Would All Time South African XI be the best All Time XI?

[rkt.india]

chappell brothers did not play that series.It was a struggling aus side and hughes lost his capaticny and border got it.

I was talking about the video I had posted.

[hhhhdmt]

I don't know how fast Imran was bowling in that video but comparing him to Dinda or Shami is a joke. On topic, i am not sure if an all time SA team would be the very best, but it would certainly be up there, they have produced an astonishing number of great players.

[rkt.india]

I don't know how fast Imran was bowling in that video but comparing him to Dinda or Shami is a joke. On topic, i am not sure if an all time SA team would be the very best, but it would certainly be up there, they have produced an astonishing number of great players.

where did I compare Imran to Shami and Dinda? I just said visually he is not looking quicker than Dinda aur Shami and probably also have as high a jump as Dinda. :winky:

[Malcolm Merlyn]

The Australian team would be the best in my view. A bowling attack of McGrath, Lillee, Lindwall, Miller, and Warne with O'Reily, Grimmett, Davidson, and Gillespie in the back up. Gilchrist as the keeper obviously with Marsh and Healy being backups. A batting line up of Bradman, Waugh, Border, Chappell, Hayden, Morris. The batting backup would be an embarrassment of riches with Ponting, Harvey, Hussey, Walters, Trumper etc. etc. The West Indian first XI would be close to Australia, but after factoring in the backups the Australians would be better. South Africa are not in the same class in my view.

Outy You select Lindwall or Lillee over Davidson?Thats very strange. Also no place for Richie Benaud in the team not even reserves? @OP Well Australia will probably wash away in world 11.Remember The WI team of 80s didnt have a very high class spinner to face.The faced a bit of Qadir and struggled.I guess Warne would have owned all of them including Viv. This SA line up looks great but not one of them has done anything great againist a great spinner.Kallis struggled vs Warne and Murali and also in England.Amla.well.he is making merry at a time when the world is devoid of great fast bowlers. As big a fan as i am of Graeme Pollock i am not convinced if his no footwork technique would have survived in international cricket.Barry Richards well IDK how well he did in WSC or county cricket so will not comment.Proctor was a good batsman and Tayfield a great spinner. All in All the SA11 would.probably own most SC sides but may struggle to beat.them on occasions on SC wickets.

[Lurker]

That's a great team LUrker. As much as I like your team I would say it's too early to add Hashim Amla in there. I would just change it to Daryll Cullinan. One of the best South African bats for me. I used to enjoy his batting. He perhaps only failed against Warne but he was a class bat.

Truth be told 'tics, Amla was one of the reason behind this thread. I was checking the SA-NZ score and here was Amla scoring his customary century. It is getting to the point where it is boring to see him score so many centuries consistently. Yes it may still be early days but an average of 50 plus across 67 Tests is rather splendid. I think he does make a strong case for himself. Darryl Cullinan was a fine player. Very artistic. Amazing how folks like him, Fanie De Villiers, Brian McMillan from that era would not even make a cut.

[Lurker]

Thanks Lurker, well the idea is certainly flattering, SA could edge out Australia/ WI all time XI if it weren't for us lacking great spinners. Australia would probably win out due to having the best potential bowling lineup, no other country has produced as many quality pacers and spinners. And then there is the small matter of the best batsman ever. Their batting lineup would probably also be the best ever. 1. Arthur Morris 2. Hayden/ Trumper 3. Don Bradman 4. Ricky Ponting/ Greg Chappell 5. Allan Border/ Steve Waugh 6. Keith Miller 7. Adam Gilchrist 8. Shane Warne 9. Mcgrath 10. Lillee 11. Thomson/ Gillespie/ Lindwall. And this is without mentioning the likes of Doug Walters, David Boon, Michael Hussey, Richie Benaud, Davidson, Bill Lawry and a whole lot more.

Quite true mate. Australia is the benchmark by which every ATG team is measured and West Indies. However one thing to note is these two countries are called the best not only because of the talent at display, and Lord knows they have plenty, but also the fact that they won and dominated cricket. South Africa had a great team in late 60s/70s but before they could dominate they were casted out. If I was compiling SA All time list in 90s I would have maybe picked folks like Cronje, Cullinan etc and while they would still make a great team it would be a shade lower than the top. Today's team will have Graeme Smith as skipper, someone who has scored 8000 plus Test runs at just about 50 and is a very solid skipper now who has started to maybe lead SA into domination phase. I wonder if SA dominates a few more years suddenly the aura behind WI and Aus great teams starts dwindling. This is of course nothing to take away from their great teams. Any team with Lillee/Miller/Lindwall/Warne is as formidable as they come.

[Lurker]

Marshall had a huge advantage of bowling on those days. Not even Marshal' date=' in fact every pacer had advantage. [b']There was a fear of pace on those days, which you dont see now.

It is easy to have no fear on dead wickets, body armor and no bouncer rules. The day modern day "greats" will start facing Steyn without helmet and chest guard is when me and you can discuss how the fear factor is gone :winky:

[putrevus]

It is easy to have no fear on dead wickets' date=' body armor and no bouncer rules. The day modern day "greats" will start facing Steyn without helmet and chest guard is when me and you can discuss how the fear factor is gone :winky:[/quote'] I still don't think Steyn is as good as Marshall.Marshall was more versatile.

[vandokkum]

It is easy to have no fear on dead wickets' date=' body armor and no bouncer rules. The day modern day "greats" will start facing Steyn without helmet and chest guard is when me and you can discuss how the fear factor is gone :winky:[/quote'] :haha: Forget about helmet and chest guards. Let today's batsmen face Donald/ Marshall/ Lillee on the old WACA pitches with no bouncer rules. Then talk about the fear factor being gone :giggle:

[maniac]

:haha: Forget about helmet and chest guards. Let today's batsmen face Donald/ Marshall/ Lillee on the old WACA pitches with no bouncer rules. Then talk about the fear factor being gone :giggle:

Why should it work only one way...may be give the yesteryear batsmen helmets and other protective gear and maybe Marshall may be as effective as Tino Best and Lille might be another Peter Siddle at best :winky:

[vandokkum]

Why should it work only one way...may be give the yesteryear batsmen helmets and other protective gear and maybe Marshall may be as effective as Tino Best and Lille might be another Peter Siddle at best :winky:

:hysterical: You might have a point there with Siddle but LOL at Tino best.

[Lurker]

Why should it work only one way...may be give the yesteryear batsmen helmets and other protective gear and maybe Marshall may be as effective as Tino Best and Lille might be another Peter Siddle at best :winky:

Well Marshall did bowl to batsmen when atleast the helmet was in vogue, the results was not very different. :winky: In fact Mike Gatting was wearing a helmet when he was fell by Malcolm Marshall and blew his nose. Now, if Suresh Raina was playing in those days I give him exactly 1 game never to be picked again :hysterical:

[Lurker]

I still don't think Steyn is as good as Marshall.Marshall was more versatile.

Oh absolutely. Both Marshall and Richard Hadlee actually. Steyn is certainly right up there though. 310 wickets in 62 tests in low 20s with SR of 42 is fantastic. I will take him over any of the Indian cricketing greats....except Kapil Dev :--D

[vandokkum]

Well Marshall did bowl to batsmen when atleast the helmet was in vogue, the results was not very different. :winky: In fact Mike Gatting was wearing a helmet when he was fell by Malcolm Marshall and blew his nose. Now, if Suresh Raina was playing in those days I give him exactly 1 game never to be picked again :hysterical:

Suresh Raina against Marshall. With or without a helmet would be a sight to watch :hysterical:

[Sooda]

where did I compare Imran to Shami and Dinda? I just said visually he is not looking quicker than Dinda aur Shami and probably also have as high a jump as Dinda. :winky:

Imran was never an out and out quick though. Certainly not as fast as Steyn or Marshall. Does not make that yorker less unplayable. Its the swing that gets Chappel there more than the pace. Anyway to state Chappell is batting like Ishant is ridciulous..!

[Muloghonto]

When it comes to alltime XIs, Australia and West Indies are the top, followed closely by South Africa IMO. IMO RSA has the strongest opening pair of the three, West Indies has by far the best pace lineup and the greatest allrounder the game has ever seen but AUS have the most well balanced side, with the greatest batsman the game has ever seen, the greatest wicketkeeper batsman the game has ever seen and by far the most balanced attack.

[Muloghonto]

Well u forget that windies had one of the all time great all time allrounder sir Garfield sobers ' date=' though they didn't have a class spinner , may be lance Gibbs and ramnariane but that battery of fast bowlling of 80's and the ferocious wes hall and Roy gilchrist with batters like 3 w's Haynes , grinedge, Richards, kalicharan, kanhai, Lloyd , lara,gayle, chanders and dujon can ripp apart any best 11 I mean , warne and piggie can get u out , but these guys can hurt u and cam end ur carrier.[/quote'] West Indies did not have a 'class spinner' ?! Seriously mate, ever heard of one Lance Gibbs ? The first spinner to 300 test wickets, the ONLY foreign spinner to consistently make rabbits out of Indian batting lineups and even on square turners in India, Gibbs remained competetive against the fearsome foursome Indian spin quartet. Gibbs IMO is the 2nd best offspinner the game has ever produced, behind a certain Murali and slightly better than Prasanna.

[Sooda]

When it comes to alltime XIs, Australia and West Indies are the top, followed closely by South Africa IMO. IMO RSA has the strongest opening pair of the three, West Indies has by far the best pace lineup and the greatest allrounder the game has ever seen but AUS have the most well balanced side, with the greatest batsman the game has ever seen, the greatest wicketkeeper batsman the game has ever seen and by far the most balanced attack.

Strongest opening pair- Im not sure. In fact Englands opening pair of Hobbs/Sutcliffe or Hobbs/Hutton is arguably the best of any All time XI. Otherwise yes Aus is the best side- definitely the most balanced attack. Englands AT side is possibly a better one than SA's - the batting (Hobbs, Hutton/Sutcliffe, Hammond, Barrington, Pieterson, Botham... ) is about on par if not stronger, pace attack is a lesser one but not by a huge degree and much superior spin attack.... For me if an All time XI test championship were held in the end teams would rank - Aus, WI, Eng, SA, Pak, Ind, NZ, SL

[Muloghonto]

Strongest opening pair- Im not sure. In fact Englands opening pair of Hobbs/Sutcliffe or Hobbs/Hutton is arguably the best of any All time XI. Otherwise yes Aus is the best side- definitely the most balanced attack.

I meant the strongest opening pair amongst the three nations i listed ( AUS, WI and RSA). England & India have the strongest opening pair on paper but ultimately, my alltime England XI wouldn't have many of the old fogeys who opened in the days of spinners comming on by the 10th over and medium pacers ( barely breaking 80mph) in the alltime XI- this excludes Sutcliffe and Hobbs by my criteria, as these guys didn't face any major fast bowling duo like an alltime XI is expected to face.

Englands AT side is possibly a better one than SA's - the batting (Hobbs, Hutton/Sutcliffe, Hammond, Barrington, Pieterson, Botham... ) is about on par if not stronger, pace attack is a lesser one but not by a huge degree and much superior spin attack.... For me if an All time XI test championship were held in the end teams would rank - Aus, WI, Eng, SA, Pak, Ind, NZ, SL

IMO England's pace attack is definitely weaker- except for Trueman they do not have any real all-weather fast bowlers who will be effective in every condition or against the top batting lineup. Bedser, Statham, Willis are all excellent seamers, epecially Bedser, but they are definitely weaker than the likes of Donald, Steyn, Adcock, Procter or Lillee, McGrath, Lindwall, Davidson, etc. England also comes out weaker than these three teams on the 'allrounder' balance- OZ have miller, who was quite easily better than Botham, Greig, etc. and RSA have both Procter and Kallis, who are far more suited to their XI on primary skills basis alone ( Procter was like Imran- an alltime great callibre bowler who was a bits and pieces batsman, though his batting was more Kapil than Imran & Kallis is an alltime great batsman who is an effective bowler, Botham/Greig etc. are neither alltime great bowlers or alltime great batsmen) and WI have Sobers, who still is the greatest allrounder to play the game by a comfortable margin. Also, I don't think RSA's spin bowling option is weaker than English spin bowling option. Yes, England have a bevy of spinners to chose from, such as Lock, Laker, Underwood, Swann, etc. but Hugh Tayfield was no slouch and I'd struggle to think of an offie better than Tayfield once i've seen past Murali, Gibbs and Prasanna. For those who compare Sobers to Kallis, i would say the comparison is justified but Kallis is neither a bowler or a batsman in Sobers' class. Especially in the batting department, Sobers' era was not much different for west Indies batting than in the 90s, when Lara and Chanderpaul carried the team together. In Sobers' days it was Sobers and Kanhai with not much else. The Three Ws retired soon after Sobers' debut and IIRC he played like 10-12 of his 18-19 year career without the Ws.Kallis has an enviable record, but he was not as series defining against top end bowling like Lara or a consistency machine on pitches where 300 1st innings score is par, like Tendulkar. Kallis's consistency phase came in the early 2000s onwards, when pitches were significantly easier to bat on and fast bowling quality thinned out significantly. As such, I'd put Kallis in the 2nd rung of alltime great batsmen, along with the likes of Allan Border, Ponting, Miandad, Dravid, etc. but below the rung of Tendulkar,Viv,Lara,Gavaskar,Sobers,Bradman,etc. On bowling, Kallis and Sobers are very similar to their effectiveness in fast bowling, though Sobers was a much better opening bowler than Kallis was and had much experience in it, plus Sobers could turn in a containing role of Slow left arm bowling on turners where he is a very effective backup to Gibbs. While they are both alltime great catchers in the slips, Sobers was almost as good as Solkar in the leg slip/fwd sht. leg position and that makes Sobers better fielder IMO. Sobers is what you'd get (i imagine) if you took Brian Lara, Pragyan Ojha, Chaminda Vaas(Sobers was slightly faster than Vaas),Mark Waugh (slip Catching) and Solkar( on the leg slip/fwd short leg position) and lumped them all together.