Burgey
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Lillee over both of them tbh. Lee is one of the great myths of world cricket in any format. Bloke was a licence to leak runs in ODIs, even though he was a prolific wicket taker.Bracken over Lee any day
Lillee over both of them tbh. Lee is one of the great myths of world cricket in any format. Bloke was a licence to leak runs in ODIs, even though he was a prolific wicket taker.Bracken over Lee any day
I've expressed my thoughts on this before, think he's a bit overrated in the format. Hussey does the same role better imo, but that's debatable. And I'd rather include Symonds and Watson as ARs. After that he's not displacing either of Ponting or Jones imo.No Bevan?
Kerry O'Keefe agreed with youI've expressed my thoughts on this before, think he's a bit overrated in the format. Hussey does the same role better imo, but that's debatable. And I'd rather include Symonds and Watson as ARs. After that he's not displacing either of Ponting or Jones imo.
I'm always including Ponting, Symonds, Waugh and Hussey as an elite inner ring.
I'd go Aus A
Gilchrist (wk)
Watson
Ponting (c)
Jones
Symonds
Bevan
Hussey
Warne
Starc
Lillee
McGrath
Aus B
Warner
Hayden
M Waugh
G Chappell
Clarke (c)
Maxwell
Haddin (wk)
Hogg
Johnson
Lee
Bracken
about Bevan? must be showing my senility!Kerry O'Keefe agreed with you
AT 11 bowling without McgrathI was thinking the same thing yesterday. McGrath is one of, if not the, first picked ODI player in history from any country
If you're an Australia, yes he may be first pick for many. If not, you'd find the majority of educated cricket fans would pick Garner first as evidenced by multiple polls on this forum alone over the years.I was thinking the same thing yesterday. McGrath is one of, if not the, first picked ODI player in history from any country
I'm a personIf you're an Australia
I little education is dangerous. They are not educated enough to account for lowest scoring era versus highest scoring era. Bolding that part of the post completely changes the context, which was correct, as it was.If you're an Australia, yes he may be first pick for many. If not, you'd find the majority of educated cricket fans would pick Garner first as evidenced by multiple polls on this forum alone over the years.
A country person ?I'm a person
Nothing wrong with a country person y’allA country person ?
Did anyone say otherwise?Nothing wrong with a country person y’all
Victor Trumper instead of Lawry and Sydney Barnes for sure better than Laker by a good distance.Until and unless Barnes is in your 1st xi,I don’t know why he won’t even make the 2nd xi despite being perhaps the best bowler who ever lived.2nd SHXI
B Richards
B Lawry
R Ponting
G Chappell
K Williamson
AB DeVilliers
K Miller
M Procter
B OReilly
D Lillee
A Donald
2nd NHXI
H Sutcliffe
S Gavaskar
R Dravid
K Sangakkara
E Weekes
C Walcott
K Dev
W Akram
A Roberts
J Garner
J Laker
Excuse me but yeah that second southern xi is missing a certain Allan Border over Kane anyway of the week. Or even Steve Waugh.2nd SHXI
B Richards
B Lawry
R Ponting
G Chappell
K Williamson
AB DeVilliers
K Miller
M Procter
B OReilly
D Lillee
A Donald
2nd NHXI
H Sutcliffe
S Gavaskar
R Dravid
K Sangakkara
E Weekes
C Walcott
K Dev
W Akram
A Roberts
J Garner
J Laker