Strongest Squad on paper?

[Arjun]

England has a balanced team that comes off well together, but it's anybody's guess how they'll perform in the subcontinent, especially when they're a man down.

Sri Lanka have a strong side, but the lack of striking power in batting will cost them, although little is needed in India. They too have enough balance and can go the distance.

South Africa would be an easy pick outside the subcontinent, choking jokes notwithstanding, but with a bowling attack so weak, even with five arms, they won't just choke- they'll get pasted. Then again, their batting may just paste back against the same teams.

India is the team favoured most, but they're plagued by poor selections, notably with a couple of stragglers carried in the team each time. The weak links may just sink them, unless weeded out. There's no way strugglers and longtime non-performers make the best team on paper.

That would leave Australia. Missing Michael Hussey will be a factor, but man for man, they've got a strong, balanced team. Match for match, they've proven themselves in three successive World Cups, have a competent spin attack that can match India's, a superior pace attack and fielding support, and all batsmen capable of striking and scoring big as against India carrying a weakness. Hard to rule out Australia, on paper. Current form, whitewashing weakened England notwithstanding, may suggest otherwise.

As for Pakistan, West Indies and New Zealand, there's not enough in the best XI to suggest they're the best teams even on a list.

 

[cricket100%]

I really think Albie Morkel would have gave the SA team just a little advantage. We saw Albie bat in IPL and I think he is doing wonderful in Indian conditions. On paper... the best teams is probably India and Australia. Yeah I know the Aussies choked in the Ashes but they mangled England in the one-day series.

Yet too win my bet is on SA. They just have that edge given by Jacques Kallis and it got to be this year.

 

[Howe_zat]

I doubt they'll miss Albie that much. It's been some time since he played a quality innings, especially not against the top nations, and South Africa have far better seam bowling options.

 

[smash84]

That would leave Australia. Missing Michael Hussey will be a factor, but man for man, they've got a strong, balanced team. Match for match, they've proven themselves in three successive World Cups, have a competent spin attack that can match India's, a superior pace attack and fielding support, and all batsmen capable of striking and scoring big as against India carrying a weakness. Hard to rule out Australia, on paper. Current form, whitewashing weakened England notwithstanding, may suggest otherwise.

As for Pakistan, West Indies and New Zealand, there's not enough in the best XI to suggest they're the best teams even on a list.

Pak probably have the best bowling line-up on paper.

In 5 years time it will be even better

 

[vcs]

If Pakistan clicks, they can beat any team out there. Afridi and Razzaq can be erratic, but if they both fire, no one else can really match their explosiveness.

 

[salman85]

If Razzaq clicks,you could bring in in Stovikn Hulalulo from Mars (Bowling Avg.of 1.89,SR of 17.88,and clocks around 598.65 m/h on average),and the ball would still dissapear for Six.

 

[benchmark00]

Hulalulo has been dogged by injuries, but his high altitude training should hold him in good stead come the tail end of the tournament.

 

[Spikey]

does have a bit of an attitude problem though. (has a tendency to kill and eat his opponents )

 

[benchmark00]

That's express bowlers for you though.

 

[smash84]

Hulalulo has been dogged by injuries, but his high altitude training should hold him in good stead come the tail end of the tournament.

does have a bit of an attitude problem though. (has a tendency to kill and eat his opponents )

 

[tooextracool]

England has a balanced team that comes off well together, but it's anybody's guess how they'll perform in the subcontinent, especially when they're a man down.

They arent going to come close.

That would leave Australia.have a competent spin attack that can match India's.

Can you explain this statement?

Australia are always a tough team to beat but they very little variety in their bowling attack. They may go far but I'd be very surprised if they were able to win 3 knock out games in a row.

 

[tooextracool]

If Pakistan clicks, they can beat any team out there. Afridi and Razzaq can be erratic, but if they both fire, no one else can really match their explosiveness.

Pakistan's top order batting is a bit of a problem IMO. There is little evidence that they are capable of building the kind of platform required for Afridi and Razzaq to make a difference, though I think an attack of Akthar, Razzaq, Gul, Ajmal and Afridi could be quite potent. Tanvir is rubbish so him being injured is a blessing in disguise.

 

[Blaze 18]

Pakistan's top order is looking better than it has in a long while. Almost everyone is decent form. I reckon they'll do okay.

 

[Shri]

Hulalulo has been dogged by injuries, but his high altitude training should hold him in good stead come the tail end of the tournament.

Mars War 7 is happening aws. Last I heard he had joined the military(temporary retirement from cricket) and has been sent on a black op to probe uranus for a weapon of mass destruction. Ease up on the beans, you might get abducted.

 

[hatrick]

i would say India based on this Cricket Worldcup Watch: Team Analysis Group B

 

[pup11]

Can you explain this statement?

Australia are always a tough team to beat but they very little variety in their bowling attack. They may go far but I'd be very surprised if they were able to win 3 knock out games in a row.

Bowling has as much variety as any other side if not more, in Lee and Tait we have two right arm quicks who can bowl well over 145 clicks consistently, we have an erratic but still one of kind left arm fast bowler in Johnson and then we have Bollinger who is a slippery left arm bowler who can swing the new ball and despite his recent form fluctuations he is right up there among the best quicks in the world over the last 12 months.

As back-up to these guys we have Hastings who is a very handy medium pacer for sub-continental conditions, Smith and Krezja are attacking spin bowling options. Watson too has been picking wickets consistently against all teams in all conditions and in Clarke and Hussey we have handy fill-in bowlers as well, so there are plenty of options and variety in the attack.

The problem really lies with our batting, none of our batters really go on to make big runs after getting off to a start and our middle order too is looking really fragile in the absence of Mussey, but despite all that, luck would play a huge part if you are to win 3 knock-out games back to back regardless how good your side might be.

 

[joels344]

India, Australia and South Africa seem to have the strongest sides.

 

[Blaze 18]

South Africa are a good side, but I reckon they are getting ever so slightly overrated on here. They just about managed to put away an Indian side missing what, four players, and that was at home. Playing in the subcontinent is a different kettle of fish altogether. They have never been great players of spin, nor are they particularly good in ICC tournaments (*cough* ). So, all things considered, they aren't that good. I think Pakistan and Sri Lanka have stronger teams on paper.

 

[tooextracool]

Bowling has as much variety as any other side if not more, in Lee and Tait we have two right arm quicks who can bowl well over 145 clicks consistently, we have an erratic but still one of kind left arm fast bowler in Johnson and then we have Bollinger who is a slippery left arm bowler who can swing the new ball and despite his recent form fluctuations he is right up there among the best quicks in the world over the last 12 months.

As back-up to these guys we have Hastings who is a very handy medium pacer for sub-continental conditions, Smith and Krezja are attacking spin bowling options. Watson too has been picking wickets consistently against all teams in all conditions and in Clarke and Hussey we have handy fill-in bowlers as well, so there are plenty of options and variety in the attack.

The problem really lies with our batting, none of our batters really go on to make big runs after getting off to a start and our middle order too is looking really fragile in the absence of Mussey, but despite all that, luck would play a huge part if you are to win 3 knock-out games back to back regardless how good your side might be.

The way I see it is that you have 4 fast bowlers all capable of bowling 145kph but none of them renowned for their accuracy. 2 of them (Tait and Johnson) are about as likely to land the ball in Kanpur as they are in Ahmedabad in their first ODI. Throw in Krejza and Smith and you basically have a bowling attack with no one to toss the ball to if you require a semblance of control. The 2 spinners on the other hand, would struggle to play for any of the other test nations as first choice spinners. Granted, I dont know much about Hastings, but the other 6 bowlers are all aggressive, attacking, wicket taking bowlers who are about as likely to concede 400 as they are to bowl the opposition out for 200. Given the typical pitches in the subcontinent wont suit their style of bowling, I would definitely suggest that they are not even close to the best side on paper.

 

[smash84]

They have never been great players of spin, nor are they particularly good in ICC tournaments (*cough* ). So, all things considered, they aren't that good.

you choked on it