My Test & ODI Teams for 2003

[Ford_GTHO351]

Here are my Test and ODI teams for 2003.

Feel free to agree or disagree on them as they are controversial & many of you here will wonder why some players are not in one or both sides

2003 Test Team (in batting order)

Ricky Ponting (Australia)
Brian Lara (West Indies)
Mathew Hayden (Australia)
(c) Steve Waugh (Australia)
Herschelle Gibbs (South Africa)
Gary Kirsten (South Africa)
Adam Gilchrist (Australia)
Shaun Pollock (South Africa)
Jason Gillespie (Australia)
Muttiah Muralitharan (Sri Lanka)
Shabbir Ahmed (Pakistan)

12th Man: Rahul Dravid (India)


2003 ODI Team (in batting order)

Sachin Tendulkar (India)
Damien Martyn (Australia)
(c) Ricky Ponting (Australia)
Chris Gayle (West Indies)
Yasir Hameed (Pakistan)
Brian Lara (West Indies)
Adam Gilchrist (Australia)
Muttiah Muralitharan (Sri Lanka)
Mohammad Sami (Pakistan)
Brett Lee (Australia)
Makhaya Ntini (South Africa)

12th Man: Yousuf Youhana (Pakistan)

 

[Eclipse]

In batting order?? are you sure?

The name's look quite good but why would you open with Ponting / Lara and have Hayden at number three.

Same with ODI's or though personaly I do think Martyn is an exellant opener in ODI's .

And Murili and Sami batting ahead off Brett Lee :O !

I also think Yousuf Youhana form Pakistan should be in the starting 11 for the ODI side and Akhtar in both side's but deffinatly the test side.

 

[Ford_GTHO351]

In batting order?? are you sure?

The name's look quite good but why would you open with Ponting / Lara and have Hayden at number three.

Same with ODI's or though personaly I do think Martyn is an exellant opener in ODI's .

And Murili and Sami batting ahead off Brett Lee :O !

I also think Yousuf Youhana form Pakistan should be in the starting 11 for the ODI side and Akhtar in both side's but deffinatly the test side.

Well statistics such as total runs scored for 2003 and batting averages for 2003 had a good part in my batting order for each side.

Oh I reckon that Brett Lee is so much better a batsman then Murili or Sami, its just that Brett Lee this year hasn't had a great year with the bat in ODI's and once again this is a 2003 Team based on games from 2003, not previous years matches or career stats. Lee had a much better 2002 with the bat in ODI's.

 

[V Reddy]

You missed Dravid there. He averaged more than 100 in 2003 :P

 

[Ford_GTHO351]

You missed Dravid there. He averaged more than 100 in 2003 :P

Rahul Dravid is having a great time with the bat in the Test Series against Australia.

Dravid on one hand may have averaged 100.37 (No.1) this year in Tests, though he wasn't high the rankings in terms of total runs scored this year. Combine that with India's lack of Test Matches played in 2003, these are my main reasons for leaving Dravid out of my Test Side.

 

[marc71178]

Well, no-one else has stuck their head on the line, but here's mine:

Hayden
Gibbs
Ponting
Lara
Dravid
Waugh (c)
Gilchrist
Pollock
Akhtar
Muralitharan
Ntini


Also, for added fun - an underachievers XI:

Vincent
Key
Sinclair
Tendulkar
McKenzie
Cairns (c)
A McGrath (wk)
Batty
Hogg
Gough
Mahwire


And for ODI's:

Gayle
Gilchrist (wk)
Ponting (c)
Tendulkar
Youhana
Flintoff
Symonds
Lee
Muralitharan
Anderson
Ntini


And the under-achievers:

Vincent
Otieno (wk)
Ebrahim
Harris (c)
Irani
R Clarke
Arnold
Matsikenyeri
Boje
Willoughby
Donald


Note I deliberately left out Bangladeshis from all selections.

 

[Richard]

Then why can't you leave-out stuff people have done against Bangladesh from discussions invlolving Test-cricket?
McGrath presumably underachieved as a wicketkeeper? Let me assure you he didn't - his wicketkeeping has never been better than at Lord's.
McGrath's batting and bowling would be best placed in a Test overachievers' XI.
I wouldn't call Mahwire an underachiever - he very diplomatically accepted his role as a black player in the Zimbabwe side. He's done himself proud in a very, very difficult situation.
And I wouldn't say Ebrahim or Clarke have underachieved in ODIs. I've never expected anything more from them.

 

[Bazza]

Very hard to disagree with your teams there Marc - hard to believe the World Cup was this year, seems like so long ago...

 

[luckyeddie]

I cannot believe that anyone could conceivably come up with a 'Team of 2003' without Makhaya Ntini and Shoaib Akhtar spearheading the attack.

 

[marc71178]

Then why can't you leave-out stuff people have done against Bangladesh from discussions invlolving Test-cricket?

I left Bangladeshis out because they almost all were terrible, and putting them in would have meant a team that was almostcompletely one nation.

McGrath presumably underachieved as a wicketkeeper? Let me assure you he didn't - his wicketkeeping has never been better than at Lord's.

I needed a keeper and McGrath was far and away the worst one I saw in Test Cricket this year - got any better ideas?

And I wouldn't say Ebrahim or Clarke have underachieved in ODIs. I've never expected anything more from them.

They underachieved for the role in the side in which they were selected.


Since you obviously take so much pleasure in picking holes in other people's statements, I challenge you to name your teams in the same way as I have, or are you one of these that can give it out, but not take it back?

 

[Richard]

I was at least 3\4s joking - should have put more s in. And I stand by my statement that Ebrahim fulfilled his role in the side, because his role wasn't to score runs, that would have been a bonus, his role was political, and he did as he was told (poor guy would presumably have his family murdered if he didn't). Clarke, however, was genuinely expected to score runs and bowl, if not well, then at least OK, neither of which he did (except against Bangladesh).
But anyway:
Tests:
Smith (naturally)
Hayden (for lack of a better name, and runs are runs)
Kirsten (fantastic year, even given quality of opposition)
Ponting (obviously)
Dravid (unleaveableoutable)
Lara (same - and yes, I'd prefer Dravid above him)
Sangakkara (not always kept wicket in 2003, but had easily the best year of the capable 'keepers)
Gillespie (he finally found his accuracy this Ashes [which ended in 2003], and it made him a very good bowler, though perhaps he was still a little flattered by figures)
Shoaib Akhtar (average and economy-rate phenominal, found another good spell in the second half of the year, longer than any of his good spells yet)
Muralitharan (48 in 7 matches, at an as-per-usual excellent economy-rate, is quite incredible too)
Shabbir Ahmed (did play 3 Tests against Bangladesh, but his bowling, often in unhelpful conditions, has now undeniably been very, very good indeed)
Underachievers:
Horne
Key
E. Smith
Tendulkar
McKenzie
Stewart (lost his average of 40)
Cairns
Agarkar (APU)
Vaas (for most of 2003 he was well below his best, and though it's typical to the long-term picture, it's still disappointing)
Johnson (been terrible in his only authentic Test)
Gough
ODIs:
Jayasuriya
Gayle
Lara
Tendulkar
Ponting
Youhana
Gilchrist
Flintoff
Vaas
Muralitharan
Ntini
Underachievers:
Key (though it's not really fair as he never opened)
Kaluwitharana (APU)
Ganguly (again, he never opened, but you'd still expect him to do better at three than just 3 unbeaten centuries against non-Test teams and basically nothing besides)
Shahid Afridi
Sehwag (crikey, these openers are everywhere, aren't they. Good job this isn't a team, just a collection of players, eh?)
Tillekeratne
Cairns (again)
Agarkar (again, and APU again)
Waqar Younis
Saqlain Mushtaq
Donald
Some undisputables, as you can see, by the fact that our teams are similar. However, I count those whose domestic and\or past records suggest they should succeed, not ones I regard as bad selections, otherwise everyone who had played and done poorly would qualify equally. I'm surprised you wouldn't pick Jayawardene in an underachievers' XI, though, as most people seemed to regard him as a good ODI player.

 

[iamdavid]

A McGrath (wk)

I remember that , they almost needed a backstop.

Test XI

1.H.H.Gibbs
2.M.L.Hayden
3.R.Dravid
4.R.T.Ponting
5.B.C.Lara*
6. G.Kirsten
7.A.C.Gilchrist+
8.S.M.Pollock
9.S.Akhtar
10.M.Muralitharan
11.M.Ntini
12th man.J.N.Gillespie


ODI XI

1.S.R.Tendulkar
2.C.H.Gayle
3.R.T.Ponting*
4.B.C.Lara
5.Y.Youhana
6.A.Flintoff
7.A.Gilchrist+
8.C.Vaas
9.B.Lee
10.M.Muralitharan
11.M.Ntini
12th man.S.Jayasuria

 

[Adamc]

For what it's worth, here are my 2003 teams:

Tests XI (batting order)

1. Herschelle Gibbs - a million times better than Smith IMO and averaged higher in 2003. Scored 228 in less than a day.
2. Matthew Hayden - Don't think there is much argument.
3. Ricky Ponting - Ditto.
4. Brian Lara (c) - Ditto.
5. Rahul Dravid - Ditto. Put him at 5 because I would rather him as a 'crisis man', doesn't score as quickly as the top 4.
6. Jacques Kallis - A good year with the bat - if he were to play today his form would be as good as anyone else. Took a 9-wicket match haul vs. Eng., but really only needed as a support bowler.
7. Kumar Sangakkara - The only person who can keep to Murali.
8. Shaun Pollock - 45 wickets at 21 in 2003, as well as a batting average of 50.
9. Shoaib Akhtar - Easily the most destructive bowler in world cricket. Seems to have benefited from responsibility of leading the attack in the absence of the two W's.
10. Muttiah Muralitharan - With his new delivery, probably the only person in the world who can read everything he bowls is Sangakkara. Gets the no. 10 slot due to some unorthodox innings which frustrated England, and Nasser Hussain in particular.
11. Makhaya Ntini - The other half of the formidable South African duo. 59 wickets at a strike rate of just 47.6.

12th Man. Habibul Bashar - Probably a few better candidates, but it's good to see a Bangladeshi doing well. Averaged over 44 this year, and had a huge series against Pakistan with 379 runs in 3 tests.
ODI XI (batting order)

1. Sachin Tendulkar - Millions of runs in opening position, don't see any need to move him from it.
2. Chris Gayle - Great year with the bat, just as good with the ball. Succeeded against all opponents.
3. Ricky Ponting (c) - Led from the front in the WC and in the TVS Cup.
4. Brian Lara - 888 runs at 47, dropped by Kallis 1st ball in the WC and had a good year since.
5. Damien Martyn - Often taken for granted and an under-recognised part of the Aus. lineup. 878 runs at 58 this year and apart from 2 centuries he hit a crucial 88* in the WC final.
6. Adam Gilchrist - ODI keepers need to be able to bat. Gilly is the best candidate.
7. Abdul Razzaq - If any bowling attack got through the top 6, Razzaq would blow them away. In the first three ODI's vs NZ in Pakistan he hit 47*(22), 42*(16) and 34(16) - 123 off 54.
8. Andy Bichel - Averaged 26 with ball and 34 with bat.
9. Chaminda Vaas - Truckload of wickets in the WC.
10. Muttiah Muralitharan - One of few spinners to do well in ODI's in 2003.
11. Shane Bond - Missed half the year through injury, but exceptional in the matches he did play. Anyone who can take 6/23 vs Aus gets my vote.

12th Man. Yousuf Youhana - very consistent year, plenty of half-centuries though only one ton.

 

[Eclipse]

Tests:

Hayden
Gibb's
Ponting
Lara
Dravid
Kallis
Gilchrist
Pollock
Akhtar
Ntini
Murili

ODI's:

Tendulkar
Gilchrist (avrage 40+ strike rate 100+)
Ponting
Lara
Martyn(again very underated has had a brilliant year in ODI's)
Youhana
Gayle
Flintoff
Pollock
Lee
Murili

 

[Ford_GTHO351]

I was going through my 2003 Test and ODI sides and I went and got my players career stats to date (as of 1.1.04) to see how strong my sides are.

My Test XI

Total Matches: 807

Batting
Total Innings: 1241
Total Not Outs: 193
Total Runs: 48379
Average: 46.16
Average Strike Rate: 54.41
100's: 134
50's: 202

Bowling
Total Overs: 11082.2
Total Runs: 26918
Total Wickets: 1119
Average: 24.05
Strike Rate: 59.42
Economy: 2.42
Total 5WI: 67
Total 10WM: 13

My ODI XI

Total Matches: 1564

Batting
Total Innings: 1269
Total Not Outs: 197
Total Runs: 41679
Average: 38.87
Average Strike Rate: 74.82
Total 100's: 92
Total 50's: 231

Bowling
Total Overs: 5397.4
Total Runs: 23474
Total Wickets: 885
Average: 26.52
Strike Rate: 36.59
Economy: 4.34
Total 5WI: 15

 

[marc71178]

Sehwag (crikey, these openers are everywhere, aren't they. Good job this isn't a team, just a collection of players, eh?)

Well I tried to select a 1-11 in a team format, not just lump players together.

 

[Richard]

Muttiah Muralitharan - With his new delivery, probably the only person in the world who can read everything he bowls is Sangakkara.

You reckon? I don't reckon Sangakkara has a cat in hell's chance of reading him from where he stands, just like anyone else playing. No-one can read him from the batting position, though you can usually make a fairly safe guess on line. Most of the time the England batsmen did in the recent series.

 

[Mr. P]

Tests

Gibbs (I do put him above Smith)
Hayden (But of course)
Ponting (Simply awesome)
Lara (Yeah)
Dravid (Yeah)
Kallis/Waugh (you decide)
Gilchrist (wk) (Probably a few better keeping options, but none come close to his batting and his keeping isnt too shabby either)
Gillespie (When not injured, I rate him the worlds best paceman)
Bond (Sublime against the Aussis, just as good elsewhere)
Muralitheran (Long may he throw, but if they say its legal for some reason ill put him in my side)
Ntini (Great year, great bowler)

 

[Richard]

Interesting - Bond, sublime against the Aussies? As far as I noticed he averaged 70 against them and the sublime figures came elsewhere when not very difficult to get (v Bangladesh's excuse for a Test-standard batting-line-up and v India on seamers' paradises). Australia and Sri Lanka are the only ones who've actually played Bond well.
As for Murali, we can discuss it in other threads, but the two main questions: have you read the relevant rules, and have you made an extensive study of his action?

 

[Adamc]

You reckon? I don't reckon Sangakkara has a cat in hell's chance of reading him from where he stands, just like anyone else playing. No-one can read him from the batting position, though you can usually make a fairly safe guess on line. Most of the time the England batsmen did in the recent series.

Well, Sangakkara said himself that he can pick everything Murali bowls. At the moment I can see no great reason to disbelieve him. It is only natural that after keeping to Murali for up to 5 days straight that he would work out some way of picking him, as I imagine any decent keeper would do.