Best vs Rest

[garage flower]

It's becoming a very confusing thread for one as simple-minded as me. If we're picking a "Rest of the World" XI to play Australia in odis in South Africa with, let's say, every test nation represented, I'd pick the following:

Gayle
Tendulkar
Kallis
Inzy
Fleming (Cpt)
Flintoff
Manjural Islam Rana
Pollock
Taibu
Murali
Harmison

It's very difficult if you include a player from each country, as the absence of Lara demonstrates (he'd obviously be a cert for the test XI, but I think you could manage without him in 1-dayers).

Might look a bit short on bowling, but I reckon Pollock, Harmison, Flintoff and Murali would be very difficult to score quickly off and there's plenty of back-up in Kallis, Rana, Gayle, Sachin.

 

[Linda]

every test nation represented

Speaking of confusing, Im a little confused with this whole Aus vs Rest of the World thing... In the ROW team thats being planned for 2005 or whenever it is, do all countries have to be represented?
Or is this something people have just decided to do on here when picking their personal teams?

 

[marc71178]

Actually, aren't the Aussie-World matches ODI's?

I believe that there will be both played.

 

[marc71178]

It's hard to disagree with an international coach that coaches by far the best side.

Anyone could coach that side to be fair - its a job on a par with the skippers.

He wasn't that crash-hot when he did it for Middlesex.

 

[marc71178]

Sorry Marc but it's Michael Vaughan who has to go.
Michael Vaughan has played his last 13 innings as Captain at an average of 31.
Compare this to Fleming who as Captain in his last 13 innings has averaged around 43.
Now if you add in Captaincy then Fleming is by far the better option even to open in this series.

I've only ever considered Tests (Vaughan being a clear example why) - Fleming is not an opener, so to put him in that role in a Test for a ROW XI would not work.

That, and the fact that Smith is batting well, is an opener, and isn't that bad a captain is why he's ahead of Fleming in selection for my team.

If Fleming were to come in, which of that middle-order would make way? And his captaincy advantage over Smith would not be worth the runs disadvantage from putting him in there.

 

[marc71178]

so what is jacobs doing in there then?gilchrist is just about as reliable as jacobs with the gloves and a much much better batsman.

Yes, but isn't he also Australian?

 

[marc71178]

By far the best ODI side, but not by far the best Test Side. Beat India first.

Australia's dominance in Tests is every bit as big as their dominance in ODI's - what other side can go to SL and win 3-0?

 

[marc71178]

He is not the best keeper in the world but there is no one around currently playing international cricket that is substancialy better if they are any better at all.

Oh please(!)

You've made some comments in your time, and this is up with them.

Gilchrist is by no means the best glovesman in International Cricket - I can think of 2 who've just been competing in the Caribbean who are better keepers.

 

[marc71178]

Speaking of confusing, Im a little confused with this whole Aus vs Rest of the World thing... In the ROW team thats being planned for 2005 or whenever it is, do all countries have to be represented?

No, it'll be the best players from outside Australia, and I'm sure that it'll involve Tests and ODI's (unless the plans have changed recently)

I'm yet to propose an ODI side, only looked at Tests so far.

 

[Eclipse]

Oh please(!)

You've made some comments in your time, and this is up with them.

Gilchrist is by no means the best glovesman in International Cricket - I can think of 2 who've just been competing in the Caribbean who are better keepers.

Thats probably because you are compleatly deluded and have no idea what you are talking about.

And I never said he was the best Glovesman in International cricket I said there is no one thats signifigantly better than him.

And Jacobs is NOT a better keeper than Gilchrist I have I have seen him drop some sitters I dont know why you formed this opinion.

I actualy asked Ian Healy last year when I saw him at the G who he though the best keepert going around is and guess what?? he was unable to give me an answere he said that in his opinion Boucher and Gilchrist were both quite good keepers and that Tibu had also impressed him. As for there rest he said no one really stood out but there were still some good one's going around obvously he ment guys like Jacobs etc..

I asked him this because I wanted the opinion of somone who actualy does take a close look at wicket keepers and knows what he is talking about. He has alot more going for him than you do and fellow aussie or not I respect his opinion much more than yours and trust him not to be to biased.

Gilchrist's keeping may have droped off slightly since he made his test debut but his mistakes are highlighted more than it seems because of his profile but he is certainly not a poor keeper.

 

[Eclipse]

Ohh and marc the last time you pointed out that one of my posts was "rubbish" or the "dubest thing I have ever said" or along those lines also had to do with keepers.

If I remember correctly I said shorter keepers are usualy better gloveman and you totaly dished me for it untill I actualy showed you why and also pointed out some experts who agreed with me Marsh is the only one I can remember right now.

Any way It seem's you dont always know what you are talking about so how about you get over yourself you dont know every thing.

And if you want to comment make sure you do so politely no need to have a go at me I dont think I have ever said anything like" You've made some comments in your time, and this is up with them." in reffrence to any of your postes.

 

[garage flower]

Speaking of confusing, Im a little confused with this whole Aus vs Rest of the World thing... In the ROW team thats being planned for 2005 or whenever it is, do all countries have to be represented?
Or is this something people have just decided to do on here when picking their personal teams?

I just decided on doing that to make picking the team more difficult/interesting, though I think it would be a decent idea if it was implemented for the games in question in order to make the ROW team more representative.

On the other hand, I don't suppose cricket fans (even in Bangladesh) would want to include a Manjural Islam Rana or Mohammed Rafique at the expense of Lara or Shoaib.

 

[Lions81]

Australia's dominance in Tests is every bit as big as their dominance in ODI's - what other side can go to SL and win 3-0?

What does that have to do with anything? Australia can't beat India in a test series, but they beat Sri Lanka 3-0 so that makes them by far the best test side? It doesn't work that way. I admit they are the #1 Test Side, and far better than Sri Lanka as that result shows, but they're not that far from India, as evidenced by their inability to beat India even at home.

 

[Loony BoB]

I've only ever considered Tests (Vaughan being a clear example why) - Fleming is not an opener, so to put him in that role in a Test for a ROW XI would not work.

That, and the fact that Smith is batting well, is an opener, and isn't that bad a captain is why he's ahead of Fleming in selection for my team.

If Fleming were to come in, which of that middle-order would make way? And his captaincy advantage over Smith would not be worth the runs disadvantage from putting him in there.

Of course, Smith captains what is on paper a far better side than New Zealand, yet Fleming still has a far better record against Australia. This is one of the main reasons I would put him into the team - because Fleming knows how to beat them. If there's one thing that can slip up with one bad ball, it's a batsman - Smith could just happen to have a bad day and fall out. Fleming's captaincy and way of playing the game, however, is something that rarely fails, and I believe that he would make more of a difference in the runs than Smith would - and I say that by considering both batting and captaincy. Of course, I'd still have Smith as a member of the team, as I believe he's one of the best (if not the best) opener available to the side.

Of course, even with that in mind, I don't think they'll have Fleming in the world XI because I don't think they'll take excellence in captaincy as a reason to get in. I think it'll be based purely on bat, ball and wicket keeping... maybe only bat and ball.

 

[garage flower]

Oh please(!)

You've made some comments in your time, and this is up with them.

Gilchrist is by no means the best glovesman in International Cricket - I can think of 2 who've just been competing in the Caribbean who are better keepers.

I don't think they're substantially better though Marc, which was the view Eclipse expressed.

I'd guess Gilchrist would be most people's 1st choice in a World test or one-day XI. There may be better 'keepers around, but there's no harm in having a no. 7 who averages 54(?) in your side. If you're facing Saturn's pace battery on a typically dodgy Blue Rings Oval strip, you need all the batting depth you can muster.

 

[Loony BoB]

Indeed. I mean, Adam Parore is stated by Cricinfo at his peak as "perhaps the most consistent keeper in world cricket" - but for him to make it into a world XI, even at his peak, would have been a huge shock to me.

 

[tooextracool]

Smith captains what is on paper a far better side than New Zealand, yet Fleming still has a far better record against Australia.This is one of the main reasons I would put him into the team - because Fleming knows how to beat them.

and remind me when was the last time fleming managed to pull of a victory over australia in tests?or for that matter in the ODIs?god stop boasting about ur success in the VB series...it was 3 yrs ago and they've lost every single game to australia since then.
greame smith hasnt even captained his side against australia yet, and already you are saying that he doesnt know how to beat them?

 

[garage flower]

What does that have to do with anything? Australia can't beat India in a test series, but they beat Sri Lanka 3-0 so that makes them by far the best test side? It doesn't work that way. I admit they are the #1 Test Side, and far better than Sri Lanka as that result shows, but they're not that far from India, as evidenced by their inability to beat India even at home.

Australia's advantages in less tangible areas like mental strength, fitness, pre-planning etc. give them a fairly clear edge I'd say and their unremitting aggression and ruthlessness also help them to win games that others would draw or lose, giving them a massive comparative advantage in overall test win-loss records.

I would however suggest that purely in terms of cricketing ability - i.e. the 3 essential disciplines of batting, bowling and fielding - India have closed the gap rapidly in recent years and are, in my view, continuing to improve while Australia are in gradual decline.

The disparity between the quality of their respective bowling attacks would have been huge a few years ago, but on the evidence of recent series is vastly reduced and India, arguably, out-fielded (or at least out-caught) the Aussies in the recent test series.

 

[Loony BoB]

I apologise if you think I'm boasting, I didn't mean to come across that way. =/ I actually believe that Fleming does have what it takes to not only score runs but to influence the amount of runs scored by his team and by the opposition purely via his own methods. Enough to deserve a place in the XI team as captain.

It's just my personal opinion. I don't expect anyone else to join in. :P Not the least the selectors of the world team.

 

[marc71178]

Thats probably because you are compleatly deluded and have no idea what you are talking about.

And I never said he was the best Glovesman in International cricket I said there is no one thats signifigantly better than him.

And you accuse me of being impolite when at no time did I resort to insults...

What I said refuted what you said about there being nobody significantly better than him.

And Jacobs is NOT a better keeper than Gilchrist I have I have seen him drop some sitters I dont know why you formed this opinion.

Jacobs is a very under-rated keeper IMO - one of the better ones.

I asked him this because I wanted the opinion of somone who actualy does take a close look at wicket keepers and knows what he is talking about. He has alot more going for him than you do and fellow aussie or not I respect his opinion much more than yours and trust him not to be to biased.

Yes, and which keepers has he seen most of, and which keeper led to his premature retirement?