World test team of the decade

[Mr. Wicket]

Gambit, your side is also missing Tendulkar. What the ----? [if you want justification on why Sachin should be there, particularly ahead of Lara at 4, your favourite cricketer has to be Afretard :winky: ]

[Gambit]

Gambit, your side is also missing Tendulkar. What the ----? [if you want justification on why Sachin should be there, particularly ahead of Lara at 4, your favourite cricketer has to be Afretard :winky: ]

[S.Bond]

for sehwag it's quite ok that you guys put him in the team, hayden is a sure in, then there is battle between smith and sehwag, that's quite a 50-50 one. But can anyone hereexplain me how on earth TENDULKAR is in????????? :hysterical::hysterical::hysterical::hysterical: You just can't accept facts guys... Tendulkar was a good batsman in this decade, not even great....... He averages 47 with 15 centuries... If you make a World XI it's to play agaisnt strong teams not agaisnt bengalis and zimbabwe.... I will love that one people here prove me the presence of tendulkar in the world XI..... Dravid is debatable, but if yousuf can't make it with 23 hundreds in 119innings i don't think dravid will make it with 22 hundreds in 176 innings. 60 inniings more I will give my world XI a litle bit later, but it's true that it's very hard in the midle order...

[Mr Eintstein]

i'd go with sehwag hayden/smith ponting tendulkar kallis sanga (idk... he could keep in a one-off i suppose.) cairns (people picked flintoff over this guy???) warne bond/steyn murali mcgrath fair chunk of the team picks itself. the rest is picked based on my kiwi bias.:winky:

[S.Bond]

So mytest team of the decade will be : Mathew Hayden Virender Sehwag Ricky Ponting Brian Lara © Jacques Kallis Adam Gilchrist (wk) Andrew Flintoff Shane Warne Dale steyn Mutiah Maurlitharan Glenn McGrath It's sad to leave out, smith, dravid, sanga, moyo, bond, akhtar, pietersen, lee, langer... But this team has a good balance, the batting is obviously pretty strong,. The bowling is very good too, because you have two specialist fast bowlers + Flintoff + Kallis, That is what allowed me to put the two best spinners warne and murli...

[Celeste]

Smith Hayden Ponting Yousuf Dravid Kallis Gilchrist Pollock Warne Akhtar Mcgrath

[Asim]

Smith Hayden Ponting Yousuf Dravid Kallis Gilchrist Pollock Warne Akhtar Mcgrath

- No Murli? - Akram is better than Akhter, Provided only if he qualify for this thread ;) - Few reservations on Pollack too... - On Yousuf: Indians wont agree I know, they MUST want to see Sewhag ;) although if we realistically compare Yousus vs Sehwag over whole decade as TEST batsmen, Yousuf is more classy, n much successful hence better choice, I am talking only if we compare these 2, no matter one is opener n one middle order (I know Sehwag hav 3 huge knocks) ... Yousuf got 59 test avg in 2000s which is far better than Sehwag.

[King Tendulkar]

Yoyo or is it moyo, I get confused. Anyway his record against SA and Oz is poor. His record in those countries is also poor. Seems he spent most of his time piling runs against windies, bangla and zimbs. Sorry he is decent but his record on certain tracks against certain teams means he is not a man for all occassions. FTB. He joins Jayawardene and Inzi as the FTBs

[vicks]

So mytest team of the decade will be : Mathew Hayden Virender Sehwag Ricky Ponting Brian Lara © Jacques Kallis Adam Gilchrist (wk) Andrew Flintoff Shane Warne Dale steyn Mutiah Maurlitharan Glenn McGrath It's sad to leave out, smith, dravid, sanga, moyo, bond, akhtar, pietersen, lee, langer... But this team has a good balance, the batting is obviously pretty strong,. The bowling is very good too, because you have two specialist fast bowlers + Flintoff + Kallis, That is what allowed me to put the two best spinners warne and murli...

Spot on - this would be my team too. Real unlucky ones are probably Smith and Moyo, although I am not convinced about Moyo performing in all conditions. Also agree with your previous post re. Tendulkar. Although I am as big a Sachin fan as any, I believe he would struggle to make a third World X1 for this decade, let alone the first. Clearly he has been unlucky with injuries during the most favorable batting conditions around the world, but he has also underperformed.

[Sooda]

I believe he would struggle to make a third World X1 for this decade' date=' let alone the first. Clearly he has been unlucky with injuries during the most favorable batting conditions around the world, but he has also underperformed.[/quote'] Ive got two numbers for you 53.65 and 22

[S.Bond]

Ive got two numbers for you 53.65 and 22

22????

[S.Bond]

Ive got two numbers for you 53.65 and 22

I have got a lot of numbers for you; but i will also give you two : 47,19 and 15.... Averages and number of centuries exluding minows in this decade...

[Celeste]

- No Murli? - On Yousuf: Indians wont agree I know, they MUST want to see Sewhag ;) although if we realistically compare Yousus vs Sehwag over whole decade as TEST batsmen, Yousuf is more classy, n much successful hence better choice, I am talking only if we compare these 2, no matter one is opener n one middle order (I know Sehwag hav 3 huge knocks) ... Yousuf got 59 test avg in 2000s which is far better than Sehwag.

Yousuf is not an opener so why compare him with Sehwag. Smith is better than Sehwag overall because Sehwag scores big 100s & 200s on flat tracks to maintain his average. He has been failure in NZ,SA & Eng.

[graphic23]

Australia has flat tracks? :hmmmm2: Also, England average: 39.10, hardly a "failure". He has a mediocre record in SA (26.44 in 5 test matches, and I think our next trip there will change it). And in NZ, he averages 20.0, but he also averages 11 vs. Bangladesh, so that should make him a um, what exactly now? On the same note though, coming back to Yousuf (:phehehe:): avg. of 33 in Australia, 34 in India (:phehehe:), 26 in South Africa, 34 in Sri Lanka, and 147.50 (!) vs. Bangladesh. What makes him a middle order great? :hehe:

[Laaloo]

Sehwag ke paas 201, 309, 195, 151, 293, 251, 109 and many more hai. Yusuf ke paas kya hai?

[The Outsider]

Choosing an XI is not just about picking the best players - it's about picking the best team which can counter all possible opposition and circumstances. For this decade I would pick : 1. Smith - aggressive opener, but someone who can dig in the trenches if needed and play out the ugly hours when the ball is doing something. 2. Sehwag - someone who can come off in even the most bowling friendly conditions to change to turn the match around in a session. 3. Dravid - With an aggressive opening combination offers the fall back option of digging in the trenches like no one else can. 4. Tendulkar - Offers the side the perfect balance between an attacking and defensive approach - the perfect number 4 batsman. 5. Ponting - Out of his regular batting position, but his game would suit the number 5 spot to perfection. If you lose 3 wickets early, nothing like a counter attack to change the game. 6. Laxman - The best batsman at the position with ability to step up to the plate in the most intense situations against the toughest opponents. 7. Gilchrist - The game is unlikely to see a wicketkeeper - batsman like him ever again. One who would slate into an all time world XI seamlessly. 8. Pollock - The perfect fast bowling allrounder to keep on picking wickets and scoring crucial runs in the lower order. 9. Warne - The comeback after an year of ban underlined his legendary genius. 10. Gillespie - The fast and fiery act in the line up to turn the match around on the deadest of tracks instead of limping off with a fake injury. 11. McGrath - THE bowler and perhaps the player of the decade with the proven ability to bring the side into a contest from any situation.

[Mr. Wicket]

Shwetabh, I would only switch Ponting or Laxman (if that, then moving Ponting to 6) from that lineup and bring in Kallis. Kallis does not have the ability that Ponting or VVS do to dominate great attacks, or the Laxmanesque history of being able to change a game from almost any situation with a brilliant innings. But he is an equally prolific rungetter with the solidity the side can use to support Sehwag, Ponting/Laxman and Gilchrist's flair around him, perfect technique to handle the difficult conditions - not to mention a fantastic bowling record that would make him a very handy fourth seamer foil for the specialist bowlers and makes him a great all-round pick (even though his batting alone is enough to put him in contention here).

[The Outsider]

Shwetabh, I would only switch Ponting or Laxman (if that, then moving Ponting to 6) from that lineup and bring in Kallis. Kallis does not have the ability that Ponting or VVS do to dominate great attacks, or the Laxmanesque history of being able to change a game from almost any situation with a brilliant innings. But he is an equally prolific rungetter with the solidity the side can use to support Sehwag, Ponting/Laxman and Gilchrist's flair around him, perfect technique to handle the difficult conditions - not to mention a fantastic bowling record that would make him a very handy fourth seamer foil for the specialist bowlers and makes him a great all-round pick (even though his batting alone is enough to put him in contention here).

I guess it again comes down to picking a team vs. individuals - Kallis is a great of the game, but what does he offer to my team that I already do not have? Looking at the bowling first - I have McGrath, Pollock, and Warne in the line up so it's unlikely that I will desperately search for a genuine fifth bowling option to fill in the overs for a tiring attack. Regarding batting, there is no doubt Kallis is a better batsman than Laxman, but just to restate my argument - I am not picking the best players from the last decade, I am picking a team. As a batsman, Kallis can fit in either at number 3 or number 4, which are already taken up by better and more versatile players and once you go lower than that Kallis loses his utility. He won't be able to offer my side the counter punch which the number 5 and 6 positions can demand. It's a tough call between him and Laxman for the number 6 slot, but Laxman gets it for his proven record at one of the most trickiest positions to bat in cricket - here I ignore the ICF rants about his selfishness in giving tailenders the strike. It's a very similar call I make in choosing an all time world XI - S Waugh will probably not be in my top 10 batsmen of all time, if he would be, barely. But in my choice of a World XI, he would be one of the first names on the team sheet for the number 5 slot with the only challenge coming from Border. Some players might not be better than others but fill into a team role much better than others can.

[Mr. Wicket]

I would still take Kallis over VVS or Ponting here. I feel he would add more balance to the side from the standpoint of a second 'solid' player in the order to anchor things around the strokeplayers (Smith, Sehwag, SRT, Ponting and Gilchrist). In the event of a green track or some early wickets, I would feel a lot more comfortable watching him come in rather than seeing Ponting and VVS padded up. And his bowling these days is only useful for when the quicks are tired, but there were periods earlier in the decade when he was a VERY handy bowler and could really bring a lot to the table on that front as a genuine bowling option. I'm thinking of games like Leeds in 2003, where he ended up being the best bowler in the SAF side (outbowling even an on-form Ntini) with some vicious swing and very intelligent variation to run through the England top and middle order. Not to mention that with his control, on flat tracks he could be a very handy option especially if one of the strike guys had an off-day or were in the field for a bit. (Bridgetown '03, where Pollock and Donald went wicketless in the 2nd dig in the face of a fine Lara/Hooper partnership, and Kallis shouldered much of the bowling burden with 36 overs and a 6/for going at less than 2 an over). Re. your point about VVS being at number 6 and doing well in a difficult position - very fair logic that I did not consider, although I don't think it really applies in this scenario much. Laxman's skills at 6 batting with the tail are a lot more valuable when there is a real tail to handle - in this, we're talking about a batting lineup going down to 10 effectively as Pollock was a pretty damn good batsman, Warne could handle a bat very well and Gillespie by the end of his career was incredibly handy with the willow. So in this case is a specialist #6 record really all that crucial when we're talking about batsmen who could work with the tail?

[Malcolm Merlyn]

1.Hayden:the most prolific opener of the decade.Can dominat both fast and spin bowling with some ease 2.Sehwag:The man can change the face of a game within a session...scoring hundred in a session is walk in a park for him...bowlers conditions dont matter for him 3.Dravid:The perfect no.3 to consolidate the start that the openers will give 4.SRT:There hasnt been a greater batsman at no.4 or for that matter ever. 5:Brian Lara:The man is an enigma he can look extremely ordinary one day and unconquerable the very next day.May be a bit lower than his no.3 position but i guess after the consolidation of Dravid and Tendulkar he will provide the flair. 6.Kallis:The perfect allrounder for this spot 7.Gilchrist:The best wicketkeeping batsman to have stepped on the field. 8.Shaun Pollock:Great bowler and a very good lower order batsman 9.Shane Warne: Perhaps the best spinner to have played the game. 10.Shane Bond:Injury aside He is as good as it gets,Pace Bounce movement agression accuracy he has it all,Injuries have ravaged what could have been a legendary career. 11.Glenn Mcgrath:The bowler who can do everything whether to hold runs or to take wickets .......A Legend.