The Wisden Test XI Of 2008

[Mr. Wicket]

So non playing captain or coach? (Oh, and if Pietersen disagrees with Colbert or has an ego clash, he gets shot. Simple. Colbert > anyone not named Tendulkar)

[graphic23]

So non playing captain or coach? (Oh, and if Pietersen disagrees with Colbert or has an ego clash, he gets shot. Simple. Colbert > anyone not named Tendulkar)

All of the above. (and Yes).

[Mr. Wicket]

On an aside, how awesome would it be to play under Colbert's captaincy? If we can't have Colbert for President, then Colbert for Coach, Captain and Commentator in chief. :D

[graphic23]

On an aside, how awesome would it be to play under Colbert's captaincy? If we can't have Colbert for President, then Colbert for Coach, Captain and Commentator in chief. :D

OMG Colbert as Commentator would rock. Even people who have no clue about Cricket can watch it and still have fun. That would be great; and yeah, having him as a captain on the field would be great - he'd come up with the greatest sledges possible. And we can have a mascot named after him as well!

[Ram]

Strauss made his runs against the lethal pace bowling of the West Indies - err, one fast bowler, a couple of trundlers and then Gayle and Benn - and all on a bunch of flatbeds. Smith produced two of the innings of 2008; the masterful Edgbaston run-chase-guiding ton and then some brilliance in Perth to set up an amazing run chase. No contest there for me.

You have left out the two 100s in 2 innings that Strauss made against a very competitive Indian bowling unit. But still, I don’t get the logic of this argument anyways. You can only make runs against the opposition you play. I can understand if Strauss made his runs against some minnows, but India and West Indies are no minnows. And remember, bout a year ago, when we were talking about Hashim Amla, you said the same thing bout him that he’s made all his runs against weak bowling and you don’t rate him that much. Since then, Hashim Amla has risen to be one of the eminent batsman of the world. Moral of Story – Good players will make runs, no matter what.

[f.b.m]

You have left out the two 100s in 2 innings that Strauss made against a very competitive Indian bowling unit. But still, I don’t get the logic of this argument anyways. You can only make runs against the opposition you play. I can understand if Strauss made his runs against some minnows, but India and West Indies are no minnows. And remember, bout a year ago, when we were talking about Hashim Amla, you said the same thing bout him that he’s made all his runs against weak bowling and you don’t rate him that much. Since then, Hashim Amla has risen to be one of the eminent batsman of the world. Moral of Story – Good players will make runs, no matter what.

I think the two hundreds in Chennai, as good as they were (not so much for the actual batting but for being at the crease for so long in such conditions), werent as good as they are made out to be by the English press. In the first inning, he had the best conditions to bat for anyone in the match. But still he saw out Zaheer and Ishant's opening spell so credit to him. The second inning hundred was again, good but he along with Collingwood stalled the inning when facing the 8-1 fields, Zaheer-Ishant, old ball challenge. I will concede that he has played very well to see off opening spells from Zaheer, Ishant, Edwards and at on occassions Jerome Taylor in batting friendly conditions. But none of the innings were inspirational or memorable in any way. On the other hand, Smith's two 4-th inning hundreds were immense feats of batting and leadership. Both were against quality attacks in much more challenging conditions. The hundred in England was after Flintoff bowled that sensational spell to Kallis in the first inning and playing Monty from the rough outside off stump in the 4th inning. The one at Perth was against Mitchell Johnson, who Smith had (and still has) loads of problems against, coming off a brilliant 8 wicket haul in the first inning facing a near record total to chase down. Far more challenging than any of the Strauss hundreds. (although, I'll give it to you that he had to face Brett Lee in Perth so him and Ryan Hinds sort of cancel out) And as for good batsmen scoring runs wherever, thats true but you cant say that Thilan Samaraweera will score double centuries everywhere against everyone just because he scored two against Pakistan in Pakistan. I dont think Strauss is as bad as him but I really dont think that he can produce an against the odds performance of substance against a quality attack.

[Ram]

^ That is a very fair post and I agree with most of what's being said there. Let me just clarify myself and say I don't actually think Strauss is a better player than smith per se. I chose my team with the criterion that this would be the team I would want to take the field now and I did not choose smith because he has some injury concerns.