Greatest ODI XI of all-time

[sussexpob]

Richard Hadlee is not even there.

That's done it for me. He's considered one of the greatest all rounders the sport has ever seen.

Indeed, but his econ rate was from another era, and would he replicate it? How would he bowl to a hardened T20 player who Dillscooped him, or to players who have learnt to smash consistent line and length bowling into the stands??

I doubt a lot of old guys who placed it on a dot would fair that well.... you have to be creative and tactical with your bowling now as batsman are so much better.

[The Waugh Twins]

Same old argument "the game's changed", "the bats are bigger", "petrol is more expensive" and "I can't get a decent cup of coffee on a plane".

There is no Bradman either. Yeah he would have sucked at one day cricket.

[The Waugh Twins]

Richard Hadlee is not even there.

That's done it for me. He's considered one of the greatest all rounders the sport has ever seen.

Indeed, but his econ rate was from another era, and would he replicate it? How would he bowl to a hardened T20 player who Dillscooped him, or to players who have learnt to smash consistent line and length bowling into the stands??

I doubt a lot of old guys who placed it on a dot would fair that well.... you have to be creative and tactical with your bowling now as batsman are so much better.

Same old argument.

What if????

You're just guessing. That's like saying Bolt would have beaten Owens if he had run in the 40's.

[The Waugh Twins]

Richard Hadlee is not even there.

That's done it for me. He's considered one of the greatest all rounders the sport has ever seen.

Indeed, but his econ rate was from another era, and would he replicate it? How would he bowl to a hardened T20 player who Dillscooped him, or to players who have learnt to smash consistent line and length bowling into the stands??

I doubt a lot of old guys who placed it on a dot would fair that well.... you have to be creative and tactical with your bowling now as batsman are so much better.

Same old argument.

What if????

You're just guessing. That's like saying Bolt would have beaten Owens if he had run in the 40's.

Yeah but wouldn't he have to be like Benjamin Button?

[sussexpob]

Check old footage of football (English) and you see that players of "immense" skill in the 50's to even 70's are players who are on par with the average League Two striker nowadays.....

Sports evolve, and the evolution of ODI cricket for all sections of the game have changed. Fielding is out of this world better, Batters have learnt to score off everything, and bowlers can no longer march in and bowl test match like lines, because they get taken apart. That isn't guessing, its an evolution that is apparent.

Saying Bradman would have been good in ODI's now is also a guess..... regardless of the arguments that he faced "quick bowlers", the simple fact is modern athletes are stronger and more explosive, so he might have struggled with the extra pace from nowadays (cue someone telling us that a 30's bowler was the fastest ever because "x" batsman from the era says so even though science proves it wrong)

Jessie Owens was no doubt the fastest sprinter in 1936.... but wouldn't qualify for the Olympics now

[Durhamfootman]

Gilchrist
Hayden
Ponting
Waugh
Bevan
Hussey
Warne
Lee
McGrath

Just need to decide which 2 Aussies will take the remaining 2 slots

[The Waugh Twins]

Gilchrist
Hayden
Ponting
Waugh
Bevan
Hussey
Warne
Lee
McGrath

Just need to decide which 2 Aussies will take the remaining 2 slots

You wouldn't need any more, they could win with nine.

[The Waugh Twins]

Check old footage of football (English) and you see that players of "immense" skill in the 50's to even 70's are players who are on par with the average League Two striker nowadays.....

Sports evolve, and the evolution of ODI cricket for all sections of the game have changed. Fielding is out of this world better, Batters have learnt to score off everything, and bowlers can no longer march in and bowl test match like lines, because they get taken apart. That isn't guessing, its an evolution that is apparent.

Saying Bradman would have been good in ODI's now is also a guess..... regardless of the arguments that he faced "quick bowlers", the simple fact is modern athletes are stronger and more explosive, so he might have struggled with the extra pace from nowadays (cue someone telling us that a 30's bowler was the fastest ever because "x" batsman from the era says so even though science proves it wrong)

Jessie Owens was no doubt the fastest sprinter in 1936.... but wouldn't qualify for the Olympics now

Do you work for the BBC?

[The Waugh Twins]

Bradman scored his runs at an extremely fast rate often if you do a little research. If he were around today on these wickets he would have been laughing all the way to the bank.

Have you ever batted on a green wicket? Not fun I can tell you, not fun at all.

[The Waugh Twins]

Sir Richard Hadlee has been overlooked. A bowling average of 21 and an econ of 3.3. A handy number 8/9 as well.

Yep the list lacks research.

Steve Waugh captained Australia to 20 wins in a row at one stage if my memory serves me correctly. That is likely why He is there, not to mention the world cups he was involved in. On batting ability alone though it would be tough to select me, but I would because I understand that cricket is not just all about slogging the ball.

[The Waugh Twins]

Gilchrist
Tendulkar
The Don
The Master Blaster
Steve Waugh
Punter
Botham
Warne
Spofforth
Lindwall
Garner


That's my first team of 15 different first teams I will come up with.

[The Waugh Twins]

I just realized there's no Tavere.

[The Waugh Twins]

Sir Richard Hadlee has been overlooked. A bowling average of 21 and an econ of 3.3. A handy number 8/9 as well.

Yep the list lacks research.

Steve Waugh captained Australia to 20 wins in a row at one stage if my memory serves me correctly. That is likely why He is there, not to mention the world cups he was involved in. On batting ability alone though it would be tough to select me, but I would because I understand that cricket is not just all about slogging the ball.

That was under Ponting Steve, but you did lay the foundation.

[Making_Splinters]

Check old footage of football (English) and you see that players of "immense" skill in the 50's to even 70's are players who are on par with the average League Two striker nowadays.....

Sports evolve, and the evolution of ODI cricket for all sections of the game have changed. Fielding is out of this world better, Batters have learnt to score off everything, and bowlers can no longer march in and bowl test match like lines, because they get taken apart. That isn't guessing, its an evolution that is apparent.

Saying Bradman would have been good in ODI's now is also a guess..... regardless of the arguments that he faced "quick bowlers", the simple fact is modern athletes are stronger and more explosive, so he might have struggled with the extra pace from nowadays (cue someone telling us that a 30's bowler was the fastest ever because "x" batsman from the era says so even though science proves it wrong)

Jessie Owens was no doubt the fastest sprinter in 1936.... but wouldn't qualify for the Olympics now

To be honest, I don't buy much of that. Physical fitness doesn't have all that much to do with the pace bowlers bowl at, nothing to do with the skill a spinner has, and very little to do with the skill of a batsmen. The only significant improvement has been in fielding.

One could quite equally point out that modern players have advantages over their older counterparts in terms of equipment, protection, quality of ground preparation. No current international players have played an international match on an uncovered pitch after it's been raining etc etc etc.

This argument has been going on as long as forums have existed.

[The Waugh Twins]

Yeah I agree Splinters, It would have been difficult to bat back then.