a team of players from 1995-2010 can beat any other.

[deeps]

Guys like Jayawardene and Youhana boosted their averages 10+ points in the 2000s for a reason also.

It's no surprise that guys like Matthew Hayden and Justin Langer, who were decent batsman early in their careers, suddenly became superstars in the 2000's. I'm not saying it wasn't down to their hard work as well, but the pitches and quality of bowling certainly helped.

 

[deeps]

You mad, old people, that the players of your era sucked?

Matthew Hayden
Virender Sehwag
Ricky Ponting
Sachin Tendulkar
Brian Lara
Jacques Kallis
Adam Gilchrist
Shane Warne
Muttiah Muralitharan
Glenn McGrath
Wasim Akram

come at this team.
The only rule is you're not allowed to pick bradman because he is a statistical freak.

edit: we've got the best leg and off spinner, the best left arm bowler, second best all rounder, and one of the top 5 bowlers in general (mcgrath) of all time.
We've also got the best wicketkeeper of all time.
We've got 2 all-time great openers, and a godly middle order with ponting, tendulkar and lara.

edit2: Yes you can pick any other player besides bradman who is not on this side.

I would have Steve Waugh at 5 over Lara. Lara's game is not suited to number 5, whilst Steve Waugh is possibly the best number 5 ever. I'd also take Lara over Ponting at 3. Again, Lara made his runs against top quality bowling...

 

[MrIncredible]

No dude. Underwood's best years were far far behind in the period you are talking about. Qadir and Qasim are the only spinners, or a very young Warne, who are worthy of selection in this World XI. The only English cricketer who definitely deserves a place is the man in my avatar. He could replace hadlee or imran if you want him in.

good point about underwood would probably replca him with Qasim then

 

[chicane]

Interesting. They are all the same person ?

Probably. Definitely the same school of spamming and trolling.

 

[Faisal1985]

Please don't feed the troll. Read his posting history - it consists of "Aleem Dar is a legend", "Zaheer averages 40 in South Africa", "Saeed Anwar was the best batsman of all time" and other obvious anti-India, pro-Pakistan crap, repeated over and over.

How the **** did he miss on the best allrounder of all times ..Shahid Afridi

 

[Faisal1985]

Yes, it's hard to say that Anwar is a better player than Sehwag given the overall destructivenesss of Sehwag. However, I am confident that if Sehwag had to play against Wasim/Waqar, Donald/Pollock, Ambrose/Walsh and McGrath/Gillespie in the 90s, it would be extremely difficult to believe that he would average over 50, especially given his lack of adaptability in his approach to more sporting wickets. Being an opener in the 90s was one of the toughest tasks ever in cricket. The very notion that he would have this exceptional strikerate against those bowling pairs in ridiculous.


Guys like Jayawardene and Youhana boosted their averages 10+ points in the 2000s for a reason also.

Mate has a point.

 

[Blaze 18]

Not really. It is all wild speculation.

 

[Howe_zat]

Got bored.

1924-39

1. Hobbs
2. Sutcliffe
3. Headley
4. Bradman
5. Hammond (c)
6. McCabe
7. Ames (wk)
8. Larwood
9. Voce
10. Grimmet
11. O' Reilly

1945-60

1. Hutton
2. Morris
3. Harvey (c)
4. Weekes
5. Walcott
6. Sobers
7. Miller
8. Evans (wk)
9. Lindwall
10. Laker
11. Trueman

 

[Maximus0723]

Matthew Hayden < L Hutton
Virender Sehwag < S Gavaskar
Ricky Ponting = V Richards
Sachin Tendulkar = G Chappell
Brian Lara = S Waugh
Jacques Kallis < G Sobers
Adam Gilchrist = K Sangakara
Shane Warne = B O'Reilly
Muttiah Muralitharan < C Ambrose
Glenn McGrath = M Marshall
Wasim Akram < I Khan

 

[Howe_zat]

I'd rate Tendulkar and Gilchrist better than Chappell and Sanga respectively. I'd rather have Headley/Hammond and Knott/Healey over them anyway.

 

[Maximus0723]

I'd rate Tendulkar and Gilchrist better than Chappell and Sanga respectively. I'd rather have Headley/Hammond and Knott/Healey over them anyway.

I don't agree that Tendulkar is better then Chappell. If there is any difference it's marginal hence why I put the equal sign.

Personally, I would pick Chappell over Tendulkar. Reason, I like Chappell's stats. He is better 2nd down batsman and does better in 3rd and 4th innings.

Also, difference b/w Gilly and Sanga is also marginal.

 

[Howe_zat]

The thing to remember about Sanga is that keeping wicket seriously affected his batting, as it has many keepers, and it was giving up the gloves that let him come into his own as a batsman. So I'd rate Sanga as the better bat but Gilly higher as a wicketkeeper-batsman.

 

[Faisal1985]

Not really. It is all wild speculation.

It is speculation but not wild by any means.

Of course the bowling attacks of the 90s were much more lethal and i think the names of pairs speak for themselves plus the pitches surely weren't as flat as now a days.

Can you imagine a Gabba test the way it turned out! Who would have thought that in the 90's

 

[Mike5181]

Matthew Hayden >L Hutton- marginal
Virender Sehwag < S Gavaskar
Ricky Ponting = V Richards
Sachin Tendulkar > G Chappell- marginal
Brian Lara = S Waugh
Jacques Kallis < G Sobers- marginal
Adam Gilchrist > K Sangakara
Shane Warne > B O'Reilly
Muttiah Muralitharan < C Ambrose
Glenn McGrath = M Marshall
Wasim Akram < I Khan

 

[Howe_zat]

Matthew Hayden >L Hutton- marginal
Virender Sehwag < S Gavaskar
Ricky Ponting = V Richards
Sachin Tendulkar > G Chappell- marginal
Brian Lara = S Waugh
Jacques Kallis < G Sobers- marginal
Adam Gilchrist > K Sangakara
Shane Warne > B O'Reilly
Muttiah Muralitharan < C Ambrose
Glenn McGrath = M Marshall
Wasim Akram < I Khan

...

No.

 

[bagapath]

Matthew Hayden >L Hutton- marginal

no way!!!!

 

[miscer]

Matthew Hayden < L Hutton
Virender Sehwag < S Gavaskar
Ricky Ponting = V Richards
Sachin Tendulkar > G Chappell
Brian Lara > S Waugh
Jacques Kallis <= G Sobers (People will be upset but stats are stats)
Adam Gilchrist > K Sangakkara (as a wicketkeeper sangakkara doesnt perform well)
Shane Warne = B O'Reilly
Muttiah Muralitharan => C Ambrose (Murali is rated the best test match bowler)
Glenn McGrath = M Marshall
Wasim Akram < I Khan[

1995-2010 3.5 wins
Rest of cricketing history (except bradman) 3.5 wins
BTW sangakkara plays in the 1995-2010 period.

Pretty amazing concentration of skill imo. Now if sehwag can just maintain his form for 3 more years id say he is equal to or better than gavaskar.

 

[GotSpin]

Don't understand the point of this exercise when you exclude Bradman. What about excluding Marshall and Murali too then?

 

[miscer]

You can't really cherry-pick results against one side, almost every batsman has a side where their average is disproportionately high. On that basis, Laxman is a better batsman than Tendulkar.

forgot to respond to this.
laxman averages 55 with 6 tons in 25 matches against AUS while tendulkar averages 60 with 11 tons in 31 matches so nah lmao.

 

[G.I.Joe]

forgot to respond to this.
laxman averages 55 with 6 tons in 25 matches against AUS while tendulkar averages 60 with 11 tons in 31 matches so nah lmao.

Out of interest, what if they interchanged that particular set of stats while keeping their overall records as they are now?