• 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.

hypothetical questions

xanderbiscuits

xanderbiscuits

U19 12th Man
I'll start off with a hypothetical question and then people can discuss what they think about it. When the discussion is drying up then someone else can feel free to ask their own hypothetical question

Ok here we go:

Imagine that you placed Verinder Sehwag, Lasith Malinga and Eoin Morgan in the 1928 Australia Test team. How would they do?

things to assume:

* racism does not exist
* they have not had 1920s training. They have had the training and experiences that they have had until now
* they have 1920s equipment


Things to consider

* general fitness levels
* fielding
* pitch conditions
* batting/bowling styles
* equipment
* lack of protective clothing
 
Mike5181

Mike5181

International Captain
They would completely dominant to be honest. The standard of cricket now would be far greater than in the 1920s you would think. Skill wise there is no comparison. The training that players these days get is pretty amazing and I doubt batsmen back then would have come across 150k yorkers either but i have seen people on this site (mainly in the Bradman vs Tendulkar thread) say that the difference in eras isn't that much which to be honest is a bit naive. I always use an example like Rocky Marciano(I know 1950s but whatever). Marciano never lost a fight and remained 42-0 until he died...but if you look at the heavyweight boxers of today Klitschko brothers, Tua etc Rocky Marciano with all due respect would get his ass handed to him because the sport has developed. The same applies to cricket. The sheer number of players has increased ten fold since then as well and that basically means you have to train harder and be a better player to make the top team. Its only natural.

I suspect someone like Michael Mason would easily be the best bowler in the world in the 1920s.
 
Last edited:
weeman27bob

weeman27bob

International Vice-Captain
Of the three, I suspect Malinga would be the most dominant. No video footage/analysis of his bowling would make it amazingly difficult to face.

I suppose you've also got to consider the pitches, which would also work in his favour, and probably make things more difficult for Sehwag and Morgan. I'd expect them all to be in the top calibre though.
 
salman85

salman85

International Debutant
Provided that the Bodyline tactics are used(Yes i know they were used in 1932 and not 1928,before any smartass points that out),i expect both Sehwag and Morgan to struggle.

Malinga on the other hand will probably be more successful.
 
Howe_zat

Howe_zat

Audio File
It's very hard to say. Morgan I would say is the least likely to succeed without one-day cricket around.

I wonder if Malinga would have his natural action coached out of him even in the modern Australian system, let alone that of the 1920s.
 
Hurricane

Hurricane

Hall of Fame Member
I think Sehwag would average 50 just like he averages now. He would self destruct in every second or third inning just because he always goes for his shots and always keeps the fielding side in the game.

Morgan is a fringe test player for one of the better test teams. He would not be a legend in 1928. He has deficiencies in his defensive technique.

I am not of the opinion that cricket has changed 300% since 1928. The only thing I am willing to truly imagine that has improved is fielding.

Michael Mason would not be the world's best bowler in 1928. Even though I am a major fan of Mase.

I have nothing to base my assertions on other than footage where people look pretty decent to me.

The argument that the game has moved on seems to be largely based on the fact 1928 was a long time ago.

The other argument that Mike has put forward about population playing cricket has some merit to it. ie there are more people playing now. But if population/people playing cricket were such a factor then teams like NZ would never beat anyone ever in International cricket. There is probably a greater depth of players now. Just like other countries (Compared to NZ) have greater depth. But I reckon you could still find a playing XI that would be pretty good back then.

The player that would run amok amongst people in 1928 would be Murali.
 
Daemon

Daemon

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Malinga would completely dominate with the bat, and Sehwag's offbreaks would be close to unplayable
 
Turbinator

Turbinator

Cricketer Of The Year
Mike5181 said:
They would completely dominant to be honest. The standard of cricket now would be far greater than in the 1920s you would think. Skill wise there is no comparison. The training that players these days get is pretty amazing and I doubt batsmen back then would have come across 150k yorkers either but i have seen people on this site (mainly in the Bradman vs Tendulkar thread) say that the difference in eras isn't that much which to be honest is a bit naive. I always use an example like Rocky Marciano(I know 1950s but whatever). Marciano never lost a fight and remained 42-0 until he died...but if you look at the heavyweight boxers of today Klitschko brothers, Tua etc Rocky Marciano with all due respect would get his ass handed to him because the sport has developed. The same applies to cricket. The sheer number of players has increased ten fold since then as well and that basically means you have to train harder and be a better player to make the top team. Its only natural.

I suspect someone like Michael Mason would easily be the best bowler in the world in the 1920s.
Click to expand...
I agree with this completely. Well said. The game has certainly developed over time, like everything else. It's certainly naive to think it hasn't. The level of training, the coaching, has all come a long way.

Reckon' Sehwag and Malinga would dominate tbh.
 
Last edited:
Shri

Shri

Mr. Glass
Sehwag would have probably been an all-rounder(because thats what he was when he debuted for India). He would have been a lower order slogger and a successful spinner in the sticky wickets used at that time.
 
vcs

vcs

Request Your Custom Title Now!
It would be so awesome to see Sehwag and the Don batting together, both of them trying to reach a triple before the end of the day. :D
 
smash84

smash84

The Tiger King
salman85 said:
Provided that the Bodyline tactics are used(Yes i know they were used in 1932 and not 1928,before any smartass points that out),i expect both Sehwag and Morgan to struggle.

Malinga on the other hand will probably be more successful.
Click to expand...
This.

I do think that Sehwag would be rendered useless by bodyline tactics. Morgan too for that matter.

Malinga would probably take out a few toes with his inswinging yorkers though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top