SA Footy

Someone opened up this can-o-worms on the Premiership debate (Tassie Map?) Who do you rate as the greatest cricket team of all time? The Invicibles? Clive Lloyd's West Indies, or Woe-woe's Wonders (the team that won 16 tests in a row, with that famous Tassie victory being early on in the piece). Sledge away, threaten each other's lives as they dare to disagree with your opinion...

The West Indies bowling attack was a very nasty piece of work, but Don Bradman would have stood up to them. The man averaged 60+ during the bodyline series, if he can do that against field placements which are now considered illegal ( the Don countered the tactic by picking the length early, stepping back and carving them through off whenever the ball was directed at the chest/head region) then I think he would have been able to lead the Aussies to a narrow victory against Garner, Marshall, Holding and co.

Bradman may have been able to stand up to the Windies, but his team mates would have fallen away as they did in 1932-33. If you bring Bradman into the Australian sides of the period that's still only two batsmen in the top six who could have stood up to the unrelenting pace of Roberts, Daniel, Croft, King, Holding, Garner, Marshall, Walsh, Patterson, Bishop and Ambrose. The West Indies team of the period was the best by a long way in my view.

Who did the invincibles beat again? An England team that was ravaged by war with very few genuine test players playing for them, the bowling especially was threadbare, read the accounts of Australia's 400 in a day at Headingly and check some of the bowlers used, the comment 'an attack barely up to test standard' appears in more than once source. A mere five years later they lost the Ashes but after five years the Windies side was just getting started against players the calibre of G Chappell, Lillee, Marsh, Border, Botham, Gooch, Imran, Miandad, Sarfraz, Kapil Dev, Gavaskar, M Crowe and Hadlee - this is an array of talent that Tugger's combination did not have to encounter when it began it's sixteen test rampage.

regards,

REB

therisingblues wrote:The West Indies bowling attack was a very nasty piece of work, but Don Bradman would have stood up to them. The man averaged 60+ during the bodyline series, if he can do that against field placements which are now considered illegal ( the Don countered the tactic by picking the length early, stepping back and carving them through off whenever the ball was directed at the chest/head region) then I think he would have been able to lead the Aussies to a narrow victory against Garner, Marshall, Holding and co.

Don Bradman averaged 56 in the Bodyline series but not all bowlers used 'leg theory' in the series (Tate, Allen). There was no respite or any spinners for the majority of the West Indian reign but how Bradman would have fared against the Windies' chin music is one of crickets greatest hypotheticals.

regards,

REB

Gee, three pretty good teams, Bradman is worth two blokes alone with his performances.

I've gone for 'The Dominators" Waughs team because they were more a more balanced combination, and also they beat better teams in my opinions that the other two did. The played against Lara, Walsh, Tendulker, Kumble, Srinath, Dravid, VVS Laxman, Vittori, Inzaman, Akhtar,

You look at them now and five of those blokes are in the top 10 of Australian run scorers, Waugh, Ponting, Waugh Langer and HAyden. Warnie and McGrath, 1100 test wickets between them, Gichrist, and chuck in the bit part players, Slater, Gillespie Lee with cameos from Fleming and Blewett, fair side.

Windies are arguably better individually and were well led but didn't have the variety of balance that the dominators did despite having nine great players. Greenidge, Haynes, Richards, Lloyd, Dujon, Holding, MArshall, Garner and Walsh. There were times Australia ran through them in 84-85, but we just got pummelled by the four quicks!!

Don't want to denegrate the Invincibles but they lacked a quality bat, spinner and 3rd bowler. They relied on "bit part" players such as Bill Johnson, Sam Loxten, Colin McCool & Ernie Toshak to fill gaps with their other skills. Perhaps given the quality of the POMS they were able to get away with it. However with players such as Morris, Barnes, Bradman, Hassett, Harvey, Tallon, Miller and Lindwall all greats of the game. They had eight quality players like the Dominators but lacked the depth in 9, 10 & jack.

Hey my opinion is Waugh team is the best, but not by much, any of the three side mentioned could give the other two teams a licking on any given five days!! As I said it is my opinion but then opinions are like bad smells, every ar5eholes got one!!

No surprise regarding statistical dominance Graham, they play more tests these days against powerful combinations like the present West Indies and New Zealand combination as well as the minnows Zimbabwe and Bangladesh.

regards,

REB

Rik E Boy wrote:No surprise regarding statistical dominance Graham, they play more tests these days against powerful combinations like the present West Indies and New Zealand combination as well as the minnows Zimbabwe and Bangladesh.

regards,

REB

Hence Muralitharan claiming so many "Test" scalps.

Hasn't taken too many down here though has he Punkybrooster?

regards,

REB

Rik E Boy wrote:No surprise regarding statistical dominance Graham, they play more tests these days against powerful combinations like the present West Indies and New Zealand combination as well as the minnows Zimbabwe and Bangladesh.

regards,

REB

Yeah but didn't play them in the streak, plus Gilchrist, Waugh, Hayden and Ponting all averaged over 50, mind you so did Bradman, Barnes, Hassett and Morris. FYI BArnes only scored 1200 runs, played three series against England the last two against a war raveged team. Mind his test averge of 60 beats mine!!

For mine, Woe-woes side has got to be the best- Cricketers are far more advanced & professional, also full time. That alone has got to put W-w's side in front. Most of these players have been through the Academy, honing their skills, & we have 2 bowlers in the team that would make the Australian, or even all time First XI. I'd probably rate the Windies 2nd- would love to see these 2 sides face off.

I reckon Clive's team would have crushed Waugh's XI.

regards,

REB

It is impossible to compare teams from one era against another.

Imagine the Windies of the 70's if they trained,had specialised coaches,played 15 test and more one-dayers in a year.

Imagine Bradman playing on decks that are rolled and rolled,prepared and covered.

If I was forced to choose,Clive Lloyd's outfit with a young Viv and Gordon would be tough to top in any era in any conditions.

Rik E Boy wrote:Who did the invincibles beat again? An England team that was ravaged by war with very few genuine test players playing for them, the bowling especially was threadbare, read the accounts of Australia's 400 in a day at Headingly and check some of the bowlers used, the comment 'an attack barely up to test standard' appears in more than once source. A mere five years later they lost the Ashes but after five years the Windies side was just getting started against players the calibre of G Chappell, Lillee, Marsh, Border, Botham, Gooch, Imran, Miandad, Sarfraz, Kapil Dev, Gavaskar, M Crowe and Hadlee - this is an array of talent that Tugger's combination did not have to encounter when it began it's sixteen test rampage.

regards,

REB

Fair point REB, I had forgotten about the standard of opposition the Invincibles faced. I guess Bradman on his own couldn't have beaten the Windies of the said era.
I'd like to know exactly which Windies combination we are discussing. I'd nominate the last team that Clive Lloyd brought over. I can't remember exactly who was in it, probably Greenidge, Haynes, Lloyd, Richards, Gnomes, Dujon, Marshall, Holding, Roberts and Garner. Deciding factor would be Lloyd and Richards being in the same team, along with all the other blokes that made up the 11. I rate this team higher than the recent Aussie team. But I know too little about the Invincibles to draw a comparison, save that Bradman was undoubtedly the greatest of them all.

Rik E Boy wrote:I reckon Clive's team would have crushed Waugh's XI.

regards,

REB

If two relatively mediocre spinners at Sydney in 84-85 could put the Windies to the sword what is Warnie going to do? Yes I know that you judge a side on all cricket conditions not just a made for spinner bunsen that blunts the effectiveness of the quicks. However, what you need to consider is that the first session of days one and two were delayed for rain so Australia batted on a juiced up pitch that was taylored for the quicks but checkout the first innings and close of play scores on days one & two of the boys in the BG. The sameness of the Windies attack was their weakness where once you got in against them if you applied yourself you invariably made runs. The trick was doing it for both innings of the match.

Australia with a far worse batting line up in 84-85 demonstrated in Adelaide and Melbourne (in one innings granted) as well as Sydney that if you got in you could make runs. Hands up who thinks a top six of Dyson (Hilditch), Wessels, Border, Wood, Hughes (Ritchie) and Boon (in his first series) is as good as Slater, Hayden (Blewett) , Langer, M Waugh, S Waugh & Ponting (Martyn)?

No bones about it the 84-85 side of Lloyds was **** excellent but our boys of 1999 - 2001 would hold their own against them I believe. For all intents and purposes a track made for quicks (Brisbane) the Windies would probably win, on a flatty (Adelaide, Perth (based on how it played this year) & Melbourne) a draw is highly likely, in Sydney get on the Aussies!!

However we are forgetting one team from history though, when Lloyds team won is Brisbane and Kim Hughes cracked the shits, they broke Armstrong's 1920-24 team's record of 8 consecutive test match wins. That team had greats such as McCartney, Armstrong, Gregory, McDonald, Bardsley and Collins. Admittedly they were playing a team, like the invincibles, that had been ravaged by war.

FYI the Sydney test match 84/85

Test # 1006 (1001/62)
The Frank Worrell Trophy, 1984/85, 5th Test
Australia v West Indies
Sydney Cricket Ground
30,31 December 1984, 1,2 January 1985 (5-day match)

Result: Australia won by an innings and 55 runs
West Indies wins the 5-Test series 3-1

Toss: Australia
Umpires: RC Isherwood and MW Johnson
Man of the Match: RG Holland
Man of the Series: MD Marshall

Close of Play:

Day 1: Australia 235/2 (Wessels 120*, Border 19*)
Day 2: Australia 414/6 (Boon 29*, Bennett 8*)
Day 3: Australia 471/9d, West Indies 163 and 31/1 (Greenidge 12*, Richardson 11*)

AMJ Hilditch c Dujon b Holding 2 24 17 0 0
GM Wood c Haynes b Gomes 45 189 114 3 0
KC Wessels b Holding 173 481 352 14 0
GM Ritchie run out 37 102 68 3 0
*AR Border c Greenidge b Walsh 69 210 149 4 0
DC Boon b Garner 49 165 123 2 0
+SJ Rixon c Garner b Holding 20 75 64 0 0
MJ Bennett c Greenidge b Garner 23 69 49 2 0
GF Lawson not out 5 20 13 0 0
CJ McDermott c Greenidge b Walsh 4 9 8 0 0
Extras (b 7, lb 20, nb 17) 44
Total (9 wickets declared, 156.2 overs) 471

DNB: RG Holland.

FoW: 1-12 (Hilditch), 2-126 (Wood), 3-338 (Border),
4-342 (Wessels), 5-350 (Ritchie), 6-392 (Rixon),
7-450 (Bennett), 8-463 (Boon), 9-471 (McDermott).

Bowling O M R W
Marshall 37 2 111 0
Garner 31 5 101 2
Holding 31 7 74 3
Walsh 38.2 1 118 2
Gomes 12 2 29 1
Richards 7 2 11 0

West Indies 1st innings R M B 4 6
CG Greenidge c Rixon b McDermott 18 27 25 2 0
DL Haynes c Wessels b Holland 34 111 82 3 0
RB Richardson b McDermott 2 15 8 0 0
HA Gomes c Bennett b Holland 28 114 105 1 0
IVA Richards c Wessels b Holland 15 46 39 2 0
*CH Lloyd c Wood b Holland 33 60 55 3 1
+PJL Dujon c Hilditch b Bennett 22 62 46 0 1
MD Marshall st Rixon b Holland 0 5 3 0 0
MA Holding c McDermott b Bennett 0 15 10 0 0
J Garner c Rixon b Holland 0 5 9 0 0
CA Walsh not out 1 4 2 0 0
Extras (lb 3, nb 7) 10
Total (all out, 62.5 overs) 163

FoW: 1-26 (Greenidge), 2-34 (Richardson), 3-72 (Haynes),
4-103 (Gomes), 5-106 (Richards), 6-160 (Lloyd),
7-160 (Marshall), 8-160 (Dujon), 9-161 (Garner),
10-163 (Holding).

Bowling O M R W
Lawson 9 1 27 0
McDermott 9 0 34 2
Bennett 22.5 7 45 2
Holland 22 7 54 6

West Indies 2nd innings (following on) R M B 4 6
CG Greenidge b Holland 12 46 43 0 0
DL Haynes lbw b McDermott 3 14 7 0 0
RB Richardson c Wood b Bennett 26 105 86 0 0
HA Gomes c Wood b Lawson 8 18 17 1 0
IVA Richards b Bennett 58 120 88 4 1
*CH Lloyd c Border b McDermott 72 139 133 9 1
+PJL Dujon c & b Holland 8 30 25 0 0
MD Marshall not out 32 86 85 5 0
MA Holding c Wessels b Holland 0 7 4 0 0
J Garner c Rixon b Bennett 8 26 26 0 0
CA Walsh c Bennett b Holland 4 7 10 0 0
Extras (b 2, lb 12, nb 22
Total (all out, 84 overs) 253

FoW: 1-7 (Haynes), 2-31 (Greenidge), 3-46 (Gomes),
4-93 (Richardson), 5-153 (Richards), 6-180 (Dujon),
7-231 (Lloyd), 8-231 (Holding), 9-244 (Garner),
10-253 (Walsh).

Bowling O M R W
Lawson 6 1 14 1
McDermott 12 0 56 2
Bennett 33 9 79 3
Holland 33 8 90 4

Clive's by streets.
Mean f*ckers the lot of them.

West Indies.

Didnt lose a test series for many many years.

Australia have had losses in India 2001 England 2005 Drew with a an ordinary West Indies side in the west indies in 1999. I dont include 2001/2002 NZ draw in aus cos the rain ruined a 2-0 lead for us. Aus drew with India in 2003/2004. Australias record does not stack up against the West Indies too many ordinary performances amongst it. The Windies were faultless in terms of not losing a series. As for the invincibles I can't comment.