Thankyou! It took a whole page...James90 said:1. Afridi
2. Slater
3. Ponting
4. Tendulkar
5. Lara
6. Flintoff
7. Gilchrist
8. Warne
9. Malinga
10. Muralitharan
11. Bond
Notable mentions go to Lance Klusener and both Waugh's
Yeah you'd think the Kiwi's would know a good cricketer when they see one... or maybe not? He's not a hard pick to explain. Man of the tournament in the '92 world cup as well.Martin Crowe was a delight to watch when in the mood. And he has great stats inspite of being pushed in too early, in his own words.
I have what some call "mana". Blue collar mana in fact.Cool thread Francis. I may or may not agree with you, but your threads/posts are always fun to read!
Francis said:Yeah you'd think the Kiwi's would know a good cricketer when they see one... or maybe not?
It was tough for me to leave out Afridi but he simply isnt consistent enough/has enough exposure in test cricket for me to include him ahead of Greenidge or Sehwag - and i was compiling a test side.deeps said:yeh surprised it took a whole page for someone to mention Shahid Afridi
True but if you want to keep ' most entertaining' as a factor, you wont be able to compile the 'best possible team' for winning matchups and i think most people's picks here are pretty competent a lineup. But at the end of the day, a Mark Waugh or Carl Hooper are infinitely more entertaining than a Steve Waugh or Jacques Kallis.That lineup would not just be entertaining and exquisite to watch, they would win most of their matches too