CW Decides The XI of the Decade

[CricAddict]

Turns out Stokes won. Wouldn’t have predicted that.

Cook
Warner
Williamson
Smith
Kohli
Stokes
Watling+
Philander
Herath
Steyn
Anderson

Guess the only question is who should captain?

While there is no doubt in crediting his abilities, Stokes won more as a product of rest of the team structure. Shakib would have won quite easily if there was any pacer or Ashwin selected instead of Herath whom I still don't think should be in this team.

 

[CricAddict]

Kohli for captaincy.

 

[honestbharani]

Virat

 

[OverratedSanity]

Williamson.

 

[ankitj]

Sad that ABD didn't make the team

 

[harsh.ag]

ABdV was the second best batsman of the decade. Sham.

 

[Athlai]

Kane

 

[h_hurricane]

Ill go Jadeja at 7 just because I dont feel good that only 1 Indian made it vs 3 from Eng if Stokes makes it. I actually thought ABDV had a chance, but again 3 SAFS and i guess the team needs extra bowling because there is a fear this attack might struggle for wickets in some situations. Situations that Jadeja probably cant improve haha.

Still, in summary, Jadeja.

Agree with this. In the end, we get a near SENA only outfit with an Indian and Sri Lankan thrown in there to have some subcontinental representation England should not have 3 players in any decade team in the last 50 years let alone this decade.

FWIW, here is the summary of how teams have performed in this decade.

Team records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

 

[vcs]

Agree with this. In the end, we get a near SENA only outfit with an Indian and Sri Lankan thrown in there to have some subcontinental representation England should not have 3 players in any decade team in the last 50 years let alone this decade.

FWIW, here is the summary of how teams have performed in this decade.

Team records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

Look at that W/L ratio for Afghanistan! Team of the decade.

 

[h_hurricane]

Look at that W/L ratio for Afghanistan! Team of the decade.

Should go below 5 other teams by end of day tomorrow.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Agree with this. In the end, we get a near SENA only outfit with an Indian and Sri Lankan thrown in there to have some subcontinental representation England should not have 3 players in any decade team in the last 50 years let alone this decade.

FWIW, here is the summary of how teams have performed in this decade.

Team records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

We shouldn't really consider team strength for this stuff, just consider individual players on their strengths. A 90s xi might have fewer Australian players than you'd think despite them being the best team by a distance.

 

[h_hurricane]

We shouldn't really consider team strength for this stuff, just consider individual players on their strengths. A 90s xi might have fewer Australian players than you'd think despite them being the best team by a distance.

I get it, fair point..

 

[stephen]

Hmm a 90s XI:

Gooch
Slater
Lara
Tendulkar
S Waugh
De Silva
Healy+
Akram
Warne
Donald
Ambrose

 

[OverratedSanity]

You could easily argue Kirsten over slater too. You'd look at the side and think wtf only 3 Aussies but it sort of makes sense.

 

[Bolo.]

We shouldn't really consider team strength for this stuff, just consider individual players on their strengths. A 90s xi might have fewer Australian players than you'd think despite them being the best team by a distance.

Ya, doesn't matter how strong England were. Cook and Anderson are two of the 4 players I would consider least acceptable to leave out of this team (with Steyn and Smith). Everyone else is practically drawing names out of a hat.

Stokes a bit lucky, because Herath was a mistake that made balancing the side tough. Should have been Ashwin and Shakib.

 

[vcs]

We shouldn't really consider team strength for this stuff, just consider individual players on their strengths. A 90s xi might have fewer Australian players than you'd think despite them being the best team by a distance.

Haven't looked up the statistics but 90s must have been a close call between SA and Australia, right?

 

[h_hurricane]

Haven't looked up the statistics but 90s must have been a close call between SA and Australia, right?

Australia won the most matches that decade but SA had the best win-loss ratio. This is the order based on win-loss ratio.

SA
Aus
Pak
WI
Ind
SL
Eng
NZ

Team records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

 

[NUFAN]

Australia won the most matches that decade but SA had the best win-loss ratio. This is the order based on win-loss ratio.

SA
Aus
Pak
WI
Ind
SL
Eng
NZ

Team records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

Australia were better at winning, South Africa were more cautious and better at not losing.

 

[Burgey]

Hmm a 90s XI:

Gooch
Slater
Lara
Tendulkar
S Waugh
De Silva
Healy+
Akram
Warne
Donald
Ambrose

Neither Kirsten nor Slater scored as many as Taylor opening in the 90s, and despite his slump he was still the best leaver of the ball going in an era of exceptional fast bowlers

 

[Burgey]

Haven't looked up the statistics but 90s must have been a close call between SA and Australia, right?

Except SA never won a series between them