akilana
International 12th Man
no way better choice than Sehwag.
-
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.
ICC Greatest Test Team
- Thread starter smash84
- Start date
BlazeDragon
Banned
I guess we gotta agree to disagree. I really don't see a point in an aggressive opener in tests. You need a solid opening pair to get a good partnership and aggressive openers often give their wicket away cheaply. Plus I just don't see a point in Sehwag's aggressiveness when there is already Gilchrist.
BlazeDragon
Banned
What are you talking about? Those racist white ICC members did injustice to the great India by putting only 4 Indians down for us to vote.Have those nasty Indians pre-empted the selection of a proper All-Time XI on the ICC website with their uninformed, biased voting? Truly, the apocalypse is upon us. I fear for the future of mankind.
Only about 28% of the team is Indian when it should be easily over 50!
BlazeDragon
Banned
Well lets see if Sehwag can keep that average of 53 and then we shall decide.
centurymaker
Cricketer Of The Year
shouldn't be too hard for him to maintain that avg tbh. All he has to do is bat for about 60 balls per innings on average and he'll achieve that.
In contrast, someone like dravid has to face alot more deliveries to keep avging 50+ (around 125 balls on avg).
G.I.Joe
International Coach
You don't see the point all right.
why are we surprised? any exercise of this nature will be skewed by the demographics of the voters/selectors.
the 5 wisden cricketers of the century had shane warne in the list even in 96. now that was a ridiculous (biased?) selection if there ever was one! but composition of the selecting committee - by nationality - was based on the number of tests the particular country had played. stands to reason that warne would be chosen.
the 5 wisden cricketers of the century had shane warne in the list even in 96. now that was a ridiculous (biased?) selection if there ever was one! but composition of the selecting committee - by nationality - was based on the number of tests the particular country had played. stands to reason that warne would be chosen.
vcs
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Who were the other four? Should be Bradman, Sobers, one of Imran/Hadlee and Marshall IMO.
vcs
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Yeah, that's pretty good. I guess Richards over Marshall because he was also the greatest ODI batsman ever.
smash84
The Tiger King
Actually I do agree with BlazeDragon somewhat. I don't see the point have having a very high SR in test matches (except for a few situations). There is plenty of time in test matches and I would also prefer a rather solid opener (somebody like Gavaskar). Sehwag is pretty good but would like to see him play in England and a bit more against quality pace to give a verdict on him.
Yeah it was quite a travesty to have Shane Warne in the Wisden top 5 cricketers of the century when the list came out in the 90s
G.I.Joe
International Coach
Sehwag and Gavaskar average 39 and 41 respectively in England. A player with a perfect record is a rare one. Any player is allowed to have an average record in a couple of countries as far as I am concerned. I don't have a strong preference for having Sehwag in the all time XI, but I will not hold back from pointing out how ridiculous the arguments are for treating him as if he shouldn't even be in consideration.
Last edited:
smash84
The Tiger King
I think it was in 99.
Yes maybe 2000. Even then considering the fact that 98-00 wasn't such a great period for Warne with all the shoulder injury stuff IIRC, Warne really should not have been in that there back then.
Last edited:
and, i'm pretty sure, one in 96. the 2000 one was a reprise of that exercise. apologies if wrong about the date.
Last edited:
smash84
The Tiger King
I think Gavaskar was one of the most solid openers against quality pace that you would find. I don't think the same can be said about Sehwag. At least not yet IMO. I also really don't think that having a solid opener argument in test matches is ridiculous.
G.I.Joe
International Coach
Sehwag is a 'solid opener', all right, whatever that term is supposed to mean. Its strange how CW seems to have moved on to a phase where a high SR is seen as an undesirable quality. Sehwag gives you as many runs as Gavaskar does. Only he does it in 50 fewer balls. Thats not a biggie. Gavaskar/Bradman/Tendulkar/Lara/Sobers etc each get an extra 10 balls to themselves and everyone's happy.