Which is the strongest XI?

Which is the strongest XI?


  • Total voters
    39
  • Poll closed .

aussie_ben91

School Cricketer
Joined
Aug 21, 2006
Location
Sydney, Australia
Online Cricket Games Owned
Flower is a 5/10 wicketkeeper?
Andy Flower wasn't a International-standard wicketkeeper. He wasn't very good at it at all. He was a batsman who could wicketkeeper, the same as AB de Villiers. The reason why Flower got a 5 and de Villiers 4 was because Flower was a fulltime keeper but de Villiers only has ever kept once in a Test match.

@aussie ben

you rate this 7/10 ?

3. Ricky Ponting (c)
4. Kevin Pietersen
5. VVS Laxman
6. Adam Gilchrist (wk)
7. Andrew Flintoff

the average of their batting average is probably higher than any other middle order listed above.

same for bowling attack.
the last four bowlers have the lowest of average i think. average of bowl avg of them.

easily 9/10 or 9/10 or 8/10 and 8/10 :D
Are you serious? Ponting is the world-class batsman, Pietersen isn't far off but Laxman, Gilchrist & Flintoff are by no means amongst the best batsman in the draft. The combination of Gilchrist at 6 and Flintoff at 7 looks fairly weak, IMO.

You honestly think that, that batting lineup deserves more then a 7? =/

Dare said:
I also dont understand how a middle order of Dravid, Mahela, Clarke, Martyn gets 5/10.
Because Dravid is the only good batsman.

My whole rating system was a criticial analysis and I wasn't giving away easy points.
 

Dare

Chairman of Selectors
Joined
May 29, 2006
Location
London, Canada
Online Cricket Games Owned
Andy Flower wasn't a International-standard wicketkeeper. He wasn't very good at it at all. He was a batsman who could wicketkeeper, the same as AB de Villiers. The reason why Flower got a 5 and de Villiers 4 was because Flower was a fulltime keeper but de Villiers only has ever kept once in a Test match.

de Cilliers doesn't keep wickets because South Africa have Boucher and he probably wont for the same reason Sangakkara doesn't in tests. Because his team wants to protect him from breaking down all the time. You are knowledgeable about cricket and you know that if de Villiers put on the gloves he would be one of the top WK around.
Flower is more than a average WK, in 63 matches he had 151 catches and 9 stumpings and that was with the weakest bowling attack during his time. He only had Heath Streak.
Besides we judge WK as batsman too, Flower and de Villiers and great batsman. Flower is probably top 2 WK batsman with only Sangakkara to contest with.


Because Dravid is the only good batsman.

?? than what is Mahela? Martyn?

lets look at it this way

kallis=dravid
inzamam<mahela
s.Waugh>Clarke
m.Waugh<Martyn

....
 

aussie_ben91

School Cricketer
Joined
Aug 21, 2006
Location
Sydney, Australia
Online Cricket Games Owned
de Cilliers doesn't keep wickets because South Africa have Boucher and he probably wont for the same reason Sangakkara doesn't in tests. Because his team wants to protect him from breaking down all the time. You are knowledgeable about cricket and you know that if de Villiers put on the gloves he would be one of the top WK around.
Flower is more than a average WK, in 63 matches he had 151 catches and 9 stumpings and that was with the weakest bowling attack during his time. He only had Heath Streak.
Besides we judge WK as batsman too, Flower and de Villiers and great batsman. Flower is probably top 2 WK batsman with only Sangakkara to contest with.
Yeah, Flower was probably the best batsman that was ever a wicketkeeper but he was nothing more then a below-par International standard wicketkeeper, who only wicketkept because no one else could do it.

I'm not questioning Flower's ability with the bat, but if you think that he is a world-class wicketkeeper just because of his batting ability then you are kidding yourself.

If you had've selected say, a Ian Healy or Mark Boucher as a wicketkeeper then you might've gotten 9 or 10.

Dare said:
?? than what is Mahela? Martyn?

lets look at it this way

kallis=dravid
inzamam<mahela
s.Waugh>Clarke
m.Waugh<Martyn

....
Don't let records fool you mate, Inzamam was better then Jayawardene and Mark Waugh was way better then Damien Martyn. Jayawardene is a minnow-bashing subcontient flat-track bully and Damien Martyn couldn't even make it into the Test side until Mark Waugh was retired. Plus Mark Waugh played twice as many Tests against better bowlers.
 

manee

Chairman of Selectors
Joined
Jul 1, 2005
Location
England
Online Cricket Games Owned
Are you serious? Ponting is the world-class batsman, Pietersen isn't far off but Laxman, Gilchrist & Flintoff are by no means amongst the best batsman in the draft. The combination of Gilchrist at 6 and Flintoff at 7 looks fairly weak, IMO.

You honestly think that, that batting lineup deserves more then a 7? =/

Would likely agree with that as I am one batsmen short who has been sacrificed to get the bowling all rounder in. However, I think you are a tad harsh to Laxman, he is a pretty strong middle order batsman. Same with Gilchirst, regardless of how he got his runs, he still had 5570 runs at 47.60 averaging over 40 in every continent except Asia (37.31).
 

jordox

International Cricketer
Joined
Jan 28, 2007
Online Cricket Games Owned
If you had've selected say, a Ian Healy or Mark Boucher as a wicketkeeper then you might've gotten 9 or 10.

I don't understand the way you are rating this. Flower was more beneficial to a team than Healy, or Boucher are. While I agree with you that he was not as good with the gloves as they are, he was never so bad that he let the team down at all.

And by the way, he wasn't fantastic but he was well and truly international standard with the gloves. I watch him for years, and I'm telling you he was good enough. He kept better than Haddin keeps at international level - but could you argue that Haddin should be sacked for a better gloveman? No, you couldn't because Haddin is a brilliant batsman and a good enough keeper. That's what Flower was, but even better.

Mark Waugh was way better then Damien Martyn.

100% agree. They are very similar players too - both in style and the way they batted. Waugh was superior to Martyn.
 

Dare

Chairman of Selectors
Joined
May 29, 2006
Location
London, Canada
Online Cricket Games Owned
Yeah, Flower was probably the best batsman that was ever a wicketkeeper but he was nothing more then a below-par International standard wicketkeeper, who only wicketkept because no one else could do it.

I'm not questioning Flower's ability with the bat, but if you think that he is a world-class wicketkeeper just because of his batting ability then you are kidding yourself.

If you had've selected say, a Ian Healy or Mark Boucher as a wicketkeeper then you might've gotten 9 or 10.


lol I'm sure if I had selected Healey or Boucher the complain would have been their batting isn't as good so my batting lineup would have been judged as weak.
Whatever, you made the game so you can give the marks that you want. Your team got the most points in your scoring but in the poll you are last...

Don't let records fool you mate, Inzamam was better then Jayawardene and Mark Waugh was way better then Damien Martyn. Jayawardene is a minnow-bashing subcontient flat-track bully and Damien Martyn couldn't even make it into the Test side until Mark Waugh was retired. Plus Mark Waugh played twice as many Tests against better bowlers.

right and Inzamam was born in England and played for England....:rolleyes:

Mahela scored runs against most of the countries he faced. for the most part his records away are similar to Inzis. The thing against Mahela is his poor record in New Zealand.

As for Martyn and Waugh sure you could be correct, Martyn was a solid batsman for Australia. Just because he couldn't get in the side during Australis golden age doesn't mean hes not a good batsman, I guess the same thing could be said about Hussey then.
 
Last edited:

manee

Chairman of Selectors
Joined
Jul 1, 2005
Location
England
Online Cricket Games Owned
This is quite tight, I'm hoping I can hold on to second.

manee added 14 Minutes and 11 Seconds later...

Here are my analyses.

Team 1
1. Gautam Gambhir
2. Virender Sehwag
3. Rahul Dravid
4. Mahela Jayawardene
5. Michael Clarke
6. Damien Martyn
7. AB de Villiers (wk)
8. Wasim Akram
9. Shane Warne (c)
10. Muttiah Muralitharan
11. Ian Bishop

Strong team and I certainly missed a trick with Jayawardene but AB De Villiers cannot be said to be a Test class keeper having barely kept at international cricket. I think people are too willing to ignore such a weak keeper. The bowling looks strong, but I'm not sure you can discount a post injury Bishop as it made up a large part of his career.

Team 2
1. Mark Taylor
2. Matthew Hayden
3. Jacques Kallis
4. Inzamam-ul-Haq
5. Steve Waugh (c)
6. Mark Waugh
7. Alec Stewart (wk)
8. Anil Kumble
9. Jason Gillespie
10. Shane Bond
11. Allan Donald

Very strong, well balanced team. Taylor and Mark Waugh as very slight weak links but no more than that.

Team 3
1. Greame Smith
2. Andrew Strauss
3. Michael Hussey
4. Mohammad Yousuf
5. Brian Lara
6. Andy Flower (wk)
7. Daniel Vettori
8. Chaminda Vaas
9. Makhaya Ntini
10. Curtly Ambrose
11. Courtney Walsh

Makhaya Ntini is a bizarre selection, imo considering just how weak he is, off his day and outside South Africa. Vettori is a tad high at seven imo, and Yousuf (two years of success) and Strauss (ditto) are both too weak for such an XI.

Team 4
1. Justin Langer
2. Herschelle Gibbs
3. Younis Khan
4. Sachin Tendulkar
5. Shiv Chanderpaul
6. Kumar Sangakkara (wk)
7. Chris Cairns
8. Shaun Pollock
9. Waqar Younis
10. Stuart MacGill
11. Shoaib Akhtar

Nothing to say here except the weak link of MacGill. He bullied Bangladesh with 33 wickets in four matches. Take that out and he has 172 wickets at 31.53 and this considering he would have only played in matches alongside Warne (which was a fair few) when conditions suited.

Team 5
1. Gary Kirsten
2. Saeed Anwar
3. Ricky Ponting (c)
4. Kevin Pietersen
5. VVS Laxman
6. Adam Gilchrist (wk)
7. Andrew Flintoff
8. Harbhajan Singh
9. Fanie de Villiers
10. Dale Steyn
11. Glenn Mcgrath

Superb side. Utilises the five bowler tact with five different and yet equally world class bowlers. The batting line up is both superb and sublime with such quality meaning that the extra bowler can be used. One of the all time best draft XIs.

In all seriousness though, I've tried to give a balanced view of the other teams.
 

Dare

Chairman of Selectors
Joined
May 29, 2006
Location
London, Canada
Online Cricket Games Owned
also fails to point out that I'm the only one that has bowlers that played allot of matches together. King Pietersen has Shoaib and Waqar but they didn't come close to the matches that Curtly and Courtney played together. Funny that you only point out the weaknesses in my team. Yousuf was as good as VVS before his conversion to Islam and turned it on after that. I guess there is no reason to point out that I have probably the best middle order in the draft.
 

manee

Chairman of Selectors
Joined
Jul 1, 2005
Location
England
Online Cricket Games Owned
also fails to point out that I'm the only one that has bowlers that played allot of matches together. King Pietersen has Shoaib and Waqar but they didn't come close to the matches that Curtly and Courtney played together.

Meh, not massively important when forming a composite XI, imo. Tbh, I was overly harsh on your XI, considering you have two of the best in Lara and Ambrose
 

King Pietersen

ICC Board Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Location
Manchester
My analysis of the teams:

Team 1:

Openers: Pretty average, Sehwag can be destructive on his day and on a flat wicket, and has a good record, but Gambhir's probably too early into his career to be considered for an XI such as this. 6/10
Middle Order: A very strong middle order, with 4 very good, talented batsmen. Dravid and Jayawardene are the 2 stronger batsmen, with Martyn and Clarke being slightly weaker. But it's strong enough. 7/10
Keeper: Hmm, very strange selection this. Only 1 Test as keeper, and although he'd probably perform well, his lack of exposure as a Test keeper means he's probably the weakest of the keepers on show. 4/10
Bowling Attack: 4 quality bowlers, with the 2 best spinners of the generation in Murali and Warne. Wasim Akram was a genuis also, so he's a great selection, but an injury prone Ian Bishop lets the side down a little. 8/10

Total: 25/40

Team 2:

Openers: Hayden is probably the best opener of the era, with his average of over 50 and his 30 Test centuries. He destroyed batting line-ups, making runs in most countries. Taylor was certainly not as strong as Hayden, but a very competent opening batsman. 8/10
Middle Order: A strong middle order, made up by the greatest all-rounder of the generation in Kallis, and then followed by 3 very competent batsmen in Inzamam, Waugh and Waugh. I think Maugh lets the side down a little. He had a good record, but I don't rate him as highly as some other batsmen from the era. 7/10
Keeper: Alec Stewart was a good keeper and a good batsman. England have certainly missed the services of him, and although not the best of his generation, he was certainly good enough. 6.5/10
Bowling Attack: Probably the weakest section of the side. Allan Donald was very good, but the other 2 seamers were somewhat up and down. Bond has a very good overall record, but take out his wickets against Zimbabwe and his average moves upto 27, and he definitely struggled against Australia. He was an explosive strike bowler, but somewhat over-rated I think. Kumble helps strengthen the bowling attack. 6.5/10

Total: 28/40

Team 3:

Openers: Smith is a very good choice, averaging over 50 with quite a few hundreds plus the burden of captaincy from a young age. Strauss is quite a poor selection though, due to the up and down nature of his career. Strauss started brilliantly, making bucketfulls of runs, including a superb tour of South Africa, but had a massive run of poor form, before finding his form again recently against India and West Indies. He's been far too inconsistent to really be considered for inclusion. 6/10
Middle Order: Brian Lara is a very good pick. Scoring massive runs and being the lynchpin in his sides batting line-up. Yousuf and Hussey however are not as strong, both having career boosting strong years. Yousuf was pretty average until his couple of 2 years, and Hussey came into Test cricket in his prime and made heaps of runs. I don't think either have really proven consistency over a long enough period of time to be great picks. 6/10
Keeper: Fantastic batsman playing for a poor team, but his keeping was not the best. A very good option, one probably stronger than Stewart, but certainly not a Gilchrist. 7/10
Bowling Attack: Vettori and Ntini are weak picks here. Ntini has a very poor away record, and Vettori is certainly nowhere near as dominating in the longer formats as he is in OD and T20 cricket. Vaas, Ambrose and Walsh were all very consistent and wicket taking bowlers though, adding some much needed strength. Ambrose and Walsh being far and away the best bowlers in the team. Team balance is affected with Vettori at 7 also. 5/10.

Total: 24/40

Team 4:

Openers: Langer and Gibbs both have averages nearing 50 when opening the batting. Langer providing the more solid, consistent role, and Gibbs being the aggressor taking the attack to the bowlers. It's a solid and strong opening pair, that almost matches that of Hayden and Taylor. 7.5/10
Middle Order: A middle order consisting of 3 players all averaging over 50 in Test cricket. One of them the greatest batsman of his generation in Sachin Tendulkar. Another, Shiv Chanderpaul is currently ranked the #1 Batsman in the world, with averages over 100 in his last 2 years of Test cricket. The 3rd, the current Pakistan captain, that although has a couple of technical flaws, is a very strong batsman. 7.5/10
Keeper: Kumar Sangakkara is a very solid all-round wicket-keeper. He's capable against pace having kept to both Vaas and Malinga competently, and is also very handy keeping to the great spinner, Muttiah Muralitharan. His batting is also incredibly strong, with an overall average well over 50 and an average as keeper over 40. 7/10
Bowling Attack: 2 superb strike bowlers taking the new ball, in Waqar Younis and Shoaib Akhtar. Younis being a key exponent of swing bowling, with Akhtar capable of bowling at extreme pace with a mean yorker and a seering bouncer. Pollock and Cairns will follow them up. Pollock who was genuinely quick in his prime and possibly a better bowler than his partner, Donald, bowling with the canny Kiwi all-rounder Chris Cairns, who took alot of wickets, and also provides handy lower order batting helping balance. The spin option comes from Warne Mk II, Stuey MacGill, who although not as good as Warne, was a very capable Leggie. 7.5/10

Total: 29.5/40

Team 5:

Openers: Not the strongest, but Anwar and Kirsten were no mugs. A very capable opening pair. 6.5/10
Middle Order: 3 very talented middle order batsmen, with the 2nd best of his generation in Ponting, the best batsman in the universe ever after RV KING OF SIXERS, KP and the effervescent stroke maker VVS Laxman. A strong Middle order. 7/10
Keeper: Best Keeper-batsman of his generation. Destructive with the bat, very good with the gloves. Gilchrist at his best was unstoppable. 8.5/10
Bowling Attack: De Villiers and Harbhajan let the bowling attack down a little, with Harbhajan's record outside India not being fantastic and De Villiers having not played that many games. But Steyn, McGrath and Flintoff bring it back. Steyn and McGrath being 2 superb new ball bowlers, with Flintoff a key exponent of reverse swing. Those 3 are strong, but a little let down by the other 2.7/10

Total: 29

Team 4 wins by half a point =]

;0
 

Dare

Chairman of Selectors
Joined
May 29, 2006
Location
London, Canada
Online Cricket Games Owned
a middle order of Kallis, Inzamam, S.Waugh, M.Waugh gets 8 while a middle order of Hussey,Yousuf,Lara, Flower gets 7...

KP a thing about your rankings.

You say that Hussey and Yousuf dont deserve good marks because of only performing in 2-3 years and then you go and make a point about Shiv and him being the best over the past 2 years....
 
Last edited:

King Pietersen

ICC Board Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Location
Manchester
Nope, Ben's team got a 7, your's got a 6. Don't think your team is worth more than that tbh. Lara was class, but Yousuf and Hussey only really had 2 years of success each, which isn't enough to warrant a high score. Team 4 only scored higher than a 7 because of Tendulkar, who on his own is worth an extra half a point I think.
 

Dare

Chairman of Selectors
Joined
May 29, 2006
Location
London, Canada
Online Cricket Games Owned
Nope, Ben's team got a 7, your's got a 6. Don't think your team is worth more than that tbh. Lara was class, but Yousuf and Hussey only really had 2 years of success each, which isn't enough to warrant a high score. Team 4 only scored higher than a 7 because of Tendulkar, who on his own is worth an extra half a point I think.

The 1st part of my post is talking about bens rankings.

The 2nd one about yours...

Funny thing too ben does his ratings his team wins, you do yours and your team wins....
 

King Pietersen

ICC Board Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Location
Manchester
What can I say. The ranking of my middle order just happens to help me win by half a point. If I was going to be unbiased I'd drop half a point off my team. But then I'd have to knock half a point off Manee's bowling attack, for having a guy called Fanie in the team. Either way I win ;)
 

Dare

Chairman of Selectors
Joined
May 29, 2006
Location
London, Canada
Online Cricket Games Owned
Also Yousuf had one bad year where he averaged 29 (I think) all other years he averaged 40+, he had a few years with 50+, one with 70+ and another I think he averaged 99 his record breaking year. I would say he was fairly consistent over the years.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top