What is your ALL TIME WORLD XI TEAM for tests?

[stephen]

Yeah, makes sense. Memories probably don't serve us well in this case.

It's pretty easy to think that Warne feasted on hapless English batsmen because he was so good he made them look terrible. I didn't see as much of Murali vs England but he at times made them look equally bad. But England weren't particularly bad at cricket and Australia's domination over them in the 90s wasn't because they were a historically bad side, but because their competition was historically strong.

Australia
West Indies
Pakistan
South Africa

Were all really good sides in the 90s and England were below them but they were better than India, Sri Lanka and New Zealand. They won tests against Australia quite regularly through that era as well (though usually the dead rubbers).

 

[stephen]

Was a one man army in 2005. Ridiculous series

I can't remember ever seeing you this active in ATG discussions. Is work really that boring for you right now?

 

[stephen]

I've seen people say that. Brainless argument. Warne only averaged slightly less against England than his career average. No where near as meaningful as Murali taking 180 wickets against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe at an average of 14 lol

Thing is, I see this argument all the time too. It's bizarre.

Here are some points in favour of the different bowlers:

Murali:
More wickets at a better average
Carried his team/ less support
Better record against India
More consistent when the stakes weren't high
His mum never gave him diuretics

Warne:
More wickets against top 8 nations
Better away record against top 8 nations
Better average than Murali in Sri Lanka
Big game performer
Had a straight arm while bowling

Thing is, they're all valid points (except the last ones) but they all don't really say a whole lot about who was better. You'd pick either of them for your Saturday side.

 

[OverratedSanity]

All fair points.

However, aussie posters bringing up the chucking allegations again is actually pretty despicable. Considering how your country treated him his entire career, you all should be repenting instead of doubling down. And it seems to be the only CW contingent which does it. Dreadful behaviour.

 

[Burgey]

I can't remember ever seeing you this active in ATG discussions. Is work really that boring for you right now?

Yeah, lot of cases settling so only got one decision to write atm.

I've been active in them from time to time over the years, but after 15 years or so, you've kinda seen all the arguments before.

Still good to chime in now and again and wind up the usual suspects though.

 

[Burgey]

Considering how your country treated him his entire career, you all should be repenting instead of doubling down

I like this logic, and look forward to the Indian contingent on here having to name Symonds in all their ATG ODI sides to repent for the way their crowds called him a monkey over ten years ago.

 

[akilana]

Thing is, I see this argument all the time too. It's bizarre.

Here are some points in favour of the different bowlers:

Murali:
More wickets at a better average
Carried his team/ less support
Better record against India
More consistent when the stakes weren't high
His mum never gave him diuretics

Warne:
More wickets against top 8 nations
Better away record against top 8 nations
Better average than Murali in Sri Lanka
Big game performer
Had a straight arm while bowling

Thing is, they're all valid points (except the last ones) but they all don't really say a whole lot about who was better. You'd pick either of them for your Saturday side.

Big game player nonsense. We are talking about test cricket. Warne is no more big game player than Murali. Just thrown in random bull**** to overrate Warne. If Murali had a decent batting line up that made enough runs away from home, he’d have probably ended up with a better away record too.

 

[h_hurricane]

I like this logic, and look forward to the Indian contingent on here having to name Symonds in all their ATG ODI sides to repent for the way their crowds called him a monkey over ten years ago.

Yes he arguably can. Not as a 5th bowler though, please.

 

[ataraxia]

O'Reilly and Grimmett are both superior, this is really just a battle for 3rd place.

 

[akilana]

The remove his record vs Bangladesh is one of the worse take given Murali has a better record than Warne against almost every team. What does taking away his record vs Bangladesh prove? Nothing.

 

[akilana]

I guess the big games were the ones against England.

 

[Gob]

I guess the big games were the ones against England.

How did you guess?

 

[TheJediBrah]

However, aussie posters bringing up the chucking allegations again is actually pretty despicable. Considering how your country treated him his entire career, you all should be repenting instead of doubling down. And it seems to be the only CW contingent which does it. Dreadful behaviour.

Who brought that up? I deliberately go out of my way to ignore it whenever discussing him because so many people here can't think objectively about it, as demonstrated your targeted emotional attack in this very post

The remove his record vs Bangladesh is one of the worse take given Murali has a better record than Warne against almost every team. What does taking away his record vs Bangladesh prove? Nothing.

lol wut. Horrible take. Taking away his record against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe adds like 4 runs to his average. It's a huge difference.

 

[akilana]

Horrible take is excluding his record vs Bangladesh but including his record vs Australia.

 

[Gob]

I'm going to beach and shops

This thread will be nice and terrible to read when I return in couple of hours

 

[Burgey]

Murali was the ultimate minnow bashing, turning track bully. Tendulkar-level minnow bashing, but at least Tendulkar also did well against everyone else.

 

[Burgey]

Horrible take is excluding his record vs Bangladesh but including his record vs Australia.

I think it's awesome his average in Aus is way higher than Graeme Pollock's test average. Fantastic stuff.

 

[Burgey]

Yes he arguably can. Not as a 5th bowler though, please.

No, not arguably. You have to put him in, because your spectators treated him badly. That's the new way of things, apparently.

Next up, Mitchell Johnson in the England AT XI, because they sung a nasty song about his mum and girlfriend.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Horrible take is excluding his record vs Bangladesh but including his record vs Australia.

You clearly cannot think about a Sri Lankan player objectively, so there's no point discussing it

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

Thing is, I see this argument all the time too. It's bizarre.

Here are some points in favour of the different bowlers:

Murali:
More wickets at a better average
Carried his team/ less support
Better record against India
More consistent when the stakes weren't high
His mum never gave him diuretics

Warne:
More wickets against top 8 nations
Better away record against top 8 nations
Better average than Murali in Sri Lanka
Big game performer
Had a straight arm while bowling

Thing is, they're all valid points (except the last ones) but they all don't really say a whole lot about who was better. You'd pick either of them for your Saturday side.

I don't want any ****s in my Saturday side so I wouldn't pick Warne.