Could a Combined SC XI have beaten Waugh's or Ponting's Teams from 99 to 2007 in Australia?

[Adorable Asshole]

Yeah but weren't you one of those who insisted on having a spinner for the Asian team as well even if they'd struggle? Either way, I don't expect the Asian top order to last long vs Fleming, Gillespie and especially McGrath which means Warne would be free to unleash vs the tail.

What? No

 

[morgieb]

It's mostly Mcgrath. Warne, Lee and Gillespie don't have a great record against Asian teams.

Gillespie has a poor record against Asian teams? Huh?

Even Lee was a huge reason as to why Australia won the 07/08 BG Trophy.

________________________

Anyway, to answer the question - it would depend on when they played. A SC XI in 1999 would've been more competitive than the actual touring teams, but I still think they would've lost. I think the 2004/05 Australian team would have little trouble accounting for a combined team at that point too. But given that India were arguably the better side in 2003/04, I think with the likes of Shoaib, Murali, etc. on board that probably swings it to an actual series win. 07/08 could go either way I suppose, but again the additions at least could only help the team, and India again were fairly close to winning that series.

 

[Slifer]

What? No

My mistake then.

 

[Slifer]

Gillespie has a poor record against Asian teams? Huh?

Even Lee was a huge reason as to why Australia won the 07/08 BG Trophy.

________________________

Anyway, to answer the question - it would depend on when they played. A SC XI in 1999 would've been more competitive than the actual touring teams, but I still think they would've lost. I think the 2004/05 Australian team would have little trouble accounting for a combined team at that point too. But given that India were arguably the better side in 2003/04, I think with the likes of Shoaib, Murali, etc. on board that probably swings it to an actual series win. 07/08 could go either way I suppose, but again the additions at least could only help the team, and India again were fairly close to winning that series.

Again, that was only imo, because Glenn McGrath was missing. For goodness sake Australia's main bowlers were Bracken, Bichel, Gillespie and Macgill. Replace them with McGrath, Warne and Fleming and it makes a world of difference. Warne not so much admittedly.

 

[Ali TT]

Unless you're the Clive Lloyd/Viv West Indians, it's best to have a bowling side with variety In Australia and that includes a good spinner. Slow bowlers have to be judged by a different standard here and one that averages 40 is doing a good job. Over the years the more successful slow bowlers have generally been English SLA or leg spinners and off breakers from the sub con. Vettori was good too.

Your team's bowling should be based on pace but sides that had Mushtaq, Saqlain, Kaneria, Ashwin, Jadeja, Kumble, Vettori, Swann (for a series) and Herath ... even Pat Symcox, were stronger for their presence.

Agree with this. Swann averaged 40 in 2010/11 but bowled England to victory with a 5fer at Adelaide and picked up wickets throughout the series while not leaking runs. There has been a trend of useful touring spinners getting smacked in Australia. Might reflect the quality of the rest of the attacks they were in though.