Who's the best?

[twctopcat]

1980s West Indians - bowlers win matches.

Couldn't agree more, their fast quartet could tear through anyone, and i mean anyone, '48 invincibles included - hmmm perhaps a bit contentious but what the hell. As for their batting Richards and Lloyd weren't half bad and they had the greatest opening partnership seen for a long time statistically speaking until recently, when a couple of australian flat track bully's came on the scene and began destroying today's stellar attacks.

 

[Richard]

Lindwall, Miller, Johnston and Toshack could tear through anyone, too. So could Pollock, Procter, Barlow, Goddard and Trimborn.
And as for their batting, Bradman and Loxton weren't half bad either, Barnes and Morris were IMO better than Greenidge and Haynes, and Hassett, Harvey and Miller were IMO better than Richardson, Kallicharran, Dujon and the like. And certainly Pollock, Richards, Barlow, Bacher, Goddard, Lindsay and Procter weren't bad either. Sure I've forgotten someone from '69\'70...

 

[SquidAU]

I picked the 1969/70 South Africans.....they would have dominated world cricket for a long time if they had continued playing.

Why would the Aussie team of 2002 be the best...I would have had the poll with the 1999-2001 aussie team.....

 

[marc71178]

thank you captain obvious.

So you cannot ask where teams with just 2 good players are.

 

[Rik]

I refuse to vote, based on having seen only one of those teams.

Remarkable restraint! But you still got a post in :P

 

[Beleg]

1980's WI and 1969-70's SA.
WI have a slight edge because other teams around that time were slightly better then in the other era's. But I have heard a lot of acclaim for the SA from the mouths of those who had seen them play.

 

[a massive zebra]

I would go for the 1948 invincibles, followed by West Indies 1984 in 2nd, with South Africa 1969-70, Australia 2000 and England 1928-29 joint 3rd. And IMO the English teams of 1928-29 and 1954-55 were better than the bodyline tourists.