England XI vs South Africa XI (since 1990)

[Coronis]

Pretty sure a team including Flintoff and 2 or 3 other England players from my XI won a series in SA where SA team included 5 or 6 from my XI

Conveniently you don’t mention that it was the debut series for Steyn, AB, and less than a month after Amla’s debut.

 

[Bolo.]

He doesn't have a point was my first point.

Maharaj is at least as good at ripping opposition apart when things are easy, which is the criterion you are suggesting Swann offers an advantage in.

Swann is better at more consistently taking wickets. But a big part of why he took wickets more consistently is Maharaj not getting as much opportunity to bowl, with bowlers like Rabada shredding the opposition. And another part has been RSA batting lolapsing and not giving totals to bowl at.

What is your composite XI of the two?

 

[Thala_0710]

Combined Xi:
Smith
Cook
Amla
Kallis
Root
De Villiers
De Kock
Pollock
Swann
Steyn
Donald

 

[Coronis]

Maharaj is at least as good at ripping opposition apart when things are easy, which is the criterion you are suggesting Swann offers an advantage in.

Swann is better at more consistently taking wickets. But a big part of why he took wickets more consistently is Maharaj not getting as much opportunity to bowl, with bowlers like Rabada shredding the opposition. And another part has been RSA batting lolapsing and not giving totals to bowl at.

What is your composite XI of the two?

Be like an 8-3 split surely.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Combined Xi:
Smith
Cook
Amla
Kallis
Root
De Villiers
De Kock
Pollock
Swann
Steyn
Donald

Basically this but I like having Rabada over Swann unless the pitch is a turner.
Only 2 English player in the combined xi for me.

Smith
Cook
Amla
Kallis
Root
De Villiers
De Kock
Pollock
Steyn
Donald
Rabada

Brook, Jamie Smith, and Jansen could potentially break into this

 

[reyrey]

Conveniently you don’t mention that it was the debut series for Steyn, AB, and less than a month after Amla’s debut.

I already mentioned they're not really players for the big occasion. You don't need to highlight that again.

 

[Coronis]

I already mentioned they're not really players for the big occasion. You don't need to highlight that again.

The **** do those two things have to do with one another?

 

[reyrey]

Maharaj is at least as good at ripping opposition apart when things are easy, which is the criterion you are suggesting Swann offers an advantage in.

Swann is better at more consistently taking wickets. But a big part of why he took wickets more consistently is Maharaj not getting as much opportunity to bowl, with bowlers like Rabada shredding the opposition. And another part has been RSA batting lolapsing and not giving totals to bowl at.

What is your composite XI of the two?

Swann excelled in helpful conditions in Asia and against much better batsmen. Maharaj not so much.

Also Swann played alongside prime Broad and Anderson. The 3rd seamers at the time all generally got wickets too when picked. (Tremlett, Bresnan, Finn). Swann probably had more competition for wickets.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Swann excelled in helpful conditions in Asia and against much better batsmen. Maharaj not so much.

Also Swann played alongside prime Broad and Anderson. The 3rd seamers at the time all generally got wickets too when picked. (Tremlett, Bresnan, Finn). Swann probably had more competition for wickets.

Swann also had a career of only 5 years and pulled the trigger the moment he was getting struck regularly.

 

[reyrey]

Smith
Gooch
Kallis
Root
De Villiers
Stokes
De Kock
90s Pollock/ 2004-07 Flintoff
Swann
Steyn
Donald

 

[reyrey]

Swann also had a career of only 5 years and pulled the trigger the moment he was getting struck regularly.

Still played more Tests than Maharaj

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Still played more Tests than Maharaj

Only because England play more tests a year. Maharaj has had better longevity.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Rating Swann higher than Maharaj is fine but acting like they’re not close is a bit odd tbh

 

[capt_Luffy]

2004-07 Flintoff was amazing, but **** me if you are taking him over a bowler who averaged 20 and scored @32. Also taking Stokes over Amla when you already have Kallis is really stupid.

 

[Coronis]

Smith
Gooch
Kallis
Root
De Villiers
Stokes
De Kock
90s Pollock/ 2004-07 Flintoff
Swann
Steyn
Donald

Pollock’s peak for reference vs Flintoff

(Aug 98-Aug 03)

49 matches
1643 @ 35.71 2 tons 7 fifties
216 @ 18.79 11 5’fers 1 10’fer
46 catches

 

[reyrey]

2004-07 Flintoff was amazing, but **** me if you are taking him over a bowler who averaged 20 and scored @32. Also taking Stokes over Amla when you already have Kallis is really stupid.

Don't want Kallis bowling. Always thought he'd have averaged comfortably over 60 if he didn't have any bowling responsibilities.

Stokes is in my team based on peer reviews and many guys (even Steyn picked him over Kallis) saying they'd love to play alongside him cos he'd makes them feel they could win from any position.

Flintoff was instrumental in beating one of the best teams ever. Pollock never did that.

 

[Bolo.]

Swann excelled in helpful conditions in Asia and against much better batsmen. Maharaj not so much.

Also Swann played alongside prime Broad and Anderson. The 3rd seamers at the time all generally got wickets too when picked. (Tremlett, Bresnan, Finn). Swann probably had more competition for wickets.

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

stats.espncricinfo.com

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

stats.espncricinfo.com

Look at these SRs and averages. You are very wrong.

Swann never ran through a side like Maharaj. Yes, he bowled at better bats. But that's an entirely different argument.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Don't want Kallis bowling. Always thought he'd have averaged comfortably over 60 if he didn't have any bowling responsibilities.

Stokes is in my team based on peer reviews and many guys (even Steyn picked him over Kallis) saying they'd love to play alongside him cos he'd makes them feel they could win from any position.

Flintoff was instrumental in beating one of the best teams ever. Pollock never did that.

If you're picking players based on who steps up in big games, then how does Root get in with his record in Australia?

 

[capt_Luffy]

Don't want Kallis bowling. Always thought he'd have averaged comfortably over 60 if he didn't have any bowling responsibilities.

Stokes is in my team based on peer reviews and many guys (even Steyn picked him over Kallis) saying they'd love to play alongside him cos he'd makes them feel they could win from any position.

Flintoff was instrumental in beating one of the best teams ever. Pollock never did that.

Pollock averages 9 runs less with the ball in his peak. It's incomparable imho. Don't really rate Stokes' bowling much, in fact I would say he is overall somewhat overrated, I no way thinks he will make much difference with the ball, would rather have Kallis to occasionally chime in and play Amla.

 

[Johan]

If you're picking players based on who steps up in big games, then how does Root get in with his record in Australia?

Australia isn't the only country in the world.

tho I agree his standards are weird