Test dream team from each nation. 1970-2020

[Red]

I've been forming an opinion of late that Graham Gooch is perhaps the best opener of the last 50 years. It's very debatable but I've started to think Gooch doesn't get the kudos he deserves.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Dravid for me is one of the top 5 batsman in the last 50 years. 1970-2020. Ponting would be up there too. Best number 3s in that time?
1. Dravid
2. Ponting
3. Richards
4. Sangakkara
5. Williamson
6. Amla/Younis

Hmmm... These are their averages at 3:

Richards 61.54
Sangakkara 60.83
Ponting 56.27
Williamson 53.96
Dravid 52.88
Younis 51.33
Amla 49.96

I rate Dravid but I wouldn't put him in the top dozen batsmen of the past 50 years. In fact I'd only put him 5th amongst Indians (behind SRT, Sunny, Kohli, and Sehwag).

 

[Coronis]

Hmmm... These are their averages at 3:

Richards 61.54
Sangakkara 60.83
Ponting 56.27
Williamson 53.96
Dravid 52.88
Younis 51.33
Amla 49.96

I rate Dravid but I wouldn't put him in the top dozen batsmen of the past 50 years. In fact I'd only put him 5th amongst Indians (behind SRT, Sunny, Kohli, and Sehwag).

I’d put him ahead of Sehwag, personally. But yeah he definitely doesn’t come near a World XI for the last 50 years imo.

 

[bagapath]

There’s no feud. Barry Richards is a rare genius who strengthens any team. It’s not quite true to say he didn’t play “any” Tests, but if anyone decides he can’t be chosen based on stats that’s their tickle.

not using stats. his test records in the 70s is the same as mine. there is no stats to analyse. he just didn't play that form of the game. his ranking as a test player in the 70s is the same as his ATP rankings and the number of times he scaled Mount Everest.

 

[ataraxia]

not using stats. his test records in the 70s is the same as mine. there is no stats to analyse. he just didn't play that form of the game. his ranking as a test player in the 70s is the same as his ATP rankings and the number of times he scaled Mount Everest.

I sure hope you're counting the 70s as being 1971 to 1980.

 

[Himannv]

I think SL will probably go with something like this:

01. Jayasuriya
02. Dilshan
03. Sanga
04. Mahela*
05. Aravinda
06. Matthews
07. Chandimal+
08. Vaas
09. Herath
10. Malinga
11. Murali

Slightly different from some other teams mentioned here I think. Bats pretty deep and has more than enough bowling options. A bit strange to say this, but our best ODI team wouldn't be very different and that tells you a bit on where this team's focus has been. Sanga takes the gloves in that scenario and someone else comes in at 7.

Malinga comes in as I think he's SL's best Test bowler after Murali, Herath, and Vaas. At his peak he was probably our best bowler even with Murali in the team. He's hard to deal with due to his action - a little bit like Bumrah is currently. He's also quite good regardless of the conditions, so I think he'll be a good addition to the best XI.

Chandimal is a better batsman than PJ and Mahes Goonatilleke although not quite as good a keeper. He's a better keeper than Dilshan though so he'd make the cut for me.

Dilshan opens ahead of Attapattu. I think he's just about done enough to get the gig there.

 

[_00_deathscar]

Hmmm... These are their averages at 3:

Richards 61.54
Sangakkara 60.83
Ponting 56.27
Williamson 53.96
Dravid 52.88
Younis 51.33
Amla 49.96

I rate Dravid but I wouldn't put him in the top dozen batsmen of the past 50 years. In fact I'd only put him 5th amongst Indians (behind SRT, Sunny, Kohli, and Sehwag).

Sachin and Sunil are way ahead, and Kohli has a chance to get there. After those 2 (and you could argue Kohli is already ahead too of Dravid and I wouldn't have an issue with it), it's pretty level IMO but yea as said, he'd be about third or fourth pick at best in a World XI for the #3 position over the last 50 years.

 

[_00_deathscar]

But averaging 49 against those guys is a pretty neat achievement by itself.

Yep - no argument there, it's actually quite exceptional, especially as an opener.

 

[Immenso]

I sure hope you're counting the 70s as being 1971 to 1980.

Good caution. It's so tempting to pile in, so obvious, surely there's a trap?

 

[Red]

I sure hope you're counting the 70s as being 1971 to 1980.

So 1970 is part of the 1960s?

 

[Lillian Thomson]

not using stats. his test records in the 70s is the same as mine. there is no stats to analyse. he just didn't play that form of the game. his ranking as a test player in the 70s is the same as his ATP rankings and the number of times he scaled Mount Everest.

He played 4 Tests in the specified period of 1970-2020. But that’s not relevant to my point anyway. He makes any dream XI from that period irrespective of anything. The opening post doesn’t specify any criteria or insist on delving into stats guru. But if anyone wants to not pick him based on “stats”, (which includes number of Tests played, not just a batting average) that’s up to them and there’s no “feud”.

 

[Coronis]

Maybe I should add Labuschagne to my Aussie side.

 

[Nintendo]

Maybe I should add Labuschagne to my Aussie side.

Yeah Nah ponting>marnus by a long mile.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Maybe I should add Labuschagne to my Aussie side.

If you feel he's one of the best players, and not just dumping someone with a limited number of appearances in to make a spurious point, go for it.

 

[BoyBrumby]

If you feel he's one of the best players, and not just dumping someone with a limited number of appearances in to make a spurious point, go for it.

Ha.

The available evidence (an FC career of nigh on 80 games) would seem to suggest Marnus is a batter in great form rather than a great batsman, but he wouldn't be the first to do better in tests than regular FC games.

Lord Gah is one name who sprang to mind and dear old Kenny Barrington (who managed 13 more runs per innings in tests over an 82 test career) another.

I suppose Labuschagne's sample size is rather small currently.

 

[trundler]

The odds of Richards having been a mediocre are rather slim as evidenced by his FC stats but there's no reason to believe he was any better than say Mark Waugh or Hanif Mohammad, both of whom have very good test stats and terrific FC records. Therefore I have a hard time believing anyone who can say with certainty that he was better than yer Boycs's and Sunny's

 

[Lillian Thomson]

It's not about saying anything with certainty. It's about expressing an opinion where solid evidence isn't available.

 

[Red]

I have a hard time believing anyone who can say with certainty that he was better than yer Boycs's and Sunny's

Basically everyone (elite first class and test cricketers) from that era who played against or with him (in tests, WSC or FC cricket in Eng or Aus), testify to how absolutely good he was. If you've read anything from that era beyond statsguru it becomes pretty apparent just how good he was.

 

[jimmy101]

Actually quite staggering that the same old diatribe of "this guy's numbers don't quite correlate to this guys numbers" still gets passed around on this forum. Seemingly some people refuse to recognize the genius of B Richards because it mucks up their stats book.

 

[harsh.ag]

Basically everyone (elite first class and test cricketers) from that era who played against or with him (in tests, WSC or FC cricket in Eng or Aus), testify to how absolutely good he was. If you've read anything from that era beyond statsguru it becomes pretty apparent just how good he was.

Actually quite staggering that the same old diatribe of "this guy's numbers don't quite correlate to this guys numbers" still gets passed around on this forum. Seemingly some people refuse to recognize the genius of B Richards because it mucks up their stats book.

Basically everyone would also probably have said the same things for Mark Waugh if his international career had been curtailed for no fault of his own. Actually quite staggering that you guys don't get that.

Would always have Barry ahead of most openers in my XIs but won't pretend there isn't plenty of uncertainty to go around