Fan's dream teams

[Chandan]

There has been a lot of heart burn these days among fans as well as among cricket experts over the non inclusion of few of the great players of cricket who admittedly not many of the young cricket fans have seen. But there are only 11 places in the ICC XI and few of the greats will get left out. So I thought, why not make an XI from the players who debuted before the 1000th tests and another XI who debuted after 1000th test and then see which XI is better? The 1000th test was played in 84-85. http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/current/match/63389.html You can choose all the players who debuted after this test in the second XI and before this test in the first XI. I've never chosen an ATG great team. So I don't have an idea. What do you guys think of this? Which players will come out on top? The modern greats or the older ones? Please make the teams.

[Sooda]

Youve NEVER chosen an ATG team??!!! Chandan, it is the reason why Im a cricket fan. Anyway this is a cracking idea, Here we go. 1st 1000 XI: Hobbs Sutcliffe Bradman G Chappel V Richards Sobers Knott Hadlee/Gibbs Marshall Lillee O Reilly Dujon, Gavaskar, G Pollock, Underwood, Holding 2nd XI V Sehwag M Hayden R Ponting S Tendulkar J Kallis B Lara A Gilchrist S Warne W Akram D Steyn/ M Muralitharan G Mcgrath W Younis, A Kumble, S Waugh, K Sangakarra, J Langer Edited a bit to make it 17 man squads :P Would go for three or two pacemen depending on the pitch of course, and not sure who'd captain..possibly Richards and Warne... Im sure there might be glaring omissions from my teams...As Outy for one keeps pointing out alot of these sides do not work in practice as for one thing the batting lineup has too many out and out stroke players for instance..As for who would win...:D I dont know anyway let the debate begin

[Chandan]

Hayden? An ATG opener? Are you sure? Guys like Lillee and Marshall will have him for breakfast. You HAVE to choose Steve Waugh somewhere as he was one of only 3 batsmen to average above 50 in an era dominated by fierce pace bowlers and mean spinners like Warne and Murali, ie 90s. How many of you think that Richards and Bradman can survive against Warne?

[The Outsider]

1. Gavaskar 2. Hobbs 3. Bradman 4. Richards 5. Headley 6. Sobers 7. Hadlee 8. Knot 9. Marshall 10. Trueman 11. O'Reilly 1. Sehwag 2. Smith 3. Dravid 4. Tendulkar 5. Lara 6. Waugh 7. Gilchrist 8. Warne 9. Akram 10. Steyn 11. McGrath First team will probably win on the strength of it's openers.

[deepak_sach]

1. Gavaskar 2. Hobbs 3. Bradman 4. Richards 5. Headley 6. Sobers 7. Hadlee 8. Knot 9. Marshall 10. Trueman 11. O'Reilly 1. Sehwag 2. Smith 3. Dravid 4. Tendulkar 5. Lara 6. Waugh 7. Gilchrist 8. Warne 9. Akram 10. Steyn 11. McGrath First team will probably win on the strength of it's openers.

Hobbs played only against Australia.You could have Peter Kirsten.

[Sooda]

Hayden? An ATG opener? Are you sure? Guys like Lillee and Marshall will have him for breakfast. You HAVE to choose Steve Waugh somewhere as he was one of only 3 batsmen to average above 50 in an era dominated by fierce pace bowlers and mean spinners like Warne and Murali, ie 90s. How many of you think that Richards and Bradman can survive against Warne?

Like I said glaring omissions! No place for Border too.. Outsiders XIs are probably a bit more balanced that mine though not too differennt Warnes variations would be nothing like what Bradders or Viv would have faced, or for that matter the Muralki doosra..makes it rather interesting...the 1st team though does have some serious options to choose from esp on the pace bowling side..more so than the 2nd I think I could not think of anyone who stands out to partner Sehwag, Smith did cross my mind as he could make it into the side as skipper too I guess, but as batsmen there cant be too much to choose between him and Haydo

[Sooda]

I wonder if Bossbhai would even have a first 1000 tests XI... :hehe: :icflove:

[Chandan]

Like I said glaring omissions! No place for Border too.. Outsiders XIs are probably a bit more balanced that mine though not too differennt Warnes variations would be nothing like what Bradders or Viv would have faced, or for that matter the Muralki doosra..makes it rather interesting...the 1st team though does have some serious options to choose from esp on the pace bowling side..more so than the 2nd I thinkI could not think of anyone who stands out to partner Sehwag, Smith did cross my mind as he could make it into the side as skipper too I guess, but as batsmen there cant be too much to choose between him and Haydo

Even the second team has some terrific pace back ups which I may say are at par or even than the back ups of first teams like Ambrose, Donald, Waqar and a second spinner in Murali. Don't think first XI have this much of variety and fierce options. If the second option wants to go for accuracy, they can opt for Walsh, Pollock.. all these bowlers have above 380 wickets at terrific average and few have stunning SR too. The only place where the second XI is weak is at the openers. It is really surprising that no outstanding openers have come up in last 25 years who have looked like scoring 10,000+ runs above an average of 50 against mean seamers. Hayden etc flourished only when these meanacing seamers retired. I'm not sure about Sehwag. He can smash every bowler, so I'm not quite sure how he'd have fared against these bowlers, but Smith and Hayden...?No! They are as good or bad against Lillee and Marshall as Deep Dadgupta is against a world class bowler. Can anyone give the reason for lack of great openers in last 1000 test matches?

[rkt.india]

Hayden? An ATG opener? Are you sure? Guys like Lillee and Marshall will have him for breakfast. You HAVE to choose Steve Waugh somewhere as he was one of only 3 batsmen to average above 50 in an era dominated by fierce pace bowlers and mean spinners like Warne and Murali, ie 90s. How many of you think that Richards and Bradman can survive against Warne?

I think Hayden is the best opener this decade and only second to Sehwag in terms of taking on fast bowlers. He was a big reason for Australia's dominance this decade along with Langer as opener with 30 hundreds in less than 90 test as an opener. It is not a mean achievement. Graham Smith is no where near Hayden in terms of impact.

[rkt.india]

Even the second team has some terrific pace back ups which I may say are at par or even than the back ups of first teams like Ambrose, Donald, Waqar and a second spinner in Murali. Don't think first XI have this much of variety and fierce options. If the second option wants to go for accuracy, they can opt for Walsh, Pollock.. all these bowlers have above 380 wickets at terrific average and few have stunning SR too. The only place where the second XI is weak is at the openers. It is really surprising that no outstanding openers have come up in last 25 years who have looked like scoring 10,000+ runs above an average of 50 against mean seamers. Hayden etc flourished only when these meanacing seamers retired. I'm not sure about Sehwag. He can smash every bowler, so I'm not quite sure how he'd have fared against these bowlers, but Smith and Hayden...?No! They are as good or bad against Lillee and Marshall as Deep Dadgupta is against a world class bowler. Can anyone give the reason for lack of great openers in last 1000 test matches?

How can you say Hayden wouldn't have done well against Lillie and Marshall.

[Cricket Tragic]

Maybe because he watched him bat against Ambrose. Hayden was also a home town bully. The only place where he made runs outside Aus was in India. Hayden, Hussey, Samaraweera and Lady are pretty much the same in this regard. Of course, you only hear about Lady and Samaraweera being HTBs.

[Chandan]

How can you say Hayden wouldn't have done well against Lillie and Marshall.

Check how he failed early in his career against SA and WI against good and menacing fast bowlers in 90s. He flourished only when those bowlers were gone. He could not establish himself as a regular opener for Australia beccause of that. Seems you've started watching cricket quite late.

[rkt.india]

Check how he failed early in his career against SA and WI against good and menacing fast bowlers in 90s. He flourished only when those bowlers were gone. He could not establish himself as a regular opener for Australia beccause of that. Seems you've started watching cricket quite late.

He did not play many matches at that time and dropped and he had just debuted when he failed. Anyone can be failed at the start, but he came back a a better batsman. How many batsman can score 30 test 100s after 30 and if some one say he made those in Australia, then Australian wickets are good to bat but not that good. They are only good for good batsmen.

[Chandan]

There was a reason why he was dropped after being unsuccessful in 94, 96 and 97. He just couldn't handle the hot fast bowlers then. A simple question to you: Did you see him bat during that time? If not, you won't understand what problems he had against seriously fast and accurate bowlers who had bounce and why he flourished after 2001. And yes, ATG batsmen don't falter at start against great bowlers and capitalise against only weak ones.

[Jayaram_IND]

1. Gavaskar 2. Hobbs 3. Bradman 4. Richards 5. Headley 6. Sobers 7. Hadlee 8. Knot 9. Marshall 10. Trueman 11. O'Reilly 1. Sehwag 2. Smith 3. Dravid 4. Tendulkar 5. Lara 6. Waugh 7. Gilchrist 8. Warne 9. Akram 10. Steyn 11. McGrath First team will probably win on the strength of it's openers.

We often forget the era of players from mid 80s to the mid 90s maybe because no single team was dominant then the likes of ambrose walsh steve waugh border etc.

[Sooda]

There was a reason why he was dropped after being unsuccessful in 94, 96 and 97. He just couldn't handle the hot fast bowlers then. A simple question to you: Did you see him bat during that time? If not, you won't understand what problems he had against seriously fast and accurate bowlers who had bounce and why he flourished after 2001. And yes, ATG batsmen don't falter at start against great bowlers and capitalise against only weak ones.

I do agree with your pt, i.e is a bit of a home town bully, however who else would have partner Sehwag? He is the 2nd best opener of this last 1000 test era. He would struggle aginst the kind of pace bowlers this oppostion have, as Indeed would Sehwag...

[The Outsider]

It is really surprising that no outstanding openers have come up in last 25 years who have looked like scoring 10,000+ runs above an average of 50 against mean seamers. Hayden etc flourished only when these meanacing seamers retired. Can anyone give the reason for lack of great openers in last 1000 test matches?

Opening has been traditionally the toughest batting position. In fact, there is no opener who has the criteria you have mentioned above - 50+ average and 10,000+ runs if you take out the runs Gavaskar scored in the middle order. Even really good openers like Boycott, Greenidge, Gooch, Haynes ended up averaging in the mid 40s, showing what made Gavaskar so special. It's only over the last 10 years with the flattening of pitches and decline in quality of fast bowling that 50+ openers have become a regular feature in test matches - Sehwag, Gambhir, Hayden, Smith. Cook and Gibbs are also nudging the 50 mark. Historically, Hobbs also stands out because he played a lot of test matches before WW-I when the pitches were quite sub standard and ended up averaging considerably above 50. Till then an average of 40+ was considered really good something Ranjitsinhji, Trumper ended up with. After the war, pitch preparation underwent major changes and Hutton, Sutcliffe were able to breach the 50 mark. Personally, I don't think any of the post 2000 openers would have been able to average 50+ in an earlier era. Sehwag possibly, but with Sehwag it's really difficult to say because he appears to struggle in difficult conditions at times and on occasions can play truly sublime innings when he applies himself a bit.

[The Outsider]

Slater, Anwar, and Taylor would also be in the running for the second team - won't mind having either to partner Sehwag.

[Sooda]

Outy how about Gary Kirsten? Ideal foil for Sehwag too...may not be on par as the above names in terms of ability...also I think his record vs Aus is not very good strong as the Aussies were at that time

[rkt.india]

Opening has been traditionally the toughest batting position. In fact, there is no opener who has the criteria you have mentioned above - 50+ average and 10,000+ runs if you take out the runs Gavaskar scored in the middle order. Even really good openers like Boycott, Greenidge, Gooch, Haynes ended up averaging in the mid 40s, showing what made Gavaskar so special. It's only over the last 10 years with the flattening of pitches and decline in quality of fast bowling that 50+ openers have become a regular feature in test matches - Sehwag, Gambhir, Hayden, Smith. Cook and Gibbs are also nudging the 50 mark. Historically, Hobbs also stands out because he played a lot of test matches before WW-I when the pitches were quite sub standard and ended up averaging considerably above 50. Till then an average of 40+ was considered really good something Ranjitsinhji, Trumper ended up with. After the war, pitch preparation underwent major changes and Hutton, Sutcliffe were able to breach the 50 mark. Personally, I don't think any of the post 2000 openers would have been able to average 50+ in an earlier era. Sehwag possibly, but with Sehwag it's really difficult to say because he appears to struggle in difficult conditions at times and on occasions can play truly sublime innings when he applies himself a bit.

DO you think, bowling and batting standards were top notch in 1930s-40s while we see that quality in most of the games evolve with time, take an example of 100 meter race, where in those days 10 second barrier was a dream. Now, it has reached close to 9.5. It must be the case with cricket too, batting and bowling standards must be improved since then, not gone down, as you say that no opener post 2000 would have averaged 50 in Hobbs' days.