.

This may come as a surprise to you, but Collins and Taylor have been average for most of their careers. I don't care how good Taylor looks sometimes, but the fact is that he's average to poor a lot of the time. Mervyn Dillon was much more consistent than Taylor and marginally more consistent than Collins. That's how he actually took wickets more regularly.

Amazingly enough, you consider this:

29 matches
82 wickets
35.64 average
3.55 economy
60.1 SR

...to be far superior to...

38 matches
131 wickets
33.57 average
3.03 economy
66.4 SR

I love the way you put "at their best" in there though. The problem with that is that "at their best" does not qualify over quality. The fact that they weren't - Taylor in particular - at their best with any regularity counts against them. "At his best" Adrian Griffith is Test class.

Dillon was not a brilliant bowler, but he was better than Taylor at the very least. Don't be blinded by potential, when performance is the real measure of quality.

As for Ramnarine, he was comfortably more effective than Taylor and Collins. Again, this is not about potential. This is about actual performance, and Ramnarine was much more consistently good than Taylor and Collins.

 

[TT Boy]

Why on Earth that way around? Why on Earth not Smith-Kirsten-Gibbs, given Gibbs was only ever a manufactured opener anyway and Kirsten was a natural?

And quite why you rate Gibbs so highly anyway is beyond me as he was such a fairweather batsman.

Kirsten averaged 65 in 17 test matches when not opening (with 7 hundreds) and Smith and Gibbs was South Africa's best opening pair since readmission. Gibbs had a superb record as opener, averaged over 45 in close to 70 test matches. Yet, when Gibbs played in the middle order (over 20 times), he never scored a 100. Not bad for a manufactured opener.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Richard... I think you just got served.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

England

Trescothick
Strauss
Vaughan capt
Gower
Thorpe
Botham
Russell
Swann
Gough
Hoggard
Fraser

 

[Goughy]

^ Interesting. If you watched Botham then you must have seen Gooch. Any reason you have Tresco and Strauss rated ahead of him?

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Well both have better records than Gooch for a start.Apart from a couple of years at the end Gooch was a pretty ordinary opener.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Australia

Hayden
Langer
Ponting
Border
Waugh
Waugh
Gilchrist
Warne
McDermott
Gillespie
McGrath


West Indies

Greenidge
Haynes
Lara
Richards
Lloyd
Chanderpaul
Dujon
Marshall
Holding
Ambrose
Garner

New Zealand

Wright
Richardson
Fleming
Crowe
Astle
Cairns
Vettori
Hadlee
Smith
Nash
Bond


India

Gavaskar
Sehwag
Dravid
Tendulkar
Ganguly
Laxman
Kapil Dev
Dhoni
Kumble
Zaheer Khan
Harbhajan

Sri Lanka

Jayasuriya
Atapattu
Sangakkara
de Silva
Jayawardene
Ranatunga
Jayawardene
Vaas
Ratnayake
Malinga
Muralitharan


Pakistan

Mudassar Nazar
Saeed Anwar
Younis Khan
Inzamam
MoYO
Miandad
Imran
Rashid Latif
Wasim Akram
Abdul Qadir
Waqar

South Africa

Smith
Kirsten
Gibbs
Kallis
de Villiers
Prince
Boucher
Pollock
Steyn
Donald
Ntini

 

[aussie tragic]

Best team I've seen live is Aus vs WI at MCG in Dec-2000

MJ Slater
ML Hayden
JL Langer
ME Waugh
SR Waugh*
RT Ponting
AC Gilchrist†
AJ Bichel
JN Gillespie
CR Miller
GD McGrath

 

[Richard]

Well both have better records than Gooch for a start.Apart from a couple of years at the end Gooch was a pretty ordinary opener.

That's nonsense. Gooch was a very good Test opener for a decade between 1978 and 1988; he was then an exceptional one from 1990 to 1993 (that's 4 years, not 2). Trescothick was only a successful Test batsman because of his propensity to get catches dropped and lbws missed; to suggest he was better than Gooch is plain ludicrous. Strauss has a bit more going for him but is still nothing close to Gooch's level when it comes to combatting top-quality seam and swing bowling at high pace. Strauss might if he does well end-up a better Test opener than Atherton; Trescothick is miles behind both. Also if you saw Botham at his best you must've come pretty close to seeing Boycott? Who was obviously better than both Gooch and Atherton.

 

[grecian]

England

Boycott
Gooch
Smith
Thorpe
Gower
Stewart
Botham
Flintoff
Fraser
Underwood
Willis

West Indies

Greenidge
Haynes
Lara
Richards
Lloyd
Richardson
Dujon
Marshall
Holding
Ambrose
Garner

Australia

Hayden
Langer
Ponting
M. Waugh
Border
S. Waugh
Gilchrist
Warne
Lillee
Gillespie
Mcgrath

New Zealand

Wright
Richardson
Fleming
M. Crowe
Turner
Astle
C. Cairns
Parore
Hadlee
Vettori
Bond

Pakistan

Saeed Anwar
Zaheer Abaas
Younis Khan
Mo-yo
Miandad
Inzy
Moin Khan
Imran
Wasim
Waqar
Abdul Qadir

India

Sehwag
Gavaskar
Dravid
Tendulkar
Vengsarkar
Laxman
Kapil
Dhoni
Kumble
Harbajhan
Zaheer

Have changed mine now, just for blighty ,ones in bold. Good shout for Tres over Gooch from flibbertyjibber, there was an awful lot of ordinary years against ordinary medium-pacers, but I still give it too Gooch mainly for that truly great run of his including that innings.

 

[Richard]

Kirsten averaged 65 in 17 test matches when not opening (with 7 hundreds) and Smith and Gibbs was South Africa's best opening pair since readmission. Gibbs had a superb record as opener, averaged over 45 in close to 70 test matches. Yet, when Gibbs played in the middle order (over 20 times), he never scored a 100. Not bad for a manufactured opener.

Gibbs only scored runs when the ball was not seaming or swinging; Kirsten was a fine player when it was seaming and swinging and excelled when it was not (which funnily a period when it hardly ever did enough coincided not too far with the point at which he was shoved down to three; the success he enjoyed there would've been no different had he remained at the top). Given that Gibbs was a vastly superior batsman when the ball was not seaming it seems to make sense to keep him away from the new-ball to the maximum extent you can.

This is, of course, making the presumption that the match is to be played in an era which conforms to what Test cricket has been like for most of its history; if it conforms to post-2001/02 then of course it doesn't really matter a lot which way around Kirsten and Gibbs bat.

 

[Richard]

Richard... I think you just got served.

I'll have a Strongbow, no ice, then please.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Sehwag
Gambhir
Dravid
Tendulkar
Laxman
Ganguly/Azharuddin
Dhoni +*
Harbhajan
Zaheer
Kumble
Srinath

Pretty much the 2008 side + Srinath