World Composite XI (off topic)

[Graham_5000]

Lol. Just read this old thread - it is amazing how things change in the case of some players!

What are your thoughts now regarding a world composite XI?

[CharlesDarwini]

ODI:
T Dilshan
H Amla
K Sangakkara
V Kohli
R Jadeja
AB De Villers
M Dhoni
S Ajmal
S Narine
J Anderson
D Steyn

T20:
C Gayle
K Perera ( I know , stupid choise :P )
D Warner
S Watson
E Morgan
Y Singh
D Hussey
A Dananjaya
L Malinga
S Ajmal
S Narine (Yeah, 3 spinners . Got Watson , Malinga as pacers and that's enough )

Test:
A Cook
H Amla
K Sangakkara
M Clarke
J Kallis
AB De Villiers
M Prior
D Steyn
V Philnader
J Anderson
R Herath ( Consistant with line and length , Got variation and performed well in non-sub continent pitches )

All-Three-Formats:
A Cook
H Amla
K Sangakkara
V Kohli
R Jadeja
AB De Villiers
M Dhoni
D Steyn
S Ajmal
J Anderson
R Herath

I would be wrong to say your a Herath fan then :P (jokes.. the guy is a good spinner) :P

[AnjuRatty]

ODI:
T Dilshan
H Amla
K Sangakkara
V Kohli
R Jadeja
AB De Villers
M Dhoni
S Ajmal
S Narine
J Anderson
D Steyn

T20:
C Gayle
K Perera ( I know , stupid choise :P )
D Warner
S Watson
E Morgan
Y Singh
D Hussey
A Dananjaya
L Malinga
S Ajmal
S Narine (Yeah, 3 spinners . Got Watson , Malinga as pacers and that's enough )

Test:
A Cook
H Amla
K Sangakkara
M Clarke
J Kallis
AB De Villiers
M Prior
D Steyn
V Philnader
J Anderson
R Herath ( Consistant with line and length , Got variation and performed well in non-sub continent pitches )

All-Three-Formats:
A Cook
H Amla
K Sangakkara
V Kohli
R Jadeja
AB De Villiers
M Dhoni
D Steyn
S Ajmal
J Anderson
R Herath

[CharlesDarwini]

Can't agree. Again you're saying Ajmal is better than Swann in ODIs which I agree, but not the argument I'm having. English conditions are much less favourable for spin compared to sub-continent pitches.
I'm not sidelining anything mate. I don't only look at stats as I have said.

I've heard your case a lot of times, still don't agree and never will. Swann is better.
We've both made our cases, let's stop and agree to disagree as I said a while ago...

lol i'm getting tired of this convo. as well.. gone too far. I say ajmals the better .. we'll just have to agree to disagree ;D

(but really ajmals way beterrrrrrrr!!!!!!!!) :P lol

[Alrounder80]

If you want to consider anderson as great due to his whole career.. then you can look at a very average bowling average of 30.. that my Friend can not be considered to be stats of someone who is the best of his era nor can it even possibly be compared to that of steyns.. with you saying to look at the full career you sideline players who are late flourishes like ajmal who only really began too bowl well in the last two years. And i completely agree with you about test cricket.. and ajmal still out performs swann in test cricket, but you can't sideline odi cricket, if its not so special, then why does it decide the best team of its era through the world cup? so basically even if we look at their full careers ajmal out marks swann in averages and economy.. and in the sub-continent ajmal may have played more oftenly.. but when ever both have featured in the same tournament/ series ajmal has outplayed swann.. for example in the icc world cup, pak v england series and the champions trophy. too add further your describing English conditions to be shockingly bad for spinners, clearly this isn't the case, i mean if your a quality spinner you can bowl in english conditions as was the case with warne who had lots of success in England.. and ajmal who had lots of success in the 2010 test series where he took a 5 wicket haul, and in the icc 2009 world cup where he finished as one of the top wicket takers! I rest my Case :P

Can't agree. Again you're saying Ajmal is better than Swann in ODIs which I agree, but not the argument I'm having. English conditions are much less favourable for spin compared to sub-continent pitches.
I'm not sidelining anything mate. I don't only look at stats as I have said.

I've heard your case a lot of times, still don't agree and never will. Swann is better.
We've both made our cases, let's stop and agree to disagree as I said a while ago...

[CharlesDarwini]

I don't know about you, but I judge a players quality on how he performs in test cricket. ODIs and T20s are just an added bonus. Players like Dale Steyn and James Anderson are not good in ODIs but are quality in tests. Test cricket is, and always will be, the pinnacle.
Ajmal has played 26 tests. That's not long enough to be considered a 'great'. I prefer to look in careers rather than recent performances. You can't choose a number of years in recent times that puts an advantage towards Ajmal. It's better to look at the whole career. In the last two years of Ajmal's career, quite a few of his games have been in the subcontinent. For Swann, not near as many. I don't rate James Anderson on his performances two years ago. I rate him on his performances over his whole career. I take into account where and against who he's performed and the context of the match. You don't seem to be doing that.
Ajmal is way more inconsistent than Swann hence Swann not averaging more than 40 against any opposition unlike Ajmal.

If you want to consider anderson as great due to his whole career.. then you can look at a very average bowling average of 30.. that my Friend can not be considered to be stats of someone who is the best of his era nor can it even possibly be compared to that of steyns.. with you saying to look at the full career you sideline players who are late flourishes like ajmal who only really began too bowl well in the last two years. And i completely agree with you about test cricket.. and ajmal still out performs swann in test cricket, but you can't sideline odi cricket, if its not so special, then why does it decide the best team of its era through the world cup? so basically even if we look at their full careers ajmal out marks swann in averages and economy.. and in the sub-continent ajmal may have played more oftenly.. but when ever both have featured in the same tournament/ series ajmal has outplayed swann.. for example in the icc world cup, pak v england series and the champions trophy. too add further your describing English conditions to be shockingly bad for spinners, clearly this isn't the case, i mean if your a quality spinner you can bowl in english conditions as was the case with warne who had lots of success in England.. and ajmal who had lots of success in the 2010 test series where he took a 5 wicket haul, and in the icc 2009 world cup where he finished as one of the top wicket takers! I rest my Case :P

[Alrounder80]

so you admit ajmals better in odis... and lets not look in careers.. yet in the last two years..as for example you can't rate james anderson on his performances from two years ago, if you did he wouldn't be seen as one of the best fast bowlers in the world at the moment. Just to clarify a good player shouldn't loose form too oftenly as obviously he/she would have the skills to avoid it, therefore seeing as your saying swann was in bad form, that is not the case, yet the case is he's a touch inconsistent. his performances against india and south africa series of recent show the following as in both he didn't perform to his potential skills. and a good bowler needs to be good across all formats (Test cricket being the most important obviously), i mean you wouldn't see the likes murali, warne, saqlain,etc. being smashed around in odi or t20 cricket, and they were the greats of their era,.. so if you want to say swann is the great spinner of this era, then he shouldn't be going for so many runs in odi cricket so oftenly :P

I don't know about you, but I judge a players quality on how he performs in test cricket. ODIs and T20s are just an added bonus. Players like Dale Steyn and James Anderson are not good in ODIs but are quality in tests. Test cricket is, and always will be, the pinnacle.
Ajmal has played 26 tests. That's not long enough to be considered a 'great'. I prefer to look in careers rather than recent performances. You can't choose a number of years in recent times that puts an advantage towards Ajmal. It's better to look at the whole career. In the last two years of Ajmal's career, quite a few of his games have been in the subcontinent. For Swann, not near as many. I don't rate James Anderson on his performances two years ago. I rate him on his performances over his whole career. I take into account where and against who he's performed and the context of the match. You don't seem to be doing that.
Ajmal is way more inconsistent than Swann hence Swann not averaging more than 40 against any opposition unlike Ajmal.

[CharlesDarwini]

Pretty strong case you've made there! But I didn't mean to imply Swann was a better bowler in ODIs. Ajmal is clearly the better bowler there because of his many different variations. The only case you made of Ajmal being better than Swann in tests was with the economy rate being lower for Ajmal. The point about Ajmal doing better against South Africans than Swann isn't really valid. I could argue that Swann was not in form in that certain series. You also didn't take into account the pitch conditions, SA batsmen's form, etc. It's not a fair comparison to make IMO. In saying that, Ajmal's average in the 4 matches he's played against SA in still 40 whereas Swann's is 38 in the 6 matches he's played against them. If you look at Swann's performances against all teams over his whole career, his average never exceeds 40 against ANY opposition, unlike Ajmal. Plus Swann is often not even used properly in matches because of seamers taking all the wickets. I've seen him used very infrequently on occasions when the pitch is moving around a bit which obviously means he can't get into a proper rhythm. Ajmal always bowls a lot and can easily do so.

It's easy to argue using stats, but it's best to just see the respective bowlers for yourselves over a period of time (which I have done for both!) and decide who you feel is the best. There will always be subjectivity on who's is better so it's fair enough you feel Ajmal is way better. But I truly think Swann is a better test bowler who can usually adapt to any pitch conditions unlike many other spinners. Let's agree to disagree.

so you admit ajmals better in odis... and lets not look in careers.. yet in the last two years..as for example you can't rate james anderson on his performances from two years ago, if you did he wouldn't be seen as one of the best fast bowlers in the world at the moment. Just to clarify a good player shouldn't loose form too oftenly as obviously he/she would have the skills to avoid it, therefore seeing as your saying swann was in bad form, that is not the case, yet the case is he's a touch inconsistent. his performances against india and south africa series of recent show the following as in both he didn't perform to his potential skills. and a good bowler needs to be good across all formats (Test cricket being the most important obviously), i mean you wouldn't see the likes murali, warne, saqlain,etc. being smashed around in odi or t20 cricket, and they were the greats of their era,.. so if you want to say swann is the great spinner of this era, then he shouldn't be going for so many runs in odi cricket so oftenly :P

[Alrounder80]

OK lets see shall we.. agianst south africa.. arguably the best batting line around right now.. swann avaraged 77! ajmal however avaraged 33! ... ajmal also in the past two years has maintained a much better economy and avarage than swann. swanns test avarage is 28.. ajmals 27 .. swanns odi avarage is 27, ajmals 23.. swann has a test economy of 2.89.. ajmal has an economy of 2.66 .... swann has an odi economy of 4.54 ajmal has an economy of 4.17.. thus ajmal beats swann in both avarages in test and odis as well as economy.. and did you see how many runs swann went for in the recent odi's england played against sri lanka and new zealand .. and monty was bowling better than swann in the test series against india in india.. and ajmal in the odi series against india(arguably the best players of spin) had an avarage of 10! ... swanns now performing agianst a weakend australian side.. who after michael clarke and watson have no other experianced batsmen.. and in the recently concluded champions trophy swanns bowling avarage was 50! whilst ajmals 27! i rest my case as in the champions trophy both played in the same conditions. and ajmal had to bowl agianst the south african and india two of the strongest batting line ups around.. and still maintained an economy of 4.36! and if thats not enough for you.. both played in the asme conditions in the pakv england series.. swann avaraged 25 with an economy of 2.83 and he was up against a weak pakistan batting line up.. ajmal ontheotherhand was playing against a batting line up which everyone will agree with me is much better than pakistans yet he avaraged 14 with 24 wickets... and if thats not enough for you both also played in the same conditions in the icc world cup.. ajmal avaraged 18 in the world cup swann averaged 25.. i rest my case mate..

Pretty strong case you've made there! But I didn't mean to imply Swann was a better bowler in ODIs. Ajmal is clearly the better bowler there because of his many different variations. The only case you made of Ajmal being better than Swann in tests was with the economy rate being lower for Ajmal. The point about Ajmal doing better against South Africans than Swann isn't really valid. I could argue that Swann was not in form in that certain series. You also didn't take into account the pitch conditions, SA batsmen's form, etc. It's not a fair comparison to make IMO. In saying that, Ajmal's average in the 4 matches he's played against SA in still 40 whereas Swann's is 38 in the 6 matches he's played against them. If you look at Swann's performances against all teams over his whole career, his average never exceeds 40 against ANY opposition, unlike Ajmal. Plus Swann is often not even used properly in matches because of seamers taking all the wickets. I've seen him used very infrequently on occasions when the pitch is moving around a bit which obviously means he can't get into a proper rhythm. Ajmal always bowls a lot and can easily do so.

It's easy to argue using stats, but it's best to just see the respective bowlers for yourselves over a period of time (which I have done for both!) and decide who you feel is the best. There will always be subjectivity on who's is better so it's fair enough you feel Ajmal is way better. But I truly think Swann is a better test bowler who can usually adapt to any pitch conditions unlike many other spinners. Let's agree to disagree.

[CharlesDarwini]

The stats don't really lie by the time you have played for a few seasons and all over the world as Flintoff had. Kallis has a slightly better bowling average and similar strike rate, and likewise he occasionally gives a match winning bowling performance. However he has very much played 2nd fiddle to other bowlers in the attack like Donald, Pollock, Ntini, Steyn, Morkel and Philander.

Kallis has five 5 wicket hauls to Flintoff's three 5 wicket hauls, so seeing that he has played about twice as many matches, they are actually very similar when it comes to bowling record. I don't even need to compare batting stats...

yeah true i think stats do speak mountains.. unless external factors like injury etc. plague ones career for example making him not achieving the max amount of wickets he could possibly achieve
and yeah i wouldn't rate flintoff to be anywhere near kallis (nevertheless he was an amazingly good allrounder) .. he wouldn't be in the shaun pollock,imran khan, tony greig class what would you say

[Graham_5000]

Completely agree with you graham..

The stats don't really lie by the time you have played for a few seasons and all over the world as Flintoff had. Kallis has a slightly better bowling average and similar strike rate, and likewise he occasionally gives a match winning bowling performance. However he has very much played 2nd fiddle to other bowlers in the attack like Donald, Pollock, Ntini, Steyn, Morkel and Philander.

Kallis has five 5 wicket hauls to Flintoff's three 5 wicket hauls, so seeing that he has played about twice as many matches, they are actually very similar when it comes to bowling record. I don't even need to compare batting stats...

[CharlesDarwini]

@Harold. Flintoff was only a match winner in a handful of games. He was inconsistent or poor the rest of the time as the stats correctly imply. It is easy to remember the memorable performances. Flintoff had as many memorable performances with the ball as Steyn has had poor matches with the ball.

Great performers need to be consistent match winners. Consistent top performances result in great stats.. Strike rates, averages etc.

Completely agree with you graham..

[Graham_5000]

@Harold. Flintoff was only a match winner in a handful of games. He was inconsistent or poor the rest of the time as the stats correctly imply. It is easy to remember the memorable performances. Flintoff had as many memorable performances with the ball as Steyn has had poor matches with the ball.

Great performers need to be consistent match winners. Consistent top performances result in great stats.. Strike rates, averages etc.

[Harold Smith]

You can use stats all you want, but they don't always present the Truth. Look at Flintoff, batting average of 30 and bowling average of 30, as an 'all rounder' that's very bog standard but he's a match winner, without a doubt.

[CharlesDarwini]

What would you guys ODI and T20 World Xi be?

for me:
ODI:

Shakhar Dhawan
Shane Watson
Hashim Amla
Kumar Sangakarra
Jaques Kallis
Ab De Villiers (wk)
Ms Dhoni (c)
Shakib Al Hasan
Dale Steyn
Mohammed Irfan
Saeed Ajmal

12th man: Kevin Peterson

T20 Squad:
Kevin Peterson
Chris Gayle
Shane Watson
Ab De Villiers (wk)
Umar Akmal
Ms Dhoni
Yuvraj Singh
Shahid Afridi
Lasith malinga/Pollard
Dale Steyn
Saeed Ajmal

12th man: Umar Gul