Your All Time XI'S test/one day

[Migara]

All time ODI XI

Sachin Tendulkar
Sanath Jayasuriya
Vivian Richards
Dean Jones / Aravinda de Silva
Martin Crowe / Md. Azharuddin
Michael Bevan
Adam Gilchrist
Wasim Akram
Joel Garner
Muralitharan
Glenn McGrath

Bowling is quite self explanatory. garner has the besr ER, Wasim, undoubtedly the best ODI bowler. McGrath, most accurate of the bowlers, and Muralii, the best ODI spinner, who provided enough longevity. Sanath Jayasuriya is probably the best part timer ever in ODI cricket..

Tendulkar for me is the best ODI opener, with exlosiveness of Jayasuriya. It was tempting to go with Gilchrist but I stuck with Jaya. Richards is an automatic choice. Crowe, Jones, de SIlva and Azhar revolutionised ODI batting by showing people with orthadox shots can excel in this game as well. Very correct players who could push singles at will. Could go with any two of the four. de Silva has the advantage of being a off spinner as well. Michael Bevan's position is also self explanatory. Gilchrist and Wasim will form the big hitting combo of the side.

 

[honestbharani]

WI XI:

Hunte
Greenidge
Headley
Lara
Richards*
Walcott+
Sobers
Marshall
Holding
Garner
Ambrose

ODI XI:

Greenidge
Haynes
Richards
Lara
Lloyd*
Gayle
Dujon+
Holding
Roberts
Ambrose
Garner

World XI

Hobbs
Gavaskar
Bradman
Hammond
SRT
Sobers
Gilchrist+
Imran*
Hadlee
Marshall
Mcgrath

ODI XI

SRT
Haynes
Richards
Ponting*
Lara
Bevan
Gilchrist+
Akram
Garner
Murali
Mcgrath

Kinda interesting that Lara makes your all time ODI side and yet not the Test side, when he was so obviously better in tests than in ODIs, at least in the latter half of his career while earlier he was equally (at best) good at both...

 

[cover drive man]

Anyone but me sick of these threads?

 

[neville cardus]

Talebulamaineiilikenamainavaleniveivakabulaimainakulalakebalau

Not sure why the space keeps appearing.

 

[neville cardus]

Odious? I suppose at least on this occasion you didn't attempt to cover your lack of thought power by using a string of pointless long words.

I would take my strings of pointless long words over your lack-of-thought-power-disguising s any day. I don't call myself Neville Cardus for nothing.

Credit where it's due though, apart from the number 5 who's long name is his main claim to fame, it's not a bad side.

May I propose, Odious One, that you read the chapter on Bula in Philip Snow's Cricket Heroes? He was more than just a lengthy name.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

I would take my strings of pointless long words over your lack-of-thought-power-disguising s any day. I don't call myself Neville Cardus for nothing.



May I propose, Odious One, that you read the chapter on Bula in Philip Snow's Cricket Heroes? He was more than just a lengthy name.

What a feeble reply. Why bother to insult me out of the blue just to post that. Anyway I promised not to spoil threads with childish arguments so I'll put you and this piffle out it's misery right here.

 

[Jamee999]

Not sure why the space keeps appearing.

It's to stop the thread being stretched (horizontally) by strings of aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa or something....

 

[neville cardus]

What a feeble reply. Why bother to insult me out of the blue just to post that. Anyway I promised not to spoil threads with childish arguments so I'll put you and this piffle out it's misery right here.

For Athene's sake, man, have you not an ounce of discernment? I was not insulting you; I was taking the urine -- something which I believed I could get away with given my previously-lofty opinion of your intelligence. Unfortunately, with this dunderheaded riposte, you have shown yourself not only to be a sardonic piece of odium-inspiring excrement but also an utter dolt.

I understand that there is a killfile on CricketWeb. Does anyone know where I might find it? I should like to be spared this gunk in future.

 

[JBH001]

Well, off the top of my head, and based on the players I have seen in my time watching cricket (which is really from the early 90's on) here is my Test XI:

1. S Anwar
2. M Hayden
3. B Lara
4. S Tendulkar
5. S Waugh (capt)
6. A Gilchrist (w/k)
7. W Akram
8. S Warne
9. A Donald
10. C Ambrose
11. M Muralitharan

 

[Slifer]

From what I've seen:

WI XI:

Haynes
Greenidge
Lara
IVAR
Kallicharan
Lloyd*
Dujon+
Marshall
Holding
Garner
Ambrose

ODI WI XI:

Haynes
Greenidge
IVAR
Lara
Lloyd
Gayle
Dujon
Holding
Roberts
Garner
Ambrose

World XI:

Gavaskar
Hayden
Ponting
SRT
Sachin
G CHappel
Gilchrist+
Imran*
Hadlee
Marshall
Mcgrath

ODi XI:

SRT
Haynes
Richards
Ponting
Lara
Bevan
Gilchrist+
Akram
Garner
Murali
Mcgrath


Gilchrist+

 

[bond21]

I agree 100% with Kazoholic.

Hayden averages about 55 in test matches, only a few in the history of the sport average higher.

And so what if he scores runs against lesser bowling attacks? He still has to score the runs.

Also opening the batting is the hardest place to bat in the lineup, so that adds weight to his skill.

I put him in my World XI for the simple fact that he can completely dominate a bowling attack and demoralise the opposition.

Anyone remember I think it was 2004 or 2003 or something where he was averaging over 100 for the entire season?! Steve Waugh compared him to Don Bradman in terms of batting skill, which is the highest honour there is.

btw bowling attack - Warne, Lillee, McGrath, Lindwall.

 

[Flem274*]

I agree 100% with Kazoholic.

Hayden averages about 55 in test matches, only a few in the history of the sport average higher.

And so what if he scores runs against lesser bowling attacks? He still has to score the runs.

Also opening the batting is the hardest place to bat in the lineup, so that adds weight to his skill.

I put him in my World XI for the simple fact that he can completely dominate a bowling attack and demoralise the opposition.

Anyone remember I think it was 2004 or 2003 or something where he was averaging over 100 for the entire season?! Steve Waugh compared him to Don Bradman in terms of batting skill, which is the highest honour there is.

btw bowling attack - Warne, Lillee, McGrath, Lindwall.

But fact is you're so appallingly biased towards Australia that everyone will take you opinion with a few hundred tonnes of salt.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

For Athene's sake, man, have you not an ounce of discernment? I was not insulting you; I was taking the urine -- something which I believed I could get away with given my previously-lofty opinion of your intelligence. Unfortunately, with this dunderheaded riposte, you have shown yourself not only to be a sardonic piece of odium-inspiring excrement but also an utter dolt.

I understand that there is a killfile on CricketWeb. Does anyone know where I might find it? I should like to be spared this gunk in future.

Still a bit patchy in places, but you're learning.

 

[Ikki]

I agree 100% with Kazoholic.

Hayden averages about 55 in test matches, only a few in the history of the sport average higher.

And so what if he scores runs against lesser bowling attacks? He still has to score the runs.

Also opening the batting is the hardest place to bat in the lineup, so that adds weight to his skill.

I put him in my World XI for the simple fact that he can completely dominate a bowling attack and demoralise the opposition.

Anyone remember I think it was 2004 or 2003 or something where he was averaging over 100 for the entire season?! Steve Waugh compared him to Don Bradman in terms of batting skill, which is the highest honour there is.

btw bowling attack - Warne, Lillee, McGrath, Lindwall.

I am not sure how much you are agreeing with me then. My point is not "so what, he scored runs against lesser opponents", my point is that his fellow openers, like Gavaskar, did the same (actually, much worse overall for mine). For every hole 'perceived' with Hayden's claim there is an equal hole in the others.

And the main figure: centuries. Hayden's century rate is on a different plane to the others. Argue how you like about bowling conditions, it does not make scoring consistent 100s any easier. And Hayden had a barren run prior to the 05 Ashes for about 19 tests, otherwise he'd be so in front it wouldn't be funny.

As I said, slowly slowly people will have to start reevaluating Hayden. Which is sad to say in a way, as he hasn't scored runs quietly but with flair and dominance.

 

[Dasa]

If you're considering Hayden for an All Time XI, would you consider Sehwag?

 

[silentstriker]

If you're considering Hayden for an All Time XI, would you consider Sehwag?

Haha, Sehwag and Hayden opening in an all time XI.

 

[honestbharani]

Haha, Sehwag and Hayden opening in an all time XI.

would be a purists' delight...

 

[Ikki]

If you're considering Hayden for an All Time XI, would you consider Sehwag?

No, and they're really not comparable.

And if we apply the same arguments, Sehwag, in his short career, has done poorly against 4/9 Test nations. His annihilation of Pakistan really boosts his figures. He is a good player though, as he has shown against Australia. When he gets on a roll he is a hard train to stop.

Hayden has played just less tests than double what Sehwag has. If Sehwag played 100 odd averaging roughly the same - although better spread throughout test nations - then he could figure in an all-time XI. But as it stands, no. He'll have to improve a lot before he is at Hayden's level.

 

[neville cardus]

Still a bit patchy in places, but you're learning.

What a feeble reply, and what ever happened to putting me and this piffle out of our respective miseries? It's quite easy, Odious One: just sell your computer. You seem congenitally incapable of doing anything clever with it. (And no, there's nothing clever about that inane smiley of yours.)

 

[Lillian Thomson]

What a feeble reply, and what ever happened to putting me and this piffle out of our respective miseries? It's quite easy, Odious One: just sell your computer. You seem congenitally incapable of doing anything clever with it. (And no, there's nothing clever about that inane smiley of yours.)

Oh dear, resorting to the "same to you with knobs on" replies.
You just haven't got what it takes mate...sorry.