• 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.

Composite XI's and hypothetical match-ups ...

Maybe for India he was a decent pacer, but compared to the rest of the world he was pretty mediocre. Only in the 2000s have India finally acquired a decent pace attack - and it's showing in their results. This is a team that used to open bowling with Ganguly.
You are right. I have seen that time too. Now India has pretty decent fast bowlers sitting on the bench and waiting for the chance.
 

Matt79

Hall of Fame Member
Maybe for India he was a decent pacer, but compared to the rest of the world he was pretty mediocre. Only in the 2000s have India finally acquired a decent pace attack - and it's showing in their results. This is a team that used to open bowling with Ganguly.
Hope you're talking about Srinath, not Kapil Dev, in that remark.
 

bryce

International Regular
West Indies v Australia period pains XI

West Indies

1. Greenidge
2. Haynes
3. Richards
4. Richardson
5. Kallicharran
6. LLoyd
7. Dujon
8. Marshall
9. Holding
10.Roberts
11.Garner
Sorry, you really should have put at least 30 seconds more thought into this - your aussies don't match up quite that well...

1.Greenidge
2.Haynes
3.Richards
4.Lara
5.Sobers
6.Lloyd/Chanderpaul
7.Dujon(wk)
8.Marshall
9.Holding
10.Garner
11.Ambrose
 

Lillian Thomson

Hall of Fame Member
Sorry, you really should have put at least 30 seconds more thought into this - your aussies don't match up quite that well...

1.Greenidge
2.Haynes
3.Richards
4.Lara
5.Sobers
6.Lloyd/Chanderpaul
7.Dujon(wk)
8.Marshall
9.Holding
10.Garner
11.Ambrose

I assume you're apologizing for being stupid. It was clearly a selection of players from each Countries period of dominance. A period which didn't include Lara, Sobers, Chanderpaul or Ambrose.
 

bryce

International Regular
Interesting... So Border made his Test debut in '79 and played all through the 80's yet makes the side? I think that is what threw me off track, seems like a fairly loose selection criterium - Ambrose played in the 80's much the same as Border playing in a portion of the 90's.
 

Lillian Thomson

Hall of Fame Member
Interesting... So Border made his Test debut in '79 and played all through the 80's yet makes the side? I think that is what threw me off track, seems like a fairly loose selection criterium - Ambrose played in the 80's much the same as Border playing in a portion of the 90's.

Border made a large contribution to Australia's success being there at the start and partly responsible for it............Ambrose came along at the start of a gradual decline and made nowhere near the contribution of Roberts during the successful period.
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
Maybe for India he was a decent pacer, but compared to the rest of the world he was pretty mediocre. Only in the 2000s have India finally acquired a decent pace attack - and it's showing in their results. This is a team that used to open bowling with Ganguly.
The Srinath/Prasad combination of the late 90s i still consider the best Indian new-ball duo i've seen. Although the recent exploits of Zaheer/Ishant is coming along nicely & seems potentially more lethal.
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
Border made a large contribution to Australia's success being there at the start and partly responsible for it............Ambrose came along at the start of a gradual decline and made nowhere near the contribution of Roberts during the successful period.
If you are going to pick Border on that reasoning, you should probably pick McDermott instead of Lee also.

Border no doubt played a big part for ENG 89 to his retirement in SA 93/94 in the revival of Australia's test fortunes. But they had become dominant until WI 95. So you can't pick Border.
 

Lillian Thomson

Hall of Fame Member
If you are going to pick Border on that reasoning, you should probably pick McDermott instead of Lee also.

Border no doubt played a big part for ENG 89 to his retirement in SA 93/94 in the revival of Australia's test fortunes. But they had become dominant until WI 95. So you can't pick Border.
Okay I withdraw the entire post and replace it with an arm wrestling contest between Meryl Streep and Barry Manilow.
 

Zinzan

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Ind/WI:
Sehwag
Gambhir
Sarwan
Tendulkar
Chanderpaul
Bravo
Dhoni+*
Harbhajan
Ishant
Taylor
Zaheer Khan

.
Would have Laxman instead of Sarwan & possibly Gayle over Gambhir, although thats a tough one with the year Gambhir's had
 

Manee

Cricketer Of The Year
Team A

1. Sir Jack Hobbs
2. Sunil Gavaskar
3. Ricky Ponting
4. Sachin Tendulkar
5. Sir Vivian Richards
6. Sir Garfield Sobers
7. Adam Gilchrist
8. Wasim Akram
9. Dennis Lillee
10. Malcolm Marshall
11. Muttiah Muralitharan

Team B

1. Matthew Hayden
2. Barry Richards
3. Sir Don Bradman
4. Brian Lara
5. Graeme Pollock
6. Kumar Sangakkara (wk)
7. Imran Khan
8. Sir Richard Hadlee
9. Shane Warne
10. Curtly Ambrose
11. Glenn Mcgrath

Who would win, in your opinion?
 
Last edited:
Team A

1. Sir Jack Hobbs
2. Sunil Gavaskar
3. Sir Donald Bradman
4. Sachin Tendulkar
5. Sir Vivian Richards
6. Sir Garfield Sobers
7. Adam Gilchrist
8. Wasim Akram
9. Dennis Lillee
10. Malcolm Marshall
11. Muttiah Muralitharan

Team B

1. Matthew Hayden
2. Barry Richards
3. Ricky Ponting
4. Brian Lara
5. Graeme Pollock
6. Kumar Sangakkara (wk)
7. Imran Khan
8. Sir Richard Hadlee
9. Shane Warne
10. Curtly Ambrose
11. Glenn Mcgrath

Who would win, in your opinion?
Bowling of both sides is equally good but there is no comparison of batting. You are trying to compare apples with potatos.
 

Manee

Cricketer Of The Year
You're right, that is where the difference is pronnounced. Lemme change it up a tad.
 

Top