Page 1 of 1

Who would win?

PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 4:38 pm
by andy
Just thought I'd throw another one of these in...

In a test match on a raging turner in India, who would out of these two completely random sides in your opinon..?


1.Dean Elgar
2.Mohammed Hafeez
3.Shai Hope
4.Brian Lara (c)
5.Shakib Al-Hasan
6.Andy Flower (wk)
7.Kapil Dev
8.Shaun Pollock
9.Brett Lee
10.Monty Panesar
11.Muttiah Muralithraian


1.Martin Crowe
2.Sanath Jayasuria
3.Viv Richards
4.Mohammed Ashraful
5.Grant Flower
6.Rohit Sharma
7.M.S.Dhoni (c) (wk)
8.Graeme Swann
9.Shane Warne
10.Shane Bond
11.Glenn McGrath

Re: Who would win?

PostPosted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 9:10 pm
by Durhamfootman

I have absolutely no idea

you must really be enjoying Harrogate

Re: Who would win?

PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2018 11:03 am
by andy
haha just something random, was gonna do a few if popular lol, it appears not

Re: Who would win?

PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2018 11:58 am
by sussexpob
Quite a challenging question really, each team has pretty equal merits and weaknesses.

Team B, Id say the openers win comfortably. Crowe was no world class player of spin, but neither was he a bunny. I think Elgar has done badly in Asia, and Hafeez has done pretty much nothing outside of the UAE. Jayasuriya seems to be the trump card in this deck, with a solid history of playing on turning tracks. 2-0 team B

Team A clearly shades the middle order. Sharma and Flower both have Bradman style records in India, so probably cancel each other out. Lara never really played in India, but one of his greatest tours was against Murali in Sri Lanka v raging spin, and he always loved to smash Shane Warne around a bit. I think he clearly edges Viv Richards, who has a decent but not amazing Asian record.

That leaves Shai Hope v Flower, which on paper might seem a fair and even battle with both never setting the world alight, but Shai is a younger prospect and his record seems unfinished and destined to improve a lot, Flower was simply not a good enough test bat at his peak. Shakib v Ashraful is no contest, the latter was tailender quality really. 3-2 (ignoring the halves) Team A

Seven Slot Id say is MS Dhonis. Kapil has the ball skills, but I have ignored Shakibs, which Id say on a turner would factor more heavily towards the spinner. So on batting, Dhoni's record is good in India, Kapil's wouldnt stand up to top 6 level.

For bowlers, it might sound crazy, but Id guess that the two GOAT spinners would actually weigh down the team, should they bowl to form in India. I think Swann and Panesar would have far better records. Warne and Murali both averaged in the 45-50 a wicket region. I think Swann and Monty were more 30-40 (respectively) .So Warne/Murali cancel out, Swann beats Monty. Pollock had a good record in Asia, McGrath had an excellent one. Brett Lee had a disasterous one, while Bond's injuries really limited him to being an unknown capacity, due to probably not touring there. Im inclined to suggest on those comparisons a half, and 3 points to B

So B would win 6-3....

Re: Who would win?

PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2018 12:07 pm
by andy
Cheers SP, glad someone thought about it lol :)

Re: Who would win?

PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2018 3:32 pm
by DiligentDefence
My consideration was for team A. It has the greater variety of bowling with 3 genuine spinners and the middle order of Flower and Ashraful is just awful.

Re: Who would win?

PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2018 4:21 pm
by andy
Let's try another one:

On a green seamer in english conditions in May, who would win?

Team A:

1.Sunil Gavaskar
2.Graeme Smith (c)
3.Rahul Dravid
4.Joe Root
5.Steve Waugh
6.Mark Waugh
7.BJ Watling (wk)
8.Zaheer Khan
9.Heath Streak
10.Jimmy Anderson
11.Chris Martin

Team B:

1.Imam Ul-Haq
2.Tamim Iqbal
3.Azhar Ali
4.Kevin Piertsen
5.Jacques Kallis
6.Brendon McCullum (wk) (c)
7.Shakib Al-Hasan
8.Wasim Akram
9.Dale Steyn
10.Chaminda Vaas
11.Waqar Younis

Re: Who would win?

PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2018 12:16 am
by Alviro Patterson
Team "A" BHO job, Chris Martin and Jimmy Anderson would have the top 6 gone by lunch

Re: Who would win?

PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2018 1:16 am
by bigfluffylemon
Team A without a doubt. That top 4 are probably 4 of the best batsmen to play in English conditions since the war. If anyone could keep out a good attack on a seaming wicket, they could. Throw in Jimmy, who IMO is one of the best bowlers of all time in English conditions, against the team B top four, and it's no contest.

Team B does have a stronger bowling attack overall, but on an English seamer, wickets are going to fall. And Streak, Martin and Khan were no mugs in seaming conditions. So the top order batting quality would be the key, for me.

I'd love to watch that game though.

Re: Who would win?

PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2018 1:22 am
by bigfluffylemon
For the first one, I was going to say A, on the basis of Murali v Warne, until sussex pointed out Murali's record in India. Given his incredible record in spinning conditions elsewhere, I was staggered by that. But I guess he was bowling against the likes of Tendulkar, Dravid, Laxman, Ganguly etc.

Team A may just shade it on the basis of Lara, who Warne reckoned was the best player of spin that there was (and who am I to argue with that?). If he and Flower got going against the spinners, they'd be unstoppable. But if you do a player by player comparison as sussex did, team B comes out on top. Test cricket isn't always about who has the better player in every position - a single genius can lift a weaker team to victory against the odds at times. So it's a toughy.

Re: Who would win?

PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2018 8:44 am
by andy
Il come up with another one in a bit ;)

Re: Who would win?

PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2018 9:27 am
by sussexpob
bigfluffylemon wrote:For the first one, I was going to say A, on the basis of Murali v Warne, until sussex pointed out Murali's record in India. Given his incredible record in spinning conditions elsewhere, I was staggered by that. But I guess he was bowling against the likes of Tendulkar, Dravid, Laxman, Ganguly etc

I think a lot of it tends to be down to the Indian pitches at the time, as the Indians tended to front up pitches (especially in all Asian matches) that at least were flat to begin with, and depending on how the pitch deteriorated, you'd see either huge first innings scores leading to potential results as day 4-5 got harder to bat out (in exceptions, most didnt break up), or the type of mid-2000s Pakistan v India affair when both sides had players scoring 300s in bore draws, if the pitch didnt break up. I remember watching the Sri Lanka v India game at Brabourne right at the end of Murali's career, and the track was dead as a doodoo, you could have hand picked the finest 5 spinners in history, and an average India batting line up would still would have wracked up near the 700-800 they got.

It helped that India's premier spinner, Kumble, thrived more on bounce and pace variation, then ragging spin. I think Kumble did very well in matches vs Asian teams, because they didnt have to open up the game to the oppositions spinners, they could produce pitches that gave Kumble advantages without the others. I guess the 1998-99 series was an exception, but if memory serves, protesters dug those pitches up to stop Pakistan/India touring each other, so the pitches fell apart quickly, and both sets of spinners raged (Kumble got his 10 in the innings, Saqlain I think got a 5/for in every single innings of the series).

In contrast, Sri Lankan pitches of this time always broke up. The biggest example would be somewhere like the Sinhalese Sports Club pitches in Colombo, where the first innings may have been played in some cases on slow tracks, but eventually the cracks always opened up, the pitch would break up and dust, and results would often come. I think Sri Lanka thrased India in the early 2000s there, scored 600 in the first innings, then by day 3 the ball started turning, and Murali bowled India out twice in a day. Lost by an innings and a few.

Sri Lankan pitches tended to offer the spinner some unique advantages too. Murali had an excellent record at Galle, somewhere which is a prime example of an Asian pitch that I think offered low scores/wickets for all, even seamers have traditionally done well there until the Tsunami changed the pitch. Its said that sea breeze coming over the low stands had a habit of making those flighty spinners really hard to pick on length, so tracks could be slow but still batsman would struggle. Kandy is in the mountains, and before Pallekele Stadium opened, the only Trinity Ground there would produce similar problems with flight, as at 1000m in altitude the ball would be said to hover that little bit more in the air.

These types of factors werent available in India, so its much harder place for a spinner to bowl.

Re: Who would win?

PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2018 9:30 am
by sussexpob
If you want to suprise yourself, check Murali's record in OZ.... its horrendous, but for more obvious reasons considering the abuse he has taken from umpires and fans there.

Re: Who would win?

PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2018 10:57 pm
by bigfluffylemon
I was aware of Murali's record in Oz. As in India, I think it was a combination of some of the best batsmen of the generation being in the Australian team, plus the pitches didn't offer him much. Australian wickets often offer pace and bounce but not much turn, as with the Indian wickets you mentioned above. Australia could prepare wickets to neutralise the spinners and rely on their massively superior pace attack to win games.

I remember the 2007 SL in Australia series. Murali arrived on something like 700 wickets, poised to go past Shane Warne's record, and the Australians basically decided that he was going to overtake Shane in Australia 'over their dead bodies'. They basically prepared pitches that offered no turn at all, and took absolutely no risks against Murali, bascially blocking against him backing themselves to score off the other bowlers, and their quicks to do the damage to SL. And it worked - Brett Lee and Mitchell Johnson blew the Sri Lankans away in both games, Australia won at a canter, and Murali had to wait until the next series to go past Warne.

It does show the value of having a bowling attack that works as a unit, rather than a lone genius. A single superb bowler can and will win games, especially if conditions are in their favour, but they can be neutralised by skillful players who play defensively against them and don't care about scoring. No-one can bowl all day, and if you're getting scoring opportunities from the other end, the single bowler can't build pressure. Warne was brilliant, no doubt, but he certainly benefited from the bowlers he had at the other end, especially McGrath, who could tie up the scoring and allow Australia to keep the pressure up. As another example , Anderson in recent overseas games, especially in Asia - when conditions aren't helpful for him, teams have been content just to block and see him off, knowing that they can score easily off England's change bowlers. So he's been going for about 2 an over, but not taking that many wickets.

Re: Who would win?

PostPosted: Tue Oct 16, 2018 4:13 pm
by andy
Another one on a turning wicket

Team A:

1.Mohammed Hafeez
2.Graham Gooch
3.Hashim Amla
4.Nathan Astle
5.Shakib Al-Hasan (C)
6.Abdul Razzaq
7.Jeffrey Dujon (wk)
8.Rangana Herath
9.Saqlain Mushtaq
10.Michael Holding
11.Tajul Islam


1.Stuart Matskiynieri
2.Andrew Strauss
3.Stephen Fleming (C)
4.Andy Flower (wk)
5.Marvan Attapattu
6.Andrew Flintoff
7.Daniel Vettori
8.Mehedi Hasan
9.Wasim Akram
10.Joel Garner
11.Makahaya Ntini