Playing selector: Lets pick the best test XI of different eras

[silentstriker]

By the way, don't take this as a knock on Ponting. I think he is the best batsman in the world right now, easily. If he keeps this rate up for two more years, than I will agree with you that he should be right up there with Tendulkar and Lara, but not yet.

Same for Dravid. They both need longetivity to make up for flatter pitches and worse bowling.

 

[aussie tragic]

I realize that. But just like with Ian Botham, the stats do not tell the full story. There was a period that Lara and Sachin were so dominant, it is almost indescribable. Plus bowling was better in the 90s (Donald, W & W, Ambrose/Walsh, etc).

I don't know about you, but I think the following stats as a # 3 are pretty dominant:

Ponting: 6294 runs @ 66.25
Dravid: 6818 runs @ 61.42
Lara: 3484 runs @ 59.05
Tendulkar: Never batted at #3

 

[silentstriker]

I don't know about you, but I think the following stats as a # 3 are pretty dominant:

Ponting: 6294 runs @ 66.25
Dravid: 6818 runs @ 61.42
Lara: 3484 runs @ 59.05
Tendulkar: Never batted at #3

They are great, but the lack of top quality bowling attacks keep them from being dominant. They need longetivity to make up that difference.

 

[aussie tragic]

They are great, but the lack of top quality bowling attacks keep them from being dominant. They need longetivity to make up that difference.

Longevity??? Ponting and Dravid both have over 100 test matches...

 

[silentstriker]

Longevity??? Ponting and Dravid both have over 100 test matches...

But they weren't close to as dominant as they are now in the 1990s (when the bowling attacks were better). Now different people mature at different ages, so I can look past that thinking "Well in the 1990's, it wasn't the better bowling attacks that kept them in check, but they just hadn't matured as batsman yet"

But the fact remains that they did not do as well against the better bowlers. And now they can still catch up with Sachin & Lara, but it will take a while.

 

[bagapath]

i am not as clear as you both. here is how my selection stands as of now. will mull over it, take my time, watch how others vote and then take a call. this is from 1986 - 2006. sir viv doesnt find a place in my team.

#3 dravid/ponting
#4 sachin/ lara
#5 waugh/ inzamam

BTW, i expect the race to be pretty hot for the middle order and the fast bowling slots. the all-rounder, keeper and spinners are going to be pretty easy.

before all that, the second opener is still anybody's guess. i knew hayden would be number 1. but never did and still dont have a clue on his partner.

 

[SJS]

Here we go again. Off the cuff.
1. Gooch
2. Hayden
3. Dravid
4. Tendulkar
5. Lara
6. Steve Waugh
7. Gilchrist
8. Wasim Akram
9. Warne
10.Murali
11. McGrath

 

[Sir Redman]

I have done the stats for the # 3 batsmen and I've come up with the following lists based on them having the 20 tests, > 40.00 average since 1986, plus having a minimum of 20 innings in the # 3 position.

# 3 Batsman

David Boon
Rahul Dravid
David Gower
Dean Jones
Jacques Kallis
Younis Khan
Brian Lara
VVS Laxman
Ricky Ponting
Richie Richardson
Kumar Sangakkara

EDIT: For the #4 position, I propose the next 5 highest vote getters from # 3, plus the following which have also had > 40.00 ave plus > 20 innings in the #4 position:

# 4 Batsman

Allan Border
Martin Crowe
Daryll Cullinan
Aravinda de Silva
Mahela Jayawardene
Saleem Malik
Damien Martyn
Javed Miandad
Sachin Tendulkar
Graham Thorpe
Inzamam Ul-Haq
Dilip Vengsarker
Mark Waugh
Mohammad Yousuf

For the #5 position, I propose the next 10 highest vote getters from # 4, plus the following which have also had > 40.00 ave plus > 20 innings in the #5 and/or #6 position:

# 5 Batsman

Mohammad Azharuddin
Shivnarine Chanderpaul
Andy Flower
Sourav Ganguly
Viv Richards
Steve Waugh

Did I miss anyone?

For #3 you could include Andrew Jones. Stats as follows:

                     Mat    I  NO  Runs HS1  HS2  HS3     Ave 100  50   0
unfiltered            39   74   8  2922 186  170* 150   44.27   7  11   2
filtered              39   70   7  2732 186  170* 150   43.36   6  11   2

(Filtered is batting at #3)

 

[silentstriker]

For #3 you could include Andrew Jones. Stats as follows:

                     Mat    I  NO  Runs HS1  HS2  HS3     Ave 100  50   0
unfiltered            39   74   8  2922 186  170* 150   44.27   7  11   2
filtered              39   70   7  2732 186  170* 150   43.36   6  11   2

(Filtered is batting at #3)

Whats the point of including him if he has no chance of winning (neither do 75% of the people on that list.)?

 

[aussie tragic]

For #3 you could include Andrew Jones. Stats as follows:

                     Mat    I  NO  Runs HS1  HS2  HS3     Ave 100  50   0
unfiltered            39   74   8  2922 186  170* 150   44.27   7  11   2
filtered              39   70   7  2732 186  170* 150   43.36   6  11   2

(Filtered is batting at #3)

Done (as an amendment to original post)

 

[aussie tragic]

As it's pretty obvious that Haydon has been voted as the # 1 Opener between 1986-2006, I have just opened the Poll for the # 2 Opener (open for 7-days).

btw, I think the # 2 vote will be much closer, or is it just me as I haven't got a clue who I'll vote for

 

[aussie tragic]

i am not as clear as you both. here is how my selection stands as of now. will mull over it, take my time, watch how others vote and then take a call. this is from 1986 - 2006. sir viv doesnt find a place in my team.

Did you ever see him play, he was awesome

btw, his stats of 1820 runs @ 46.66 in the # 5 position since 1986 is good enough for me

 

[marc71178]

Shocked that Boon can appear as both an opener and a number 3 - surely he's one or the other, and appearing in both shows how silly the reliance on numbers alone as a qualifier is.

 

[aussie tragic]

Shocked that Boon can appear as both an opener and a number 3 - surely he's one or the other, and appearing in both shows how silly the reliance on numbers alone as a qualifier is.

So are you saying that if Ponting, Dravid, Lara and Kallis are voted on as #3, they can't be considered for #4 or #5. If this is the case, it wouldn't be the best World XI.

btw, moot point anyway as he is not going to win the slot, it just ensures that all of the best players were considerd in the vote.

 

[marc71178]

Personally I would vote on middle orders as a whole.

 

[adharcric]

I agree. There isn't a HUGE difference between batting at #3, #4, #5 and #6. They are all middle-order batsmen. Sure, the #3 might need a better technique against pace in case the openers fall, but it's not really that significant a difference. When you are trying to arrange Dravid, Tendulkar and Laxman in the Indian middle-order, you look at where they have succeeded to choose their positions ... but you don't exclude Tendulkar from #3 or #5 talks in World XIs just because of that. Opening batsmen and middle-order batsmen, on the other hand, are significantly different from each other. Separating them by position is almost like saying that Sehwag and Kirsten can't both make the World XI because they both take strike for their respective sides (bat at #1 and not #2). You should pick the 3 middle-order bats without too much regard to position and then proceed to slot them in particular positions.

 

[aussie]

"Any idea of how many people meet the above criteria? Im interested to see who does"

from memory i am making the following the list.

botham
cairns
imran
greig
kallis
kapil
miller
sobers

there may be more. but as far as i know, this is it!

faulkner would also have made it if he had played a few more tests. mankad misses out by a whisker.

How so Faulkner even though he played few test with this record has to be regarded as one of the greatest all-rounders so too Mankad IMO.

Some other worthy mentioned would be Hadlee, Rhodes, Pollock, Procter & Rice even though a great test careers was lost due South Africa being banned & probably even Davidson.

 

[aussie]

I don't know about you, but I think the following stats as a # 3 are pretty dominant:

Ponting: 6294 runs @ 66.25
Dravid: 6818 runs @ 61.42
Lara: 3484 runs @ 59.05
Tendulkar: Never batted at #3

Stats don't always tell the whole truth, yea Ponting & Dravid have the best averages @ #3 over the past 20 years, but i wont bat them @ 3 ahead of Lara, Tendulkar even though he surprisingly has never batted there in test or King Viv. I personally would bat Tendulkar 3 because at his best has a superb technique & has great experience from ODI cricket opening then Lara & Richards.

 

[SJS]

How so Faulkner even though he played few test with this record has to be regarded as one of the greatest all-rounders so too Mankad IMO.

Faulkner must rate amongst the half dozen top all rounders of all time.

 

[bagapath]

Did you ever see him play, he was awesome

yeap i did from 1982 onwards until he retired whenever there was coverage on indian tv. his best was certainly before 1986. he didnt score a single test hundred after 1988 i think. a certainty in the 1965 to 1985 era. but not in this one, for me, that is.