Migara
International Coach
If you consider last 18 months Benn possibly the third best. If you consider ;last 24 months then Shakib, Murali and Swann has similar records.
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
The Best of The Rest - NZ, WI, Pak, Bang in tests
- Thread starter Jezroy
- Start date
Jarquis
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I believe this to be the second time I've confronted you? I can see why you struggle to keep track though, I mean it's not just me that you argue with is it, it's not just me that calls you out on your bull****, it's not just me that thinks you're wrong.It just seems like everytime i have a debate you stick your nose in and have another sob about what i'm apparently "doing wrong", it's boring and quite frankly i really don't care about what you think, i was over it after the 100th time you had a "moan", if the majority believe Pak are better then that's their business, I DON'T and i'm sticking with that opinion whether you like it or not.
You can call me the "bad guy" all you like but it's not me who's got personal with others and spouted abuse!!, but i guess you didn't see that because your not the biased type of course!!,
I don't care what you think, so much so I don't want to have to read it, or people's response to what you think.
It's not just the fact you hold a bull**** opinion, it's the fact you come up with bull**** reasoning to support it, then put it forward in a bull**** manner, surrounded my bull**** laughs and ****ing rolleyes.
At least I'll call you out for the **** and troll you are. Rather than just roll my eyes at everything you type.
And I'm not biased, you're a ****, so I'll call you a ****. Fail to see how calling a spade a spade involves and bias.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Right guys, enough insults. Argue his points and his bias but keep the name-calling out of it.
WindieWeathers
International Regular
Don't flatter yourself by believing you've "called me out", all you've done is fallen in line and spouted a load of hot air like the rest of the sheep, nothing to do with the topic in hand you just love to talk about "Windieweathers" like some obsessed groupie, you claim "you don't care about my posts" so why the hell can't you engage your brain for once and ignore them?
give it a try, your life will turn into an "oasis of love and flowers" and you'll shed a lot less tears!! 
.p.s. abusing people online is simply a cowards game.
Furball
Evil Scotsman
Why isn't complete rubbish like this copping a warning?Don't flatter yourself by believing you've "called me out", all you've done is fallen in line and spouted a load of hot air like the rest of the sheep, nothing to do with the topic in hand you just love to talk about "Windieweathers" like some obsessed groupie, you claim "you don't care about my posts" so why the hell can't you engage your brain for once and ignore them?
p.s. abusing people online is simply a cowards game.
WindieWeathers
International Regular
No wonder this loon was removed as a mod!!
, next time if you want to aim "abuse" my way at least have the nerve to QUOTE ME first.
Furball
Evil Scotsman
I wasn't removed as a mod. I resigned.No wonder this loon was removed as a mod!!
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Right, stop posting rubbish. Get back on topic or I'll start deleting posts.
marc71178
Eyes not spreadsheets
Erm what? I was removing the cancelled Test which makes him having played 11, which is 5 against England (who aren't renowned as great players of spin) and 3 each against Australia (1 fewer than Danish) and South Africa (who you yourself was calling a poor team against spin before the series) - are you now changing that opinion because it suits this argument?
WindieWeathers
International Regular
Incase you missed the memo this debate is done now, i'm simply not in the mood to fall for peoples ambitions of getting me banned!!Erm what? I was removing the cancelled Test which makes him having played 11, which is 5 against England (who aren't renowned as great players of spin) and 3 each against Australia (1 fewer than Danish) and South Africa (who you yourself was calling a poor team against spin before the series) - are you now changing that opinion because it suits this argument?
, if you believe Benn is "crap" then good for you, but the fact remains that Benn faced the higher rated sides, whether you believe they "don't play spin well" or not is irrelavant.
Last edited:
WindieWeathers
International Regular
SA are still much better playing spin than the likes of NZ (who Kaneria faced) though so it doesn't make much difference to your argument imo.
Jezroy
State Captain
Why do you have such a problem with NZ? You always seem to resort to belittling them when in actual fact their results in test cricket are at a similar level to WI at the moment (yes, I know WI won a series against Eng 18 months ago and I will stay say that), and the ICC ranks them above the WI.To be honest the fact that NZ was on Pak's list means we automatically played the tougher fixtures!!
Jezroy
State Captain
Another example of this unprovoked anti NZ sentiment.To be honest the fact that NZ was on Pak's list means we automatically played the tougher fixtures!!
WindieWeathers
International Regular
I already addressed the NZ situation on page 17, go back and read it if you want answers.
Last edited:
Jezroy
State Captain
Windie - Pakistan just drew with Australia 1-1 in a 2 test series in England.
How do you think West Indies would do in the same situation?
FTR - I think NZ, WI and Bang would all probably lose 2-0.
Probably.
But I don't think it's such an upset that Pak drew 1-1 against them.
I wanna change my vote now...
How do you think West Indies would do in the same situation?
FTR - I think NZ, WI and Bang would all probably lose 2-0.
Probably.
But I don't think it's such an upset that Pak drew 1-1 against them.
I wanna change my vote now...
WindieWeathers
International Regular
With our best side availible (which we haven't had for 18 months) anything could happen, would Aus be favorites? yes but unlike Pak we've got a batting line-up capable of putting up a decent score, i also think on those tracks in England Taylor, Roach, Bravo and possibly Andre Russell could do some damage.
Jezroy
State Captain
What about the side you could select now (as this is what the thread is about)? Pakistan's best available side would include Mohammed Yousuf and Younis Khan if they could all just play nice. Is Taylor fit to play at the moment?
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Honestly, if you only want to use past results to decide who the better team is then that's what the ICC rankings are for. Maybe I'm being a bit (or a lot, even) contradictory in saying this given my firm stance on how a player's rating should be determined purely on what he's actually done at all levels and that potential should be left out of it, but I tend to look at teams a lot differently. As has been pointed out ad nauseum, it's all just opinion if you look at it any other way, but I've never been a great fan of comparing teams based on what they've done over 18 months or whatever for the purposes of anything other than official rankings.
I think the fact everyone is stumbling and bumbling around with Pakistan is that they have a lot more potential to upset really good teams but that their mean performance is still only around the same level as NZ/WI. Sure they may draw a series against Australia but the nature of the team makes it IMO by the far the most likely to go down to Bangladesh (mass player strikes excepted) or get absolutely pumped by one of the the other two. In fact, if all three sides played ten Tests home and away against each other right now (in a hypothetical universe where you could play sixty Tests in the blink of an eye
) I think Pakistan may run last on the league table because they'd win some games by massive amounts but also put in some shockers and crumble under pressure in close ones. They have the ability to knock off the big guns but they have a lot of inexperienced players which always breeds inconsistency in a side, not to mention intrinsically inconsistent players, no real captain to speak of and a much stronger bowling attack than its batting lineup .. all factors which contribute to what is basically Test cricket's bipolar entity. I've voted for them anyway though because I think that overall they'll do better than the others when you factor in their giant-killing potential - there are certain series you can just rule out WI/NZ winning that I think Pakistan would still be a chance in.
The West Indies lineup at full strength would IMO be the best of the lot if they played every game - not by a lot - but by enough. However they have very little depth in their fast bowling ranks and, crucially, have a ridiculously injury-prone attack. It's extremely rare for Edwards to be fit while Taylor isn't much better and Roach too has shown signs of lacking the requisite fitness for the daily grind of Test cricket. As such, their backup bowlers become a lot more relevant than those of Pakistan and New Zealand and unfortunately they immediately start turning to Rampaul, Pascal, Sammy, Bess etc who are so far from Test standard opening bowlers that it isn't funny. West Indies at full strength is a purely hypothetical entity and the true crux of the team is one that contains Ravi Rampaul for most of his appearances and sometimes bowlers even worse than he. West Indies have a decent team in theory but it never eventuates and the depth in the areas in need is very poor so they'll struggle a bit unless they can improve the fitness of their bowlers or Russell can replicate what he's been doing for the A team of late for the senior side.
New Zealand don't have don't have the unusual problems the other two teams have but they do have the one thing that has held cricket teams back since the birth of the game - substandard players. In the past I haven't subscribed to the whole "New Zealanders are untalented and get by on team morale, good coaching etc etc" line of thinking but in comparing them to West Indies and Pakistan at the current time I actually do think there's some truth in that stereotype for once. The top order is frankly terrible at the moment and I don't think you could conclusively say they had a better batting lineup than Pakistan now that Hopkins has a play as well, and their bowling lineup certainly isn't as good. However, they are a lot more professional and consistent in their cricket and they have more bottle for the close ones than Pakistan (not saying they aren't prone to the odd second innings collapse themselves, mind..), and with Bond and Oram now retired they don't have any persistent injury problems they need ready backups for at all times (other than perhaps Ryder's groin which is becoming a problem).
With the West Indies at full strength I'd rate New Zealand a bit behind but considering the likelihood of someone like Rampaul, Pascal or Dowlin making an appearance to cover an injured player I'd rate them about on par, fractionally below Pakistan.
I think the fact everyone is stumbling and bumbling around with Pakistan is that they have a lot more potential to upset really good teams but that their mean performance is still only around the same level as NZ/WI. Sure they may draw a series against Australia but the nature of the team makes it IMO by the far the most likely to go down to Bangladesh (mass player strikes excepted) or get absolutely pumped by one of the the other two. In fact, if all three sides played ten Tests home and away against each other right now (in a hypothetical universe where you could play sixty Tests in the blink of an eye
) I think Pakistan may run last on the league table because they'd win some games by massive amounts but also put in some shockers and crumble under pressure in close ones. They have the ability to knock off the big guns but they have a lot of inexperienced players which always breeds inconsistency in a side, not to mention intrinsically inconsistent players, no real captain to speak of and a much stronger bowling attack than its batting lineup .. all factors which contribute to what is basically Test cricket's bipolar entity. I've voted for them anyway though because I think that overall they'll do better than the others when you factor in their giant-killing potential - there are certain series you can just rule out WI/NZ winning that I think Pakistan would still be a chance in.The West Indies lineup at full strength would IMO be the best of the lot if they played every game - not by a lot - but by enough. However they have very little depth in their fast bowling ranks and, crucially, have a ridiculously injury-prone attack. It's extremely rare for Edwards to be fit while Taylor isn't much better and Roach too has shown signs of lacking the requisite fitness for the daily grind of Test cricket. As such, their backup bowlers become a lot more relevant than those of Pakistan and New Zealand and unfortunately they immediately start turning to Rampaul, Pascal, Sammy, Bess etc who are so far from Test standard opening bowlers that it isn't funny. West Indies at full strength is a purely hypothetical entity and the true crux of the team is one that contains Ravi Rampaul for most of his appearances and sometimes bowlers even worse than he. West Indies have a decent team in theory but it never eventuates and the depth in the areas in need is very poor so they'll struggle a bit unless they can improve the fitness of their bowlers or Russell can replicate what he's been doing for the A team of late for the senior side.
New Zealand don't have don't have the unusual problems the other two teams have but they do have the one thing that has held cricket teams back since the birth of the game - substandard players. In the past I haven't subscribed to the whole "New Zealanders are untalented and get by on team morale, good coaching etc etc" line of thinking but in comparing them to West Indies and Pakistan at the current time I actually do think there's some truth in that stereotype for once. The top order is frankly terrible at the moment and I don't think you could conclusively say they had a better batting lineup than Pakistan now that Hopkins has a play as well, and their bowling lineup certainly isn't as good. However, they are a lot more professional and consistent in their cricket and they have more bottle for the close ones than Pakistan (not saying they aren't prone to the odd second innings collapse themselves, mind..), and with Bond and Oram now retired they don't have any persistent injury problems they need ready backups for at all times (other than perhaps Ryder's groin which is becoming a problem).
With the West Indies at full strength I'd rate New Zealand a bit behind but considering the likelihood of someone like Rampaul, Pascal or Dowlin making an appearance to cover an injured player I'd rate them about on par, fractionally below Pakistan.
Last edited: