Which nation has the best all-time XI in the last 50 years?

[Ted123]

Australia

Hayden
Langer
Ponting
Smith
Chappell
Border(c)
Gilchrist (wkt)
Cummins
Warne
Lillee
McGrath

South Africa

Kirsten
Smith
Amla
Kallis
AB
Cullinan
QDk (wkt)
Pollock
Rabada
Steyn
Donald

West Indies

Greenidge
Haynes
Lara
Viv
Lloyd
R Chase
Dujon(wkt)
Marshall
Ambrose
Holding
Garner

Any other team?

 

[Ab Fan]

Australia easily.

 

[Robert]

Greenidge
Haynes
Lara
Viv
Lloyd
R Chase
Dujon(wkt)
Marshall
Ambrose
Holding
Garner

Seriously?

Just put in another batter, probably Richardson.

England would be:

Boycott
Gooch (c)
Gower
Pietersen
Root
Botham
Knott (w)
Swann
Snow
Willis
Underwood

 

[Varun]

South Africa

Kirsten
Smith
Amla
Kallis
AB
Cullinan
QDk (wkt)
Pollock
Rabada
Steyn
Donald

No way.

 

[MMHS]

From players, debuted in 1970 or later
1. Australia
Hayden
Ponting
G Chapple
Smith
*Border
S Waugh
+Gilchrist
Warne
Cummins
Lillee
Mcgrath

2. WIN
Grineedge
Haynes
*Viv
Lara
Shiva
Hooper
+Doujon
Marshall
Holding
Ambrose
Roberts

3. PAK
Saeed
MoYo
YK
Javed
Inzi
*Khan
Latif
Wasim
Saqline
Qadir
Waquar

4. SAF
*Smith
BA Richards
Amla
Kallis
AdV
FaF
+Boucher
Pollock
Phillander
Styen
Donald

5. India
Gavaskar
Sehwag
Dravid
Tendulkar
Kohli
MSD
Kapil
Ashwin
Kumble
Zaheer
Shami

6. ENG
*Cook
Gooch
Root
Gower
KP
+Stewart
Stokes
Botham
Willis
Swan
Anderson

7. NZL
Glen Turner
*Fleming
Williamson
M Crowe
R Taylor
+Watling
Cairns
Hadlee
Vettory
Bond
Boult

Really tough call for top two - I listed alphabetically Australia & WIN. Probably Warne will contribute more than one player and he With Gilchrist are the difference, otherwise WIN well a head with combination of other nine.

Between PAK & SAF, I put PAK marginally ahead for the versatile attack, though SAF has better batting.

For last three, it’s too close but India has better batting by some margin but arguably the weakest attack while Kiwis have best attack, but considerably weaker batting; England is in between.

 

[therealAB]

Australia, no question.

 

[Manunited18]

Seriously?

Just put in another batter, probably Richardson.

England would be:

Boycott
Gooch (c)
Gower
Pietersen
Root
Botham
Knott (w)
Swann
Snow
Willis
Underwood

You not think one spinner, I'd go for gough/Anderson instead of Underwood, also thorpe over root

 

[Ab Fan]

From players, debuted in 1970 or later
1. Australia
Hayden
Ponting
G Chapple
Smith
*Border
S Waugh
+Gilchrist
Warne
Cummins
Lillee
Mcgrath

2. WIN
Grineedge
Haynes
*Viv
Lara
Shiva
Hooper
+Doujon
Marshall
Holding
Ambrose
Roberts

3. PAK
Saeed
MoYo
YK
Javed
Inzi
*Khan
Latif
Wasim
Saqline
Qadir
Waquar

4. SAF
*Smith
BA Richards
Amla
Kallis
AdV
FaF
+Boucher
Pollock
Phillander
Styen
Donald

5. India
Gavaskar
Sehwag
Dravid
Tendulkar
Kohli
MSD
Kapil
Ashwin
Kumble
Zaheer
Shami

6. ENG
*Cook
Gooch
Root
Gower
KP
+Stewart
Stokes
Botham
Willis
Swan
Anderson

7. NZL
Glen Turner
*Fleming
Williamson
M Crowe
R Taylor
+Watling
Cairns
Hadlee
Vettory
Bond
Boult

Really tough call for top two - I listed alphabetically Australia & WIN. Probably Warne will contribute more than one player and he With Gilchrist are the difference, otherwise WIN well a head with combination of other nine.

Between PAK & SAF, I put PAK marginally ahead for the versatile attack, though SAF has better batting.

For last three, it’s too close but India has better batting by some margin but arguably the weakest attack while Kiwis have best attack, but considerably weaker batting; England is in between.

You might well pick Proctor for South Africa instead of Faf.

 

[kingusama92]

Definitely Australia.

 

[Ab Fan]

For India, my XI will be:-

Gavaskar
Sehwag
Dravid
Tendulkar
Kohli
MSD(wkt)
Kapil
Kumble
Zaheer
Shami
Bedi

Don't think Ashwin's batting really matters. But if Ash can deliver some good performance with bowl overseas, he still will have a good case. Hopefully, with Bumrah, the attack will look more potent.

 

[Last Monetarist]

Greenidge
Haynes
Richards
Lara
Kanhai
Lloyd
Dujon
Marshall
Holding
Roberts
Garner

vs

Hayden
Langer
Ponting
Smith
Chappell
Border
Gilchrist
Warne
Lillee
Gillespie
McGrath

I'd go with the latter due to Warne.

 

[Last Monetarist]

Greenidge
Haynes
Richards
Lara
Kanhai
Lloyd
Dujon
Marshall
Holding
Roberts
Garner

vs

Hayden
Langer
Ponting
Smith
Chappell
Border
Gilchrist
Warne
Lillee
Gillespie
McGrath

I'd go with the latter due to Warne.

Can replace Kanhai with Sobers given that they both played four years into the 70s. That one selection could tip the scales in favour of the West Indies.

 

[MMHS]

You might well pick Proctor for South Africa instead of Faf.

MJ debuted I believe in 1967, I have included one border line player (BA Richards, debuted in January 1970) but can’t take MJP. If he is included, SAF will leapfrog PAK.

 

[therealAB]

Can replace Kanhai with Sobers given that they both played four years into the 70s. That one selection could tip the scales in favour of the West Indies.

Neither should play. If we look purely at their outputs in the relevant time period and rate them with Waugh, Border etc we should rate Cummins as highly as Ambrose/Holding/Garner

 

[Ab Fan]

MJ debuted I believe in 1967, I have included one border line player (BA Richards, debuted in January 1970) but can’t take MJP. If he is included, SAF will leapfrog PAK.

Oh, you going with debut date. Then its fair enough. Probably Cullinan instead of Faf.

 

[MMHS]

Oh, you going with debut date. Then its fair enough. Probably Cullinan instead of Faf.

May be against WIN or England or NZ, but other teams have leg spinners

 

[Last Monetarist]

Neither should play. If we look purely at their outputs in the relevant time period and rate them with Waugh, Border etc we should rate Cummins as highly as Ambrose/Holding/Garner

Sobers played 17 tests and scored more than a thousand runs during the 70s, that's sufficient for him to be part of the conversation in my view.

 

[MMHS]

Oh, you going with debut date. Then its fair enough. Probably Cullinan instead of Faf.

It’s logical to consider players on debut, otherwise that range can go up to seventy years.

Also, if you consider retirement point of time, it doesn’t matter for Aussies at all (Same 11 plays - Lindwall, Benaud, KR Miller, Hervey & Davidson retired by 1963); but it’ll change the equation for WIN and SAF big time.

For WIN, I’ll pick Sir Gary for Hooper, open with Rohan instead of Haynes and Lloyd will come to lead the team in place of Shiva - that XI arguably is the best ever in history considering any era. In a time incentive world, that guy Gary Sobers was a combination of Messi, CR, Zidane & Maldini.

For SAF as well, Procter comes for Vernon Phi, GPollock for Faf and that’s massive improvement.

 

[therealAB]

Sobers played 17 tests and scored more than a thousand runs during the 70s, that's sufficient for him to be part of the conversation in my view.

Do you think his exploits should be ranked up there with Waugh/Border, who had long ATG careers during the time period in question?

 

[Bhaijaan]

India's best XI from last 50 years will stand toe to toe against Windies or Aussies and here's why :-

It's not only about quality of players but also about the will of a nation and a a group of players to win, the pride they have in playing for their nation, the level of professionalism they have.

Purely talking about batting alone, India has arguably the best and most versatile test batting line up in last 50 years.

A combined bowling line up with synergies of Dev, Bumrah, Shami, Srinath, Zaheer as a pace unit might be written off on paper but on the ground they are a formidable bowling line up. Do keep in mind that not only the above mentioned but guys like Agarkar, RP Singh, Sreesanth and Irfan Pathan have won famous away test matchee in SENA nations on their own. Last 3 year record of Indian fast bowling (the only time we ever had a complete bowling line up) actually stand at par with West Indian pace quartet of 1980s, they have outperformed Pakistanis, South Africans greatest generation of fast bowlers, actually.

In the endonce again go back to my first paragraph and read again, the desire to win for your country is very very high in Indian cricket. We held our own against Aussies with our okayish team in 2000s. With our best ever team we will turn the tables.


Gavaskar
Sehwag
Dravid
Tendulkar
Kohli
Azharuddin
Engineer
Dev
Bedi
Shami
Bumrah


° Home tests will see Dravid dropped for Kumble

 

[therealAB]

another horrific show of bias by [MENTION=65183]freelance_cricketer[/MENTION]. India are not within the top 4.

Lets compare them with the aus side.
You say they are professional and driven. Not more so that the Australia side. Smith, Waugh and Border are three of the most driven and determined cricketers in history. All have brilliant away records and were part of incredibly succesful teams. If all of these Indian players are so good, why haven't they been that succesful. Bumrah and Shami are good fast bowlers, but compared to McGrath, Lillee, Marshall etc they are unproven/nothing special. Cummins for example has their number - if they can be picked so can he.

Points of comparison with the Aus side:
Gilchrist >> Engineer
McGrath >> Dev
Lillee >> Shami
Cummins >= Shami
Warne >> Kumble
Waugh >>>> Azharuddin

These gaps are huge. India could maybe win at home, but in all other conditions it would be a rout. India isn't half as good as Aus, or Pak, WI and SA

 

[Ab Fan]

It’s logical to consider players on debut, otherwise that range can go up to seventy years.

Also, if you consider retirement point of time, it doesn’t matter for Aussies at all (Same 11 plays - Lindwall, Benaud, KR Miller, Hervey & Davidson retired by 1963); but it’ll change the equation for WIN and SAF big time.

For WIN, I’ll pick Sir Gary for Hooper, open with Rohan instead of Haynes and Lloyd will come to lead the team in place of Shiva - that XI arguably is the best ever in history considering any era. In a time incentive world, that guy Gary Sobers was a combination of Messi, CR, Zidane & Maldini.

For SAF as well, Procter comes for Vernon Phi, GPollock for Faf and that’s massive improvement.

Definitely won't go with retirement date. Can go with the era they were remembered for as there is no mention in OP.

For Sobers, it was 60s, Bedi 70s, Vern 10s, Proctor 70s as his peak would have come in that decade, he debuted in 1967.

 

[Bhaijaan]

another horrific show of bias by [MENTION=65183]freelance_cricketer[/MENTION]. India are not within the top 4.

Lets compare them with the aus side.
You say they are professional and driven. Not more so that the Australia side. Smith, Waugh and Border are three of the most driven and determined cricketers in history. All have brilliant away records and were part of incredibly succesful teams. If all of these Indian players are so good, why haven't they been that succesful. Bumrah and Shami are good fast bowlers, but compared to McGrath, Lillee, Marshall etc they are unproven/nothing special. Cummins for example has their number - if they can be picked so can he.

Points of comparison with the Aus side:
Gilchrist >> Engineer
McGrath >> Dev
Lillee >> Shami
Cummins >= Shami
Warne >> Kumble
Waugh >>>> Azharuddin

These gaps are huge. India could maybe win at home, but in all other conditions it would be a rout. India isn't half as good as Aus, or Pak, WI and SA

Your comparison of bowling is not practical at all.

Bowlers do not have to be individually ahead of their opponents. They just have to contribute to 20 wickets. Indian bowling line up of last 50 years is world class and will deliver 20 wickets anywhere. You clearly missed the part wgere j said guys like Agarkar, RP Singh, Irfan Pathan and Sreesanth have won tests on their own in SENA


Australia is not at par with India batting wise. They are not as bad but not as good. India is in an elite of its own batting wise historically speaking. Not just last year's but last 150 years of Cricket combined.

 

[Bhaijaan]

A bowling line up of Starc, Cummins, Hazzlewood was outclassed by Sharma, Bumrah, Shami just one and a half year ago across 4 tests played in Australia.

On paper, no one would have given it to the Indian bowling attack.

This is the practicality of cricket most people do not understand..

 

[Ab Fan]

Seriously?

Just put in another batter, probably Richardson.

England would be:

Boycott
Gooch (c)
Gower
Pietersen
Root
Botham
Knott (w)
Swann
Snow
Willis
Underwood

Underwood out, Stokes in.
Snow with 8 5-fers out, Jimmy with 28 in.

 

[therealAB]

A bowling line up of Starc, Cummins, Hazzlewood was outclassed by Sharma, Bumrah, Shami just one and a half year ago across 4 tests played in Australia.

On paper, no one would have given it to the Indian bowling attack.

This is the practicality of cricket most people do not understand..

It is easy to outclass them when they were bowling against some very good batsmen, and you guys were bowling to Aaron Finch

 

[Bhaijaan]

It is easy to outclass them when they were bowling against some very good batsmen, and you guys were bowling to Aaron Finch

We went to Australia with openers terribly out of form and a young wicket keeper batsman on his first tour to Australia.

Rohit Sharma hasn't yet made it as a test cricketer.

Anyway point being, bowling line up are seen as a unit when you talk about a team. Dennis Lillee, McGrath might jave greater statistics than Bumrah Dev, Shami but practically speaking Indian batting can cancel Aussie bowling in a given test match and our bowling (across 50 years) is still world class enough take 20 test wickets.

I can see from where you are coming but I firmly believe a team's output (especially as a bolwing unit) isn't directly proportional to individual records

 

[Bhaijaan]

Across 50 years, with Bradman out of the equation, Aussie batting line-up does not match Indian batting and it is a fact.

1. Gavaskar > Any batsman Australia has ever produced except Bradman
2.Sehwag > Langer
3. Dravid vs Ponting is a debate. I happily conceed Ponting in his prime was more dominant but the numbers he retired with along with the tag that he was borderline tailender across 20 test matches on Indian soil makes for a lengthy debate. This is a stalemate and arguably more in Dravid's favour

4. Tendulkar > Any batsman Australia has ever produced except Bradman

5. Kohli vs Border/Waugh is another probable stalemate as of now. There is very high probability Kohli would have eclipsed both by the time he retires with the sheer weight of his collective achievements

6. Gundappa/Azhaurddin/Laxman vs who? Martyn isn't conclusively better

7. Gilchrist ahead and arguably the only batting position Australia wins in this man to man comparison.



West Indies are closer to India in batting competition across 50 years than Australia

 

[therealAB]

Your comparison of bowling is not practical at all.

Bowlers do not have to be individually ahead of their opponents. They just have to contribute to 20 wickets. Indian bowling line up of last 50 years is world class and will deliver 20 wickets anywhere. You clearly missed the part wgere j said guys like Agarkar, RP Singh, Irfan Pathan and Sreesanth have won tests on their own in SENA


Australia is not at par with India batting wise. They are not as bad but not as good. India is in an elite of its own batting wise historically speaking. Not just last year's but last 150 years of Cricket combined.

Australia kills India batting wise. For test cricket, let's rank the best Aus and Ind test batsmen

1. Bradman vs Tendulkar. Bradman wins. Almost universally considered the GOAT
2. Gavaskar vs Smith. Let's call it a tie. For me Smith wins but arguments can be made either side
3. Chappell vs Dravid. Chappell easily. The bloke who excelled vs everyone he played against, in particular vs the mighty WI pace attack is better than a man who dspite playing some great innings, was generally mediocre in pace-friendly conditions
4. Waugh vs Kohli. Kohli could improve significantly, but to this stage in his career Waugh has just accomplished more, with an incredible well rounded record and some clutch innings that Kohli could only dream about. His record vs the top teams (SA, WI) is ridiculously good

That isn't that embarrassing for India, but the following ones will be. Who is the next best Indian batsmen. With all credit to them, Sehwag, Laxman, Hazare, Merchant, Viswanath, Pujara and Vengsarkar have nothing on Border, Ponting, Harvey, Hayden, Trumper, McCabe, Clarke and Hussey.
Alternatively, we could do a comparison by decade, looking purely at their accomplishments within that decade and selecting the best bat from that decade:
Note I have looked at Indian FC stats to see if they have any comparable players during this time

1910's: Trumper
20's: Macartney
30's: Bradman
40's: Bradman
50's: Harvey
60's: Simpson
70's: Gavaskar. I personally believe that Chappell was better than Gavaskar during this time period, but I have to give India one
80's: Border
90's: Sachin
00's: Ponting, much better than Sachin within this period
10's: Smith

Using all metrics, Australia have produced greater test bats than India. WI as well, and England would run them close based on their dominance in the 1st half of the century.
Stop being so biased. With statements like India > Aus in the last 50 years, Shami is an ATG and Dev > Imran, people will stop taking you seriously

 

[therealAB]

Across 50 years, with Bradman out of the equation, Aussie batting line-up does not match Indian batting and it is a fact.

1. Gavaskar > Any batsman Australia has ever produced except Bradman
2.Sehwag > Langer
3. Dravid vs Ponting is a debate. I happily conceed Ponting in his prime was more dominant but the numbers he retired with along with the tag that he was borderline tailender across 20 test matches on Indian soil makes for a lengthy debate. This is a stalemate and arguably more in Dravid's favour

4. Tendulkar > Any batsman Australia has ever produced except Bradman

5. Kohli vs Border/Waugh is another probable stalemate as of now. There is very high probability Kohli would have eclipsed both by the time he retires with the sheer weight of his collective achievements

6. Gundappa/Azhaurddin/Laxman vs who? Martyn isn't conclusively better

7. Gilchrist ahead and arguably the only batting position Australia wins in this man to man comparison.



West Indies are closer to India in batting competition across 50 years than Australia

Border/Waugh kills Azharuddin/Laxman/Gundappa, remember that only one of them is batting at 5

You have the opening advantage, I agree.
Dravid vs Ponting is close. I'd take Dravid personally
Tendulkar vs Smith is a close discussion, as Smith has been dominant in a way Sachin never was, and has had a much better peak. Smith cannot be discounted. Studies with no bias, such as that compiled by DOG on CW have shown Smith to be a top 5 test bat of all time already, above Sachin

Kohli has not equalled Border/Waugh yet, although he may do at some point in time. Their overseas records are way, way better than his as well as their performances in pressure situations
I find in laughable how you can completely discount Smith vs Sachin, while saying Kohli has equalled Border/Waugh



The WI are not better than Aus. After Lara and Richards, quality drops off quite quickly as Chanderpaul, Lloyd are not in Border/Waugh class

 

[therealAB]

We went to Australia with openers terribly out of form and a young wicket keeper batsman on his first tour to Australia.

Rohit Sharma hasn't yet made it as a test cricketer.

Anyway point being, bowling line up are seen as a unit when you talk about a team. Dennis Lillee, McGrath might jave greater statistics than Bumrah Dev, Shami but practically speaking Indian batting can cancel Aussie bowling in a given test match and our bowling (across 50 years) is still world class enough take 20 test wickets.

I can see from where you are coming but I firmly believe a team's output (especially as a bolwing unit) isn't directly proportional to individual records

While your openers were out of form, any batting line up with Kohli, Pujara is automatically better than:
Harris
Finch
Marsh
Khawaja
Head
Handscomb
Paine

While the Indian bowling lineup has been class, it still failed to win you away series in Eng and SA. The lack of a strong spinner overseas is a huge disadvantage compared to Warne

 

[Bhaijaan]

Border/Waugh kills Azharuddin/Laxman/Gundappa, remember that only one of them is batting at 5

You have the opening advantage, I agree.
Dravid vs Ponting is close. I'd take Dravid personally
Tendulkar vs Smith is a close discussion, as Smith has been dominant in a way Sachin never was, and has had a much better peak. Smith cannot be discounted. Studies with no bias, such as that compiled by DOG on CW have shown Smith to be a top 5 test bat of all time already, above Sachin

Kohli has not equalled Border/Waugh yet, although he may do at some point in time. Their overseas records are way, way better than his as well as their performances in pressure situations
I find in laughable how you can completely discount Smith vs Sachin, while saying Kohli has equalled Border/Waugh



The WI are not better than Aus. After Lara and Richards, quality drops off quite quickly as Chanderpaul, Lloyd are not in Border/Waugh class

Would appreciate if you could mention Aussie batting line up of last 50 years

I think we can then compare on each batting position.

You have a great batting line up. But i am sure ours is better if Bradman is taken out of the equation.

 

[therealAB]

Would appreciate if you could mention Aussie batting line up of last 50 years

I think we can then compare on each batting position.

You have a great batting line up. But i am sure ours is better if Bradman is taken out of the eauation.

Hayden
Langer
Ponting
Smith
Border
Waugh
Gilchrist

the bottom three are better than their competition for me, 1,2,3 are better for India and 4 is a deadheat.
The batting is similar, Aus has more depth with Martyn, Hussey, Clarke not being selected.
The bowling is the real decider. Remember that India was horrid away from home for most of the period due to their bowling

 

[Last Monetarist]

Do you think his exploits should be ranked up there with Waugh/Border, who had long ATG careers during the time period in question?

It's a question of eligibility, he played during the period under question. After that it's sheer ability, and I doubt there's been a cricketer who could hold a candle to Garfield Sobers on ability.

 

[Last Monetarist]

Hayden
Langer
Ponting
Smith
Border
Waugh
Gilchrist

the bottom three are better than their competition for me, 1,2,3 are better for India and 4 is a deadheat.
The batting is similar, Aus has more depth with Martyn, Hussey, Clarke not being selected.
The bowling is the real decider. Remember that India was horrid away from home for most of the period due to their bowling

Chappell ahead of Waugh all day for me.

 

[therealAB]

It's a question of eligibility, he played during the period under question. After that it's sheer ability, and I doubt there's been a cricketer who could hold a candle to Garfield Sobers on ability.

I believe that he should be rated just for the time period in question. For example, a hypothetical ATG bowler who played 20 tests during the period at the tail end of his career, still performing at ATG standards, would be rated at Cummins/Bond level

 

[Bhaijaan]

Hayden
Langer
Ponting
Smith
Border
Waugh
Gilchrist

the bottom three are better than their competition for me, 1,2,3 are better for India and 4 is a deadheat.
The batting is similar, Aus has more depth with Martyn, Hussey, Clarke not being selected.
The bowling is the real decider. Remember that India was horrid away from home for most of the period due to their bowling

I think it's clear that Australia doesn't have a firm edge over India as a batting unit across last 50 years. If anything, many people have good enough reasons to put India ahead, vice versa there will be those who will put Australia ahead. It is how you choose to see things.

My whole point was to encourage a deeper analysis of Indian XI wrt conditions of this thread.

You did put Pakistan ahead of India, and their batting line up is not only conclusively inferior to both India and Australia but their away /SENA record is downright disgraceful.

 

[Last Monetarist]

I believe that he should be rated just for the time period in question. For example, a hypothetical ATG bowler who played 20 tests during the period at the tail end of his career, still performing at ATG standards, would be rated at Cummins/Bond level

Fair enough if that's the selection rule.

 

[Ted123]

Seriously?

Just put in another batter, probably Richardson.

England would be:

Boycott
Gooch (c)
Gower
Pietersen
Root
Botham
Knott (w)
Swann
Snow
Willis
Underwood

Picked him for balance. Good batsmen and a good spinner.

Why two spinners for England?

 

[therealAB]

I think it's clear that Australia doesn't have a firm edge over India as a batting unit across last 50 years. If anything, many people have good enough reasons to put India ahead, vice versa there will be those who will put Australia ahead. It is how you choose to see things.

My whole point was to encourage a deeper analysis of Indian XI wrt conditions of this thread.

You did put Pakistan ahead of India, and their batting line up is not only conclusively inferior to both India and Australia but their away /SENA record is downright disgraceful.

I think that the batting lineups are hard to split. I believe that Aus is slightly better as the difference between Gilchrist and his Indian counterpart is greater than any difference between say Sehwag and Langer, or Gavaskar and Hayden. Either way it is close, but IMO Aus is decisively better due to their bowling line up

Pak rates highly for me due to Waqar, Wasim and Imran, which as a trio is below only Marshall, Ambrose, Garner and equal with Donald, Pollock, Steyn. Looking at the whole bowling attack, it is behind Aus as well but def better than that of India.
India's batting is clearly better, but Miandad, Khan, Inzamam, Anwar, Yousuf is reasonably solid, especially with Imran at 8 and Akram at 9

When rating the bowling lineups, I would:
WI
Aus
Pak
SA
Eng
NZ
Ind/SL

 

[Ted123]

From players, debuted in 1970 or later
1. Australia
Hayden
Ponting
G Chapple
Smith
*Border
S Waugh
+Gilchrist
Warne
Cummins
Lillee
Mcgrath

2. WIN
Grineedge
Haynes
*Viv
Lara
Shiva
Hooper
+Doujon
Marshall
Holding
Ambrose
Roberts

3. PAK
Saeed
MoYo
YK
Javed
Inzi
*Khan
Latif
Wasim
Saqline
Qadir
Waquar

4. SAF
*Smith
BA Richards
Amla
Kallis
AdV
FaF
+Boucher
Pollock
Phillander
Styen
Donald

5. India
Gavaskar
Sehwag
Dravid
Tendulkar
Kohli
MSD
Kapil
Ashwin
Kumble
Zaheer
Shami

6. ENG
*Cook
Gooch
Root
Gower
KP
+Stewart
Stokes
Botham
Willis
Swan
Anderson

7. NZL
Glen Turner
*Fleming
Williamson
M Crowe
R Taylor
+Watling
Cairns
Hadlee
Vettory
Bond
Boult

Really tough call for top two - I listed alphabetically Australia & WIN. Probably Warne will contribute more than one player and he With Gilchrist are the difference, otherwise WIN well a head with combination of other nine.

Between PAK & SAF, I put PAK marginally ahead for the versatile attack, though SAF has better batting.

For last three, it’s too close but India has better batting by some margin but arguably the weakest attack while Kiwis have best attack, but considerably weaker batting; England is in between.

Brilliant analysis. I'd rather go for Chase than Hooper though for spin on Day 5.

 

[therealAB]

Probably a good time to post my general teams. I would go for:

1. Aus:
Hayden
Langer
Ponting
Smith
Chappell. [MENTION=65183]freelance_cricketer[/MENTION] I forgot him beforehand, and he is decisively better than Dravid in the eyes of most
Border
Gilchrist
Warne
Gillespie
Lillee
McGrath

2. WI:
Greenidge
Haynes
Richards
Lara
Chanderpaul
Lloyd
Dujon
Marshall
Garner
Holding
Ambrose

3. SA:
Richards
Smith
Amla
Pollock
Kallis
ABdV, keeping as I don't rate Boucher
Rice
Procter
Adams
Steyn
Donald

Feel like Pollock could replace Adams, but do want a spinner

4. Pak

Anwar
Khan
Abbas
Inzamam
Yousuf
Miandad
Imran
Akram
Bari
Waqar
Saqlain

5. Ind:
Sehwag
Gavaskar
Dravid
Sachin
Kohli
Vengsarkar
Dhoni
Dev
Kumble
Srinath
Bedi

6. Eng:
Boycott
Gooch
Bell?
Pietersen
Root
Gower
Knott
Botham
Swann
Willis
Anderson

Don't really care that much about the rest tbh

 

[Last Monetarist]

Probably a good time to post my general teams. I would go for:

1. Aus:
Hayden
Langer
Ponting
Smith
Chappell. [MENTION=65183]freelance_cricketer[/MENTION] I forgot him beforehand, and he is decisively better than Dravid in the eyes of most
Border
Gilchrist
Warne
Gillespie
Lillee
McGrath

2. WI:
Greenidge
Haynes
Richards
Lara
Chanderpaul
Lloyd
Dujon
Marshall
Garner
Holding
Ambrose

3. SA:
Richards
Smith
Amla
Pollock
Kallis
ABdV, keeping as I don't rate Boucher
Rice
Procter
Adams
Steyn
Donald

Feel like Pollock could replace Adams, but do want a spinner

4. Pak

Anwar
Khan
Abbas
Inzamam
Yousuf
Miandad
Imran
Akram
Bari
Waqar
Saqlain

5. Ind:
Sehwag
Gavaskar
Dravid
Sachin
Kohli
Vengsarkar
Dhoni
Dev
Kumble
Srinath
Bedi

6. Eng:
Boycott
Gooch
Bell?
Pietersen
Root
Gower
Knott
Botham
Swann
Willis
Anderson

Don't really care that much about the rest tbh

Younis ahead of Zaheer for me, assuming that it's Majid opening the batting with Anwar.

I'd have Gower or Root at 3, with Stokes at 6 in the England side.

 

[therealAB]

Younis ahead of Zaheer for me, assuming that it's Majid opening the batting with Anwar.

I'd have Gower or Root at 3, with Stokes at 6 in the England side.

Complete oversight with younis, yes it is Majid Opening

Stokes is good there as well, better bat that Bell anyway tbh. Gower will bat 3

 

[Ab Fan]

Probably a good time to post my general teams. I would go for:

1. Aus:
Hayden
Langer
Ponting
Smith
Chappell. [MENTION=65183]freelance_cricketer[/MENTION] I forgot him beforehand, and he is decisively better than Dravid in the eyes of most
Border
Gilchrist
Warne
Gillespie
Lillee
McGrath

2. WI:
Greenidge
Haynes
Richards
Lara
Chanderpaul
Lloyd
Dujon
Marshall
Garner
Holding
Ambrose

3. SA:
Richards
Smith
Amla
Pollock
Kallis
ABdV, keeping as I don't rate Boucher
Rice
Procter
Adams
Steyn
Donald

Feel like Pollock could replace Adams, but do want a spinner

4. Pak

Anwar
Khan
Abbas
Inzamam
Yousuf
Miandad
Imran
Akram
Bari
Waqar
Saqlain

5. Ind:
Sehwag
Gavaskar
Dravid
Sachin
Kohli
Vengsarkar
Dhoni
Dev
Kumble
Srinath
Bedi

6. Eng:
Boycott
Gooch
Bell?
Pietersen
Root
Gower
Knott
Botham
Swann
Willis
Anderson

Don't really care that much about the rest tbh

Srinath was good at home but mediocre overseas. If I have to make a pace attack for overseas, Zaheer will always have an edge over Srinath. He could swing the new ball both ways, reverse with the old bowl as well.

Precisely, India's pace attack should be Dev and Zaheer with new ball, Shami with old ball and two spinners(Kumble and Bedi).

 

[therealAB]

Srinath was good at home but mediocre overseas. If I have to make a pace attack for overseas, Zaheer will always have an edge over Srinath. He could swing the new ball both ways, reverse with the old bowl as well.

Precisely, India's pace attack should be Dev and Zaheer with new ball, Shami with old ball and two spinners(Kumble and Bedi).

Ok that sounds reasonable.

I do not think that India can play 5 bowlers though. Assuming Dhoni is the keeper, him and Kapil at 6/7 is incredibly weak, especially outside of Asia where they both average less than 30. This is exacerbated by Shami, Khan, Bedi being poor batsmen.

 

[Ab Fan]

Ok that sounds reasonable.

I do not think that India can play 5 bowlers though. Assuming Dhoni is the keeper, him and Kapil at 6/7 is incredibly weak, especially outside of Asia where they both average less than 30. This is exacerbated by Shami, Khan, Bedi being poor batsmen.

Kapil was genuinely talented with the bat. He could have easily averaged higher with bat. But because of his workload and lack of support with bowl, he cared less on his batting. Only if he batted at about 60 SR, he could have easily averaged 35. He always said in his interviews that he scored his runs fast because he would have to come up and bowl a lot of overs as well.

With that top 5, we could easily afford Kapil and Dhoni at 6 & 7, maybe drop Bedi for Ashwin and Kumble at 9. You also get an off-spinner and leg spinner combination.

 

[King_Kohli]

Australia.. without a question .

 

[Robert]

Picked him for balance. Good batsmen and a good spinner.

Why two spinners for England?

That fast attack didn’t need balance, it just smashed everyone flat!

Balanced sides used to have two spinners. Gets the over rated up too.

 

[Robert]

Underwood out, Stokes in.
Snow with 8 5-fers out, Jimmy with 28 in.

Don’t need Stokes.

Snow was an all-conditions bowler who basically won the 19070/1 Ashes. Ian Chappell said he was the nastiest he ever faces.

 

[Ab Fan]

Don’t need Stokes.

Snow was an all-conditions bowler who basically won the 19070/1 Ashes. Ian Chappell said he was the nastiest he ever faces.

That will weaken the team.

Only 8 fi-fers, not enough to beat Anderson and Broad. Willis had 16, Broad 18, Anderson 28.