• 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.

Establishing the best decade for cricket: Finding the ATG XI from 12 decades of test cricket - then having a KO tourney to decide the best

M

ma1978

International Debutant
No natural captain. Going to go with Gooch given that Waugh barely captained in the 1990s.

Sehwag
Smith
Dravid

Mcgrath
Pollock
 
Teja.

Teja.

Global Moderator
ankitj said:
cue for @Teja. to post Shoaib stats breakdowns.
Click to expand...

Akthar is an interesting case IMO because while he did play 46 games (178 wickets @ 25.9), he was nowhere near ready to control his abilities in his first few years of cricket which colour his stats negatively a tad bit.

In the 00s purely, I think only McGrath was a better pacer. Shoaib had 144 wickets in 34 games at an average of 22.2 in the 00s.

In his first 13 tests which came between his debut in Nov 97 and the end of 1999, he took 34 wickets @ 40.4. He was mostly out on injury iirc for the next couple of years.

After that, for the rest of his career which happened to occur in the 00s. for a long-ish period of 5-6 years, he was fairly consistently (for a guy who bowled 155 kph) on the park and played 34 tests for 144 wickets @ 22.2 which seperates him from the likes of Bond/Asif imo.

Shoaib at his absolute pomp over the years 2002 and 2003 had a historically absurd peak with 72 wickets in 13 tests @ an average of 15.08 and SR of 30.4. A considerable portion of this was achieved on some incredibly flat batting friendly tracks which makes it even more remarkable. He didn't really discriminate depending on opposition either and if anything did even better against the best line-ups. He averaged 12 v. Australia and 16 v. SA against some extremely stacked batting line-ups for those sides in that period on some flat af tracks. It's up there with some of the most impressive fast bowling peaks in history and probably unparalleled considering the surfaces he was bowling on.

In the 00s, for the 5-6 years he played, he was almost def. the consistently fastest bowler in history and somehow managed to have the best bouncer, slower ball and yorker in the world. The most complete fast bowler I've ever seen.

Shoaib was the second best pacer of the 00s IMO.

Ordered by bowling average, Min 100 wickets:

1632866294673.png
 
Last edited:
The Sean

The Sean

Cricketer Of The Year
This is a great example of different voting groups in different threads.

In another thread, Hayden is winning a vote to be considered the greatest opener of the past 50 years not called Gavaskar. In this thread, he's not winning a vote to be considered one of the two best openers of the single decade.
 
F

Fuller Pilch

Hall of Fame Member
Teja. said:
Akthar is an interesting case IMO because while he did play 46 games (178 wickets @ 25.9), he was nowhere near ready to control his abilities in his first few years of cricket which colour his stats negatively a tad bit.

In the 00s purely, I think only McGrath was a better pacer. Shoaib had 144 wickets in 34 games at an average of 22.2 in the 00s.

In his first 13 tests which came between his debut in Nov 97 and the end of 1999, he took 34 wickets @ 40.4. He was mostly out on injury iirc for the next couple of years.

After that, for the rest of his career which happened to occur in the 00s. for a long-ish period of 5-6 years, he was fairly consistently (for a guy who bowled 155 kph) on the park and played 34 tests for 144 wickets @ 22.2 which seperates him from the likes of Bond/Asif imo.

Shoaib at his absolute pomp over the years 2002 and 2003 had a historically absurd peak with 72 wickets in 13 tests @ an average of 15.08 and SR of 30.4. A considerable portion of this was achieved on some incredibly flat batting friendly tracks which makes it even more remarkable. He didn't really discriminate depending on opposition either and if anything did even better against the best line-ups. He averaged 12 v. Australia and 16 v. SA against some extremely stacked batting line-ups for those sides in that period on some flat af tracks. It's up there with some of the most impressive fast bowling peaks in history and probably unparalleled considering the surfaces he was bowling on.

In the 00s, for the 5-6 years he played, he was almost def. the consistently fastest bowler in history and somehow managed to have the best bouncer, slower ball and yorker in the world. The most complete fast bowler I've ever seen.

Shoaib was the second best pacer of the 00s IMO.

Ordered by bowling average, Min 100 wickets:

View attachment 29474
Click to expand...
There's a bloke who had a better average and strike rate but only 87 wickets.
 
stephen

stephen

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
The Sean said:
This is a great example of different voting groups in different threads.

In another thread, Hayden is winning a vote to be considered the greatest opener of the past 50 years not called Gavaskar. In this thread, he's not winning a vote to be considered one of the two best openers of the single decade.
Click to expand...
It's only due to the preponderance of Indian voters who rate Sehwag and Smith higher. Anyone impartial can see that the opener with the most runs, most hundreds and highest average, who averaged 58 over an 8 year period during the era in question is clearly the best choice. People often accuse me of national bias, but to rate Sehwag higher than Hayden in the 00s, you really do have to have the nationalistic blinders on.
 
morgieb

morgieb

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Openers are a hard one. Hayden + Smith should be 1 & 2 but both are very similar players which hurts. I think I rate Smith marginally ahead of Hayden, then I’ll have Sehwag open with Smith to give some variety. Can see arguments for any variety of the 3 though.

Ponting at 3, McGrath and Pollock to open the bowling. Don’t think Steyn played enough and feel like Shoaib was too flaky.
 
sunilz

sunilz

International Regular
stephen said:
It's only due to the preponderance of Indian voters who rate Sehwag and Smith higher. Anyone impartial can see that the opener with the most runs, most hundreds and highest average, who averaged 58 over an 8 year period during the era in question is clearly the best choice. People often accuse me of national bias, but to rate Sehwag higher than Hayden in the 00s, you really do have to have the nationalistic blinders on.
Click to expand...
Yes , player with least overseas average like Hayden, Ponting at their respective positions are being voted.

Please check overseas batting average of Hayden, Smith, Sehwag, Ponting , Dravid in 2000-09 and then accuse others of biased.
 
Last edited:
h_hurricane

h_hurricane

International Vice-Captain
stephen said:
It's only due to the preponderance of Indian voters who rate Sehwag and Smith higher. Anyone impartial can see that the opener with the most runs, most hundreds and highest average, who averaged 58 over an 8 year period during the era in question is clearly the best choice. People often accuse me of national bias, but to rate Sehwag higher than Hayden in the 00s, you really do have to have the nationalistic blinders on.
Click to expand...
And Stephen, you didn't pick Tendulkar in 90s team either right ?:-O
 
h_hurricane

h_hurricane

International Vice-Captain
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top