England XI vs South Africa XI (since 1990)

[reyrey]

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

I only picked 1 and was undecided on the other. The rest including Root are in for different reasons

 

[reyrey]

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.

Maharaj got to do plenty of bowling. Look at the number of overs bowled by all the other bowlers not just strike rates. And again it's down to the quality of the batting at the time.

Maharaj ran through Sri Lanka once and BD twice (on 4th innings pitches). That's really your argument?

 

[reyrey]

Australia isn't the only country in the world.

tho I agree his standards are weird

No, but they were generally the best team between when most of those players played, so represent the best yardstick

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Australia isn't the only country in the world.

tho I agree his standards are weird

From what I’ve heard, it’s the only country that really matters for English players or at least it’s the most important by far. It’s why most people in Aus probably don’t rate Anderson or Root as top tier. The ashes in test cricket is like world cups in odi cricket.

 

[Coronis]

From what I’ve heard, it’s the only country that really matters for English players or at least it’s the most important by far. It’s why most people in Aus probably don’t rate Anderson or Root as top tier. The ashes in test cricket is like world cups in odi cricket.

And thus, the best Ashes performers with bat or ball

(min 20 innings)

Bradman (AUS) 5028 @ 89.78 19 tons
Sutcliffe (ENG) 2741 @ 66.85 8 tons
Barrington (ENG) 2111 @ 63.96 5 tons
Hussey (AUS) 1304 @ 59.27 4 tons
Waugh (AUS) 3200 @ 58.18 10 tons
Leyland (ENG) 1705 @ 56.83 7 tons
Hutton (ENG) 2428 @ 56.46 5 tons
Border (AUS) 3548 @ 56.31 8 tons
Smith (AUS) 3417 @ 56.01 12 tons
Hobbs (ENG) 3636 @ 54.26 12 tons

Others averaging above 50 - Hammond, Jones, Morris, Stackpole, Langer, Simpson, M.Waugh.

(min 2000 balls) (kept to 20th century onwards)

Hogg (AUS) 56 @ 17.00 5 5’fers
Trumble (AUS) 78 @ 17.05 6 5’fers
Laker (ENG) 79 @ 18.27 5 5’fers
Reid (AUS) 47 @ 20.40 2 5’fers
Harris (AUS) 57 @ 20.63 4 5’fers
McGrath (AUS) 157 @ 20.92 10 5’fers
Lillee (AUS) 167 @ 21.00 11 5’fers
Alderman (AUS) 100 @ 21.17 11 5’fers
Blythe (ENG) 41 @ 21.39 3 5’fers
Barnes (ENG) 106 @ 21.58 12 5’fers

Others averaging below 25 - Archer, G. Miller, K. Miller, Lindwall, Warne, Rhodes, Davidson, Cummins, Thomson, Johnston, MacGill, Noble, Hendrick

Bradman and Warne lead the aggregates, Barnes still has more 5’fers than Warne tho. England gotta worry more about their bowling than batting.

 

[peterhrt]

Any theories why England have won more Tests and series than they have lost against South Africa since readmission?

 

[Johan]

From what I’ve heard, it’s the only country that really matters for English players or at least it’s the most important by far. It’s why most people in Aus probably don’t rate Anderson or Root as top tier. The ashes in test cricket is like world cups in odi cricket.

It's the cultural significance but I rate the ability to step up in the big games by performances that win you test matches or serieses rather than just focusing on cultural significance.

 

[Bolo.]

Maharaj got to do plenty of bowling. Look at the number of overs bowled by all the other bowlers not just strike rates. And again it's down to the quality of the batting at the time.

Maharaj ran through Sri Lanka once and BD twice (on 4th innings pitches). That's really your argument?

OFC SR matters to how much bowling time the others get. If your first bowler takes 10 wickets from consecutive balls, the rest of the team only bowls 1 over. If they take 100 overs, it's 99 for the team. See the current series for an example. Maharaj has not got to bowl that many many overs cos KG has gone wild.

Average also matters. Swann averaging 30 makes him similar to the quicks in his side. The bowlers in Maharaj's team average low 20s. It's a big downgrade.

Maharaj did not get to do the amount of bowling Swann did. They have basically identical figures on every basic indictor, except Swann bowled more per match. Unless you think he was saying no to chances to bowl (he wasn't), he had less opportunities.

 

[Coronis]

Any theories why England have won more Tests and series than they have lost against South Africa since readmission?

South Africa vs England

Series with Kallis 4-2-2
Series without Kallis 1-2-4

But in reality, England have won the last 4 series, from 2015-16 onwards. iirc South Africa’s been pretty **** at batting during that time frame.

 

[Johan]

Any theories why England have won more Tests and series than they have lost against South Africa since readmission?

the difference between the output of great and good cricketers isn't quite as big as people think it is.

on a serious note, It's weird since it was pretty even, even in the 90s which is dark ages for English cricket.

 

[Bolo.]

I think people underestimate the level of randomness involved in samples this small. Stuff like blockatons from Russell can swing series. It's not that he was a big match bat, or that RSA struggled unusually to close out tight games. Just right innings, right time.

 

[capt_Luffy]

South Africa:

G Smith
Kirsten
Amla
Kallis
De Villiers
De Kock
Pollock
Steyn
Donald
Rabada
Maharaj


There is no point picking all of Pollock, Steyn, Donald, and Rabada when you've also got Kallis. It also has a weakish 7 (Pollock) with only 2 test 100s. Pick Cullinan in the middle order. Sadly Rabada probably misses out, which is insane.

Meanwhile Philander, who would walk into every other team post 1990 except possibly Australia's, doesn't get close.

McGrath, Warne, Cummins..... And?? Imo Philander is easily better than Gillespie and Hazlewood.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Imo Philander is easily better than Gillespie and Hazlewood.

It depends on the conditions. Gillespie and Hazlewood would get picked ahead of him unless the pitches are spicy.

 

[ma1978]

For batting:

G Smith > Cook
Kirsten < Gooch
Kallis > Root
Amla > Thorpe
ABD > Pietersen
Gibbs > Stokes
De Kock > Prior
Pollock < Flintoff
Maharaj = Swann

Overall, a pretty big distance in favour of SA.


For bowling:

Steyn > Anderson
Donald >> Gough
Pollock >> Flintoff
Maharaj < Swann
Kallis = Stokes

Overall, an even bigger gap for SA. It's really not close in anyways.

and no way Kirsten is worse than Gooch. It’s a wide gap on the other end