NZ AT 11 vs SA AT 11 (Tests)

[zen]

WI and Aus AT Test 11s are considered to be the top 2 in general. NZ and SA will probably contest for the 3rd place. Which of the two teams below hold the edge in a 6 test match series (3 in SA and 3 in NZ) w/ all players at their best: 

 

NZ AT 11

 

Turner

Fleming

Williamson

Crowe (c)

Taylor 

Jones

McCullum 

Hadlee

Vettori

Bond

Boult

 

SA AT 11

 

Smith (c)

B Richards

Kallis

G Pollock 

Cullinan 

ABDV

De Kock 

S Pollock (or Tahir if a spinner is needed) 

Steyn

Donald

Rabada 

 

[Jimmy Cliff]

NZ All Time XI ain't all that. SA will crush them comfortably. The SA All Time XI can be strengthened even further by including the likes of Dudley Nourse and Tayfield or even some of their other great all-rounders like Faulkner, Procter, Rice etc.

 

My SA XI

 

G Smith (c)

B Richards

G Pollock

JH Kallis

D Nourse

ABDV +

M Procter

S Pollock

H Tayfield

DW Steyn

A Donald

[Nikola]

Lol what is rabada doing in at 11? he is surely overrated as of now. Might prove me wrong in future but he will need to perform in all conditions before we start picking him in all time xi.

[zen]

8 minutes ago, Jimmy Cliff said:

M Procter

Forgot about Procter, one of SA's ATGs. 

[Gollum]

Don't agree with the XIs you posted, esp that of RSA. But yeah Kiwis will get crushed, if not 0-6, probably 1-5, nothing better than that . NZ won't contest for 3rd place, forget about it.

 

Three tiers

 

WI/Aus

 

RSA/Ind/Eng/Pak

 

NZ/Lanka

 

In an ideal scenario, where everything is fair: no chucking, no tampering, unbiased umpiring etc, Pak will drop down to 3rd tier. 

 

zen stop overrating NZ, historically they have sucked in Asian conditions, been the clients of the other 2 southern hemisphere teams both home and away, not enough quality and nowhere close to being an all conditions side. 

[Gollum]

H2H RSA leads 25-4 (17-3 since their readmission)  LINK

In NZ 8-1

In RSA 17-3

NZ has never won a series against RSA, home or away. Most one-sided rivalry involving top 8 teams. 

Edited February 20, 2020 by Gollum

[zen]

17 minutes ago, Gollum said:

Don't agree with the XIs you posted, esp that of RSA. But yeah Kiwis will get crushed, if not 0-6, probably 1-5, nothing better than that . NZ won't contest for 3rd place, forget about it.

 

Three tiers

 

WI/Aus

 

RSA/Ind/Eng/Pak

 

NZ/Lanka

 

In an ideal scenario, where everything is fair: no chucking, no tampering, unbiased umpiring etc, Pak will drop down to 3rd tier. 

 

zen stop overrating NZ, historically they have sucked in Asian conditions, been the clients of the other 2 southern hemisphere teams both home and away, not enough quality and nowhere close to being an all conditions side. 

They don’t compete on paper but have punched above their weight esp. against top sides such as 80s WI .... Hadlee, one of the biggest test match winners, can win a few games on his own. He even took 18 wkts in 3 tests in Ind to win a test .... Crowe, for e.g., does well against good bowling (record vs WI, along with Against Aus and Pak, is good) .... with the addition of AT players, NZ can compete even better 

I would say

 

1. WI

2. Aus

3. SA

4. NZ (underrated and punches above its weight)

5. Ind, Pak and Eng (mainly home condition teams. can fail to rise up to the occasion. overrated by the fans)

8. SL (again mainly a home conditions team. Has some match winners but AT Test bowling is mainly reliant on Murali) 

 

 

Edited February 20, 2020 by zen

[Gollum]

Add a 4th option

[Nikola]

NZ is easily below India, Pak & Eng in test cricket. Idk how you are considering them for top 3 spot.

[Gollum]

10 minutes ago, zen said:

They don’t compete on paper but have punched above their weight esp. against top sides WI

Thanks to nonsense umpiring.

Quote

 

.... Hadlee can win a few games on his own.

They have one ATG in Hadlee, RSA is full of ATGs. If Steyn won't get ya Donald will, if Donald won't get ya Van Der Bijl will, then there is Procter waiting. Too strong a batting line up that RSA, Hadlee maybe can do something extraordinary once in 6 matches. 

Quote

He even took 18 wkts in 3 tests in Ind to win a test

India was a **** team then. Look at the overall record of NZ against other top 8 teams, it is abysmal. 

Quote

I would say

 

1. WI

2.  Aus

3. SA

4. NZ (underrated and punched above its weight)

5. Ind, Pak and Eng (mainly home condition teams. Can fail to rise up to the occasdion. Overrated by the fans)

8. SL (again mainly a home conditions team. Has some match winners but AT Test bowling is mainly reliant on Murali) 

So what if they punch above their weight. Many tennis stars ranked in top 20 punch above their weights while Fed is an underachiever, doesn't mean I will place them above the Swiss. Results matter, stats column matters. 

Edited February 20, 2020 by Gollum

[zen]

11 minutes ago, Gollum said:

H2H RSA leads 25-4 (17-3 since their readmission)  LINK

In NZ 8-1

In RSA 17-3

NZ has never won a series against RSA, home or away. Most one-sided rivalry involving top 8 teams. 

Does not apply to AT11s, which include players from different era. For e.g. WI of 80s has a better record vs Aus if 80s, while Aus of 2000s has a better record vs WI .... No H2H is available for WI of 80s and Aus of 2000s 

[zen]

Just now, Gollum said:

Thanks to nonsense umpiring.

They have one ATG in Hadlee, RSA is full of ATGs. If Steyn won't get ya Donald will, if Donald won't get ya Van Der Bijl will, then there is Procter waiting. Too strong a batting line up that RSA.

 

SA vs NZ, I have given it to SA 
 

Other parts of your post are not applicable as mentioned in my last post

[Gollum]

2 minutes ago, zen said:

Does not apply to AT11s, which include players from different era. For e.g. WI of 80s has a better record vs Aus if 80s, while Aus of 2000s has a better record vs WI .... No H2H is available for WI of 80s and Aus of 2000s 

Matters when the H2H is so terribly lopsided in every decade. Matters when one side has NEVER in its history won a series against the other HOME or AWAY. 

[Gollum]

1 minute ago, zen said:

SA vs NZ, I have given it to SA 
 

Other parts of your post are not applicable as mentioned in my last post

Go ahead and make a thread about NZ vs Ind/Eng/Pak as well. No way will that team come out on top. There is a reason we have 2 series wins in NZ while they have total 3 test wins in India. We will crush them in Ind and give a tougher fight in NZ than what they do here...courtesy an ATG batting unit and capable pacers. If we play 10 tests home and away each we will stomp them 8-1 at home and lose 2-5 or something away. Which side is better?  

[zen]

2 minutes ago, Gollum said:

Matters when the H2H is so terribly lopsided in every decade. Matters when one side has NEVER in its history won a series against the other HOME or AWAY. 

H2H does not matter for AT teams. Regular teams could be competing with a couple of AT greats who are supported by avg players. While the other team could have more good players. We are not choosing best team of a decade 

 

An AT team has good players from across the history of a team. All these good players combine to strengthen a team. 

[Stan AF]

Damn, SA XI has a couple of all time greats.

[Gollum]

5 minutes ago, zen said:

H2H does not matter for AT teams. Regular teams could be competing with a couple of AT greats who are supported by avg players. While the other team could have more good players. We are not choosing best team of a decade 

 

An AT team has good players from across the history of a team. All these good players combine to strengthen a team. 

I am basing my conclusion on quality of personnel, adaptability to conditions, balance in team (both NZ/RSA lack in spin dept), mental strength. NZ falls short on all 4 parameters. 

Edited February 20, 2020 by Gollum

[zen]

3 minutes ago, Gollum said:

Go ahead and make a thread about NZ vs Ind/Eng/Pak as well. No way will that team come out on top. There is a reason we have 2 series wins in NZ while they have total 3 test wins in India. We will crush them in Ind and give a tougher fight in NZ than what they do here...courtesy an ATG batting unit and capable pacers. If we play 10 tests home and away each we will stomp them 8-1 at home and lose 2-5 or something away. Which side is better?  

As already explained - H2H of regular teams are not the correct way to judge AT team performances. If you think that people are going to vote based on that, it would be a meaningless exercise   

 

 

[zen]

3 minutes ago, Gollum said:

I am basing my conclusion on quality of personnel, adaptability to conditions, balance in team (both NZ/RSA lack in spin dept), mental strength etc. NZ falls short on all 4 parameters. 

Why did you post H2H then? .... WI would play w/o spinners more often as well .... Also to compete at AT level,  spin quality should "ideally" be on par with Warne and Murali (unless playing on spin friendly tracks)

Edited February 20, 2020 by zen

[Gollum]

5 minutes ago, zen said:

Why did you post H2H then?

That is an indicator that RSA is a bloody tough match-up for NZ, in every era. WI/Aus is different, because max ATGs of WI were in mid-70s to mid-90s period and during that phase they dominated Aus. So even if Aus is well ahead when it comes to H2H, it won't matter because 90% WI players will be picked from a 15 years period. NZ however has never in its history offered resistance to RSA, forget winning.  

Edited February 20, 2020 by Gollum