Message Board Archives

Ole timers what y'all think about Ambrose XI?

1. Greenidge
2. Haynes
3. Richards
4. Lara
5. Weekes
6. Sobers
7. Dujon
8. Marshall
9. Holding
10. Ambrose
11. Gibbs

Link

In reply to anthonyp

George Headley seems to be a forgotten player.

George Headley has to be there.

Christopher Henry Gayle ahead of Desmond Haynes

In reply to openning

THIS

In reply to Chrissy

HIS

Was this Ambi’s opinion? Or the opinion he settled on after consulting the CC dot com crew???

yea cc.com had to beg him to include himself

Ambrose will always be one of my favourite players. Nothing wrong with including yourself if you were amongst the best .

In reply to imusic

Really music, Gayle was a top player but lacked the consistency of Haynes. Matter of fact, Greenidge and Haynes were the best openers in world cricket at one point. Seems like another anti-Bajan comment. How about I replace Lara with Chase just for the fun of it.

In reply to imusic
Very similar but Onry has bigger tons
Freddo is also a contender

In reply to Windiesfan78

Stop being over-sensitive. VS. The toughest opponent of his era (Oz)Gayle's stats is most likely better than both Haynes and Greenidge and in Oz too. Had Rae played more tests he'd be ahead of all. Stolly with more matches would compete too. Freddo and Gayle should always be in the mix. No Aussie would name a team without Bradman, we should not without Headley

Any all time WI side without the greatest WI opener, Conrad Hunte is a farce!

In reply to googley

Forgot him, my all-time WI XI usually has Hunte and Kanhai as openers. A #3 with a 47avg and one of the best techniques pips GCG for me.
i must check Cricinfo again but I think Hunte was only out bowled once in his test career.

In reply to Brerzerk

Nothing to do with being over-sensitive, just stating an observation I have made on several occasions. Gayle proved his worth in the test format and I have the utmost respect for him as a player. However, Haynes was a lot more reliable as evidenced by his not outs, 25 over 116 tests in comparison to Gayle's 11 not outs in 103. We also have to remember that Gayle and Haynes are from two different generations. I would take reliability anyday in a test over having a higher test score.

In reply to Windiesfan78

There is precious little to choose between Haynes and Gayle as Windies Test openers. I rate Conrad Hunte as our best opener and Greenidge to accompany him:

1. Hunte
2. Greenidge
3. Headley
4. Lara
5. Richards
6. Sobers
7. Dujon
8. Marshall
9. Holding
10. Ambrose
11. Gibbs

In reply to Brerzerk

Gayle didn't face the caliber of opponents Dessie and Greenidge faced. Its true he did play against mcgrath and warne. but he only played one test and had to leave because of a heart ailment. He did very well against them in 2009, but the bowlers were not in the league of those who came before, although still very good(showing how great the cricket culture and administration is in that country). Remember dessie and greenidge had to face lillee, thommo, lenny pascoe, rodney hogg, vraig mcdermott, merv hughes etc

In reply to anthonyp
Many of these players were before my time but my father always spoke of George Headley.

In reply to Jumpstart

Gayle faced Lee, I remember him saying facing Hauritz was like bowling to himself . Greenidge has 1 ton in Oz and it was about his penultimate test. Good convo though. Grine's team may be the most realistic. Aussie commievJim Maxwell's favorite World XI has Lillee, Thommo, McGrath, Warne as the bowling attack; Stokes as the all-rounder. hahahahahaha

Big Bird plays in front of Ambrose. Some fans pick Roberts before Ambrose. Bird was the best of the lot after Marshall and Whispering Death

In reply to JoeGrine

Check this data; this will surprise most people on this MB.
https://www.espncricinfo.com/cricketers/everton-weekes-53241/tests-odi-t20-records

I cannot see any former Australian naming a team and not having Don Bradman as the first player on the list.
We surely don't know our cricket history.
George should be the first player listed on any West Indies team.
https://www.espncricinfo.com/cricketers/george-headley-52050
With the data available, how can anyone separate Greenidge and Haynes, the best opening pair in test cricket history?

In reply to Jumpstart

Really?

Like who?


Greenidge faced those bowlers.

Haynes technically faced Thomson once in his career…..and hid at the non strikers end while Thomson unleashed on Greenidge, Viv, and Kalli that famous afternoon at Kensington.

Haynes never faced Dennis Lillee anywhere near his prime, if at all.

You’re telling me Pascoe, Hogg, Hughes, McDermott were anywhere near on par with McGrath, Lee, Bond, Donald, Gillespie, Warne, Murali etc?

Come on man. Be real.

In reply to Castled

Not even Big Bird mother would select him above Ambrose.

In reply to JoeGrine
Great team dat

In reply to imusic

New Year tit clown!

link text

In reply to JoeGrine
You picked George Headley!

In reply to imusic

In reply to Castled
Ah guess we should be grateful yuh didn’t pick Anderson Cummins and Raymon Reifer

Any team without Michael bravo is a farce

In reply to brians_da_best

No, we need Carty for Xavier Marshall unproven POTENTIAL ..
Or maybe Keith Arturton- one shot and out but look pretty

In reply to JoeGrine

excellent team. Happy New Year

This thread is proof that the selection of a squad is a challenging task; each fan wants the player he likes.
I believe a player has to be in the Hall of Fame, and in order to make an All-time X1, should be selected by position and have the stats.
Very few experts would separate Haynes and Greenidge; the two openers were at the peak of Llyod and Richards winning so many tournaments, that should be a no-brainer.
To overlook the father of the fast-bowling crew is also disappointing
Andy Roberts comes to mind.
Llyod and Richards era should make up the bulk of the All Time team, along with Headley, Weekes, Gibbs and Sobers.
My All time X1
Greenidge
Headley
Lara
Richards
Weekes
Walcott WKP
Sobers
Worrell Capt The Statesman
Marshall
Roberts
Gibbs

In reply to Jumpstart

You may want to rethink that. Viv was used in Aus ahead of Greenidge because he could not handle Thammo and Lil. During Greenidge and Haynes dominance WI had the best attack!

In reply to openning Lloyd was both a better batsman and captain than Worrell, I have great admiration for Frank individual qualities.

Sir Frank Worrell was the MLK and Mandela for the underprivileged; that's why he makes my team.

In reply to brians_da_best

Hahahahahaha!!!!!

In reply to openning

Be honest. He makes your team because he’s Bajan. Period. Same fuh Walcott

In reply to imusic

I suggest you compare the test and ODI stats of Ambrose and Garner. And add Michael Holding to the comparsion as well. Those three are in flip a coin territory boss

Andy Roberts is to be selected before any pace bowler not named Marshall.

In reply to anthonyp

Dujon ahead of Walcott? I say no

I'm hoping that hubert gets on this thread and posts a team. I'm also interested in hubie's thoughts about Walcott as a keeper. The guy averaged 56 with the bat, took 27 catches and had 11 stumpings as a keeper. Not sure how many of his 44 tests were spent behind the stumps though.

In reply to Walco

I was going to add something to the Ambrose > Garner argument but Walco said it . Ambrose-Garner-Holding is really flip a coin indeed!

Some had the benefit of bowling amongst legitimate 4 prong attack, while others did not.

In reply to db

I wasn't born when most of those guys made their debut so I can't comment on who deserve to be in the all-time XI.

Even Lara debuted before I was born

In reply to imusic

If I did not know, I would say you are a jealous Tit.
After Lara, who can you add?

In reply to openning

While that might be true, that does not change the fact that the Frederick/Greenidge combo had a higher average than Greenidge/Haynes! Plus Freddo faced some of the same fearsome bowlers Haynes did and he feared no one!!

On the other hand, how can one ignore the greatest Opening bat for WI, Hunte?

So, first pair for me is Hunte/Greenidge

I can understand those of you who never saw Ambrose, Holding , and Garner in action unless it’s through Youtube highlights. Then basing their decisions purely on stats is SOMEWHAT understandable in comparing the 3

Not so for those of you who actually saw them in action. There is no way Joel Garner, as great a ODI bowler as he was, mainly because of his Econ rate that we used to call him “Iron Ball”, could EVER be compared to Michael Holding or Curtley Ambrose or Andy Roberts for that matter.

I would expect that from a poster like Castled……..but not from others.

There is no way on GOD’s green earth that Joel Garner was in the same category as a bowler as either Michael Holding or Curtly Ambrose.

It’s like saying Courtney Walsh was the best WI fast bowler ever because he has the most test wickets. That is a true stat but the statement is patently false!


Those who insist on making that comparison that Garner on par with Holdinf and Ambrose are either ignorant or insular. There is no in between.

In reply to googley

Haynes did not make the cut in my squad; I had to make room for the player with the highest average in the test, an all-time great.
I will never leave out George Headley or Everton Weekes from any test X1.

Garner was the 3 or 4 after them guys did the damage, does the stats capture that?

In reply to openning

Weekes was better than Kanhai?

In reply to imusic

Ten times better.
Check the data very, very impressive.
Only Bradman and Headley better.
https://www.espncricinfo.com/cricketers/everton-weekes-53241/tests-odi-t20-records

In reply to openning

If I were to go by data alone, Andy Ganteaume better than any WI batsman ever and also better than Bradman.

Come again

Guyana krew…..I asked my brother openning this question

His response is


Your thoughts on the original question & Openning’s response?

In reply to imusic

You should have added the link, I wished I had that data on his birthday thread.
Have you checked the link, or are you being a Trini?

I don't remember you saying yall stopping traffic to see Weekes...openning

In reply to openning

No need to check the link

When any player in the history of cricket can average more than 100 with the bat in test cricket, get back to me

In reply to imusic

Have you ever reading articles on Weekes, or had a discussion with an elderly person who saw Weekes.

In reply to tc1

The only people alive today who would have seen Weekes bat are openning, POINT, and maybe you.

I won’t get objective, reliable responses from those not named POINT.

But it would be good if either of you could answer Doosra’s question tho

In reply to openning

Bingo! music man also hides behind the perennial defense of Bajan insularity arguing it's the only reason the cou cou and flying fish invincibles were successful

Big Bird's average and strike rate are superior to Ambrose.

Fanattick god Vivi 15 years average facing Bird and Bajan 4 prongs is low 20 something. Bird owned Vivi Richards

In reply to Castled

This reminds of a story my dad told me and my brother when we were kids.
He said when Gibbs played against their (my dad’s team) club he couldn’t buy a wicket.
Now one day many years later at a club match in NY, Gibbs was present and the story was related to him by a friend. Gibbs response was, “Which Test match was that?”

In reply to doosra

Cricket fans in Barbados love Rohan, Carl Hooper must be the top favourite. But looking at the data and if you are an objective person, compare the data and you will see, why Sir Everton Weekes will always be on all West Indies all-time X1.
You seem to be an objective person.
I have seen Sir Everton bat and practice so many times, I knew of his five consecutive hundreds, especially the ones against India; what I only learned yesterday was his test match complete data.
9th Alltime Average 58.61
1st Fifties in seven consecutive test innings
1st Five hundred in consecutive test innings
Hundreds in each inning of a test match
1st Fastest to 1000 runs in 12 innings
3rd Fifties in nine consecutive test innings.
I posted the link already to this data.

In reply to StumpCam

Quit stealing Dukes routine. His lead up to the well worn punch line slicker than yours.

BTW where is Dukes? His cricket acumen is missed.

In reply to doosra

In reply to imusic

I grew up in Bim and never heard of that incident.in the 50s Weekes was considered the best batsman in the World, better than Neil Harvey or Peter May. I saw Weekes destroyed Bob Simpson 2 prong attack of Mckenzie, Hawke and Connolly in 65, he was 40 year old.

In reply to imusic

That question was like a full toss.
Hooper was knighted by the Barbados cricketing fans; Lara was a prince.
Sobers never stopped traffic; Rihanna must have security

In reply to imusic

It took you 21 years to be that low, it was a good thing Andy took greener pasture because his FC average mirrors the present test players.

In reply to Castled

Was just wondering if he is busy with Biden's reelection.

In reply to imusic

Let's put Ambrose aside because his career did not overlap with Garner (1977 - 1987) and Holding (1975 - 1987). If two bowlers played at the same time, in the same conditions, against the same opponents, and had essentially the same bowling averages, bowling economies and strike rates, what metrics are you using to come to the conclusion that they are not in the same category? Or is your statement quoted above just subjective opinion?

Michael Holding - Tests: Average 23.69; Economy 2.79; Strike Rate 50.92.
Michael Holding - ODIs: Average 21.37; Economy 3.33; Strike Rate 38.54.

Joel Garner - Tests: Average 20.98; Economy 2.48; Strike Rate 50.85.
Joel Garner - ODIs: Average 18.85; Economy 3.10; Strike Rate 36.51.

These guys don't know there were two incarnations of Joel Garner.

1. When he debut with Croft in 1977 and became the first change and second change bowler in the original four prong of Roberts Holding Croft and Garner.

In 1981 vs Eng in Eng , Croft and Holding were not doing well, Garner led the attack with Roberts and Marshall came in for Croft.

2. In 1983 , Garner was dropped and after Roberts was retired, he returned with a few more yards of pace and venom to open the attack in a successful opening partnership with Marshall until he retired in 1988, same year Ambrose made his debut .

If you ask Viv who he favored between Ambrose and Garner ,( ,Viv has said this many times so Imusic's stupid assertion that even Garner's mother wouldn't pick her own son over Ambrose is invalid ) he would say Garner but maybe he has a bias for his Somerset team mate over his Antiguan countryman.

Imusic arguing foolishness regarding Holding and Garner who to me are equals.

In 1977 Garner started and was first change and second change to Roberts and Holding .

In 1983, Holding was first change to Garner and Marshall.

You cannot argue Garner was a first change / second change bowler throughout his career as this was not true.

In 1981 he led the attack vs Eng in Eng and in 1983 until he retired in 1988, he led the WI attack with Marshall.

In reply to analyst-kid

Musicman is way off key on this one. It’s one thing to say that you would pick Holding over Garner, but to say that not even Garner’s mother would pick him, or that Garner is not in the same category as Holding and Ambrose, strains credulity.

In reply to imusic

you're right. only mcdermott was on the level of mcgrath, AB, gillespie and lee. And gordon greenidge wasn't totally comfortable playing extremely aggressive pace bowling, examplified by the fact he only scored 1 hundred down under in five series. hi average in australia is really poor, just under 31.

In reply to Jumpstart

Which is good for the modern Caribbean batsman. I would take half our current team ending the Oz tour with an average of just under 31! Happy New Year to all posters !!

Seriously though, Weekes and Headley must make any all time WI team and much as I hate to admit it, it is Richards who will lose out unless he opens with Hunte or Greenidge. Gibbs should also make the team for balance so one of Ambrose or Garner must make way if Holding is to play. As wktkpr I would go for Walcott over Dujon simply because of his vastly superior batting average.

In reply to PalsofMine

You done lost your mind.

Richards get dropped?

First 2 names on any WI best XI AFTER Gary Sobers, are Isaac Vivian Alexander Richards and Brian Charles Lara, followed closely by Malcolm Denzil Marshall.

Debate the remaining 7 spots to alllyuh hearts content. But nobody replaces those 4.

NOBODY!

In reply to PalsofMine

Dude....that is utter madness. both weekes and worrell struggled against Australia, not one averaged over 40 against them. Clyde walcott averaged 14 in the three tests he played down under. Is it their fault the WI didn't have a high quality paceman throughout almost the entirety of the 50s(Wes debuted at the end of 195 nd therefore would provide them with bowling comparable to Lynwall and co? No. That being said, they didn't perform very well in a country generally regarded as the hardest to play in. Which every batsman in the middle order in curtly's all time xi did, even with patriotic or incompetent umpires in the wicket

In reply to imusic
exactly so

In reply to analyst-kid

as great as garner was, ambrose was on a totally different level, if that is somehow possible. Ambrose, firstly, was significantly quicker on average that bird, not that bird could not bowl 90mph, but he generally bowled within himself. You don't really need to be a 90mph bowler when you're 6'8 and deliver the ball from 10/11ft. Garner was for one thing, thoroughly a gentleman, which I believe softened some of the menace that he could have had.

Ambrose is 1000% class off the field as well, but was the grim reaper on it. You can't cleanup teams the way ambrose regularly did between 1990 and 1995 without being not only very accurate and hostile, but also winning the psychological war against batsmen, which Curtly was a true master of doing.

In reply to Jumpstart

You chat shyte like a burst pipe Garner plays in front of Ambrose by every cricket metric.

Learn to read. Walco and AK already schooled Imusic on this.

In reply to Castled
and you're saying boycs could have had it easier against a bowler of the similar height, 2 or 3 yards quicker and much more mean?

In reply to imusic

Vaas playing for the opposition?

Overall batting numbers for the Gayle and Haynes are similar, just 0.11 separate the two ....

- Gayle got a better batting average in Australia, India, New Zealand, Pakistan, Sri Lanka.
- Haynes got a better batting average in West Indies & England.

Could Gayle bowling give him de edge?

Gayle stats

Haynes stats

I listened to Michael Jordan's HOF speech again after reading the thread.
I am posting the transcript below, so you can see Michael Jordan's speech on an entire career, not a season or any team.
He just doesn't want to be compared to any other player, because of various eras of basketball, he just wanted to be as good as Magic, Larry Bird and others, he was going to play against.

https://thelongshorttrader.com/2013/02/18/michael-jordans-hall-of-fame-enshrinement-speech-highly-applicable-to-market-participants/

In reply to openning

comparison is also an erosive process

Some would argue Viv is as much the West Indies as Sobers

anyone who does not include Viv in a WI team needs to get their head checked for all sorts of complications

In reply to doosra
In retirement, you compare and analyze player's entire careers.
You guys have different opinions on Rohan than me, but as someone whose first game was Barbados vs Guyana, with fans arguing who was the better batsman, Gary or Rohan, Hawker loses her Tray of goodies as he lays flat on the ground, after hitting one of his favourite shots, how can an 11 years old guy, not be a fan.
I usually state with data why I think someone's career was better; that's why my argument on the better player of spin bowling between Viv, Weekes and Kanhai was a no brainer, the details against spin-dominant countries, speak for themselves

In reply to Jumpstart

Kraigg Brathwaite's average in Australia is 47.22.
Try looking at the sum and not parts of it.

In reply to openning

i was referring to the Jordan anecdote...why he may not value him being compared to others...but thanks for what you shared

ps: I am not minimizing the value of comparing...just noting the various ways comparisons can be thought

Ambrose vs Garner

- Ambrose took more top & middle order (1-7) wickets than Garner. Ambrose - 72%, Garner - 66%
- Ambrose averaged less than 25 with the ball for more calendar years (throughout their careers). Ambrose - 85%, Garner - 55%

Ambi picked up 6% more top & middle order wickets and was more consistent throughout his career... hardly had a bad year with the ball.

Btw when did they introduce the bouncer rule?

Here are the Howstat numbers for both players...

Garner

Ambrose

Naming such an all time team always seem to be more subjective with relevant bias than objective.
We all are guilty of this.
Yet to embark on such a task requires many caveats, and truth behind raw statistics.
Any West Indies tam however must include some certainties that are unanimous choices.
Mine are Headley. Richards, Lara Sobers Gibbs and Marshall.
We can argue and compare apples and apples all we want but that is my CERTAIN 6.
With such abundant talent however replete with Career stats, any other 5 could work.
However if one examines other things such as RPO, Ave,

In reply to hubert

Why are you so certain about Headley?

I can understand Gibbs to a certain extent. He certainly was the best of our spinners. But he wasn’t a better BOWLER IMO than some pacemen who may not make the XI.

For example Garner.

I see people picking Walcott for wicketkeeper. How good was he in that position? Was he better than Dujon?

Isn’t Hendricks reported to be the best of them all?

In reply to hubert

When did the SR come into consideration?
I started scoring after the 1960 tour to Australia, rpw was for bowlers and batting average were the only two, parts of the stats.
T20 and ODI arrive much later.

In reply to imusic

Well we finally agree on something related to cricket.

In reply to imusic

You raise an interesting point perhaps which needs some clarification - are we picking a team or the best XI ever

Ambi picked a team (i am guessing) while others seem to be going between a team and a best XI

what do you think?

In reply to openning

Make SR then.

In reply to imusic

I think it is sometimes a challenge picking the guys who didn't play much - i recall Dr. Dukes making a case for Barry Richards in some all-time XI not so long ago ? And the issue of number of tests came up

What is remarkable about Headley also is his production at first class...he scores 33 100s and 44 50s (77 scores of 50 or greater) in 103 matches ( 142 completed innings) i.e. a 50+ every other innings and a 100+ in every 4+ innings

In reply to doosra

Corrected RPO to SR

In reply to doosra

Hard to separate the 2.

A best ever XI would be the best XI players regardless of position

A best ever team would be along the lines of a traditional line up: 2 openers, middle order, all rounder, keeper, 3 fast bowlers and a spinner.


If it’s the former, I don’t see Lance Gibbs in there. But it also depends on your bias. Are you biased to batsmen or bowlers?

If it’s the latter, how do you exclude Hendricks etc?

In reply to imusic

Walcott was a good keeper and was very good keeping to spin. Dujon's strength was to pace
and yes Hendricks was best off all as rated by the purists. But his career was not very lengthy
or much more than Walcott.
Walcott's bat makes it for me.. He scored about three tons while a keeper and when he was forced to give up the
gloves because of Lumbago he outshone the other 2 Ws with he bat..making 10 Tons in 3 consecutive home series of 15 tests
against India,England and Australia with 5 Tons against OZ and double immortal in that series.
His bat too big for me not to include hi,. The purists say Hendricks but by preference is Big Clyde.
The purist also say Hunte and Greenidge.
I love Hunte and Fredericks as both were better players of pace than either Greenidge and Haynes and both operated throughout
their career with no long term partner.
Garner was not a bowler who was devastating as Ambrose or Holder. He was a practioner of containment but he never blew
away of instill fear in batsman as Ambrose or Holding. He has about 8 5 fors and no 10 fors in his career while Marshall, the best fast bowler
in history,Holding and Ambrose have many more 5 fors and multiple 10fors suggesting they could win a game almost on their own,and have.
Garner was not of that devastating make up.

In shot my subjective team is
Hunte
Fredericks
Headley
Lara
Richards(c) Never lost a series
Sobers
Walcott
Marshall
Holding
Ambrose
Gibbs
12th Llloyd
I could expound in another post with reasons in this subjective exercise.

If a team has Viv and Sobers, it does not need Gibbs.

In reply to Castled

How many Test teams Garner blew away during his career ?
How many quality wickets 1-6 he has bagged compared to Ambrose and Holding
How many 5 fors and 10 fors he recorded as against Holding and Ambrose.
He was best at containment and rarely failed to get a wicket in an innings though and
perhaps has the most 2 forsand 3 fors in an innings of any bowler but he was not
a devastating bowler or match winner in the class of Marshall,Holding or Ambrose.
Those three were terrorists with a ball. Life and limb were at stake when they operated.
Garner would not make a team over Roberts or Wes hall either in my view.
But since this is a subjective thing, we can all be right

In reply to camos

You got a point, but the greatest spinner in West Indies cricket
must have a place ..He was more effective and successful than
some great fastmen being touted.

If you playing a strong Australia or India best 11 you better have toothpick in there.

In reply to doosra

Headley has great stats for sure.

I struggle with who were his contemporaries. Particularly at first class level. But even international level, there wasn’t the diversity and volume of quality to play against.

He essentially played against 2 teams. Australia and England with a solitary test against India.

He played 22 test matches in total, 5 against Oz, 1 against India, and the rest against England.

You can only play who is in front of you, and I’m sure what was in front of him was among the best the game had to offer at the time, but it doesn’t compare to the quality of later years.

In reply to hubert

Thank you

Over to the insular Bajans, which in itself is a redundant term

In reply to imusic

Am I insular because I was born in Barbados?
Why am I not called insular with my loyalty to the Pittsburgh Steelers?
Barbados cricket fans have earned the right, to be cocky.

In reply to hubert

Thanks for your contribution hubert. You are our message board cricket historian, and your opinions are especially valuable because you probably saw more WI players in person than anyone else on this thread.

In reply to openning

Why did you bother responding to musicman's insularity post? There are some deliveries where a good batsman should shoulder arms and let the ball go through to the keeper.

Our friend said the following to you:

Then hubert poster the following:

Did musicman send you a private note to apologize after he read hubert's post about Walcott?

In reply to imusic

this is not even an argument. Joel was a great bowler, one of the greatest in fact. And maybe he'd have taken more wickets had the WI not had three other great bowlers. but the same can be said of ambi early in his career. He had to compete with walsh and bishop, and at times patterson for wickets. it wasn't always winston and kenny benjamin. Garner would defeat you by not giving you any scoring opportunities. Ambrose could do that but more often, he ran through lineups with at times extreme pace, pin point accuracy and unparalleled aggression.

In reply to Jumpstart

Yet you argue about it. To be clear, my argument is that anyone whose suggests that Garner should not even be in the conversation should take a close look at the stats. And based on the stats, statements that not even Garner's mother would not pick him, or that this is not an argument, are off the reservation. You say that Garner was great from one side of your mouth, but then say that he has no place in a debate about greats from the other side of your mouth

Here is my team:
Hunte
Greenidge
Viv
Lara
Headley
Sobers
Walcott (Based on hubert's post)
Marshall
Holding
Ambrose
Hall (Gibbs sits and Sobers and Viv are my spinners)

In reply to Walco

i never said that he does not belong in the convo. I did say however that as great as he was, curtly was one or two levels above, owing to his pace and hostility. as i said in a post earlier, garner was a gentleman on and off the field. Most cricket observers would say they've rarely saw garner with real menace, except probably versus nz at sabina in 1985. Curtly, on the other hand, was also a gentleman.......off the field. he was as difficult as it got in terms of facing fast bowling in the late 80s/90s. so wasim, bishop and waqar were very quick,, but they got discouraged when you attacked them. donald was very fast and extremely aggressive, but wasn't tall enough to get awkward bounce from a good length, so you could hook him. Mcgrath was very tall but the fastest he bowled was 139 mph....and that too, only on days when he was pissed(like when bowling to lara and tendulkar. Ambrose combined the best attributes of all five, which is why he blew away lineups with the frequency that he did.

I'll ive you a stat. Lara was mauling county cricket in 1994. he scored 9 centuries in 11 innings, culminating in the 501 and sored over 2000 runs for that season. In the middle of that patch, he faced Ambrose's side northants. he scored 178 but only scored 12 runs off 145 deliveries from ambrose and was got hit on his helmet once, which actually split it. And that 1993-1995 version was the best version of brian lara.

Why nobody discussing Shiv in this team?

In reply to Seechy

Ahead of whom?

In reply to imusic

Weekes/Lloyd. Shiv has the best stats for a number 5/6 in the world. He should at least get a mention.

Haven't looked at this post for a while, came back and went straight to the last page. Saw 'HU' read Maas Hubert's posts and the smile got broader and broader. That team is likely the most practical but it was the analysis and history that I loved. Thanks Sah.

In reply to Walco

So, only Marshall and Ambrose have more 5fer than Gibbs and he has the lowest economy of all bowlers, yet he is the designated 12th man???

In reply to hubert

Respect Hubert your wise opinion is important.

Here are the views of an important figure in world cricket

link text

The historical anti-Bajan bias of trini pests music man and jumpstart disqualify them from serious discussion

In reply to StumpCam

don't need a spinner when you have that much pace of the highest quality

In reply to Seechy
if we are considering gayle, who deserves consideration as an opener, we should also consider tger, especially seeing that he raised his average from 38 in 2001 to finish with a 50+ average in 2015.

In reply to Jumpstart

Me:

You:

In reply to Seechy

I’ll leave you to openning

In reply to Seechy

Shiv gets no respect. Batting average for over 20 tests, only Headley, Walcott, Sobers, Weekes, Lara are ahead.

Second overall in runs total behind Lara.

How would Shiv be if he was on Lloyd/Viv world beater teams?

In reply to Curtis

So again…..who would he play ahead of in an all time WI XI?

Better yet…..name your XI…..let’s see if Shiv makes your list

In reply to imusic

I did not have the pleasure of seeing most of the greats bat over a sustained period.

I do know you start with Sobers. A must pick. Weekes, a purist's batter.

Lara. Richards. Walcott. Shiv. Headley opens with one of the previous. That's your top 7 batters. Walcott is keeper. Headley opens with Shiv or Walcott.

Then: Ambrose, Roberts, Marshall, Holding

Shiv is ahead, no disrespect meant, to Greenidge & Haynes.

In reply to Curtis

lol. So purely to accommodate shiv…..you putting players to open who don’t.

Not only that, you putting Shiv ahead of Kanhai

What contortions

In reply to imusic

Well, what's the criteria? Average or batsmanship?

In reply to Curtis

Stollmeyer has a higher average than Shiv

Ganteaume has the highest test batting average of all time

Obviously it can’t be average

And if it’s batsmanship, shiv doesn’t make the team ahead of Kanhai or Kallicharran, far less for the others called.

So you tell me.

In reply to imusic

I said average after 20 or more tests.

Plus opening batsmen in this context are not necessarily the best batters, Headley the exception for WI.

In reply to Curtis

Why you putting limitations? Why 20?

Why not 10? Or 8?

Come on man. Just be honest.

Shiv was a great servant of WI cricket. Of that there is no doubt.

In the latter part of his career, he was the premier batsman in an extremely weak team. That too is undisputable.


He will likely make a WI all time 2nd XI. But not a first XI.

You know it. This message board knows it. The cricket world knows it.

Nothing disrespectful about that at all. It just is what it is.

In reply to imusic

Bro, Gauntaume and Stollmeyer played ONE test match each. A better comparison from you would have been Charlie Davis.

Not sure what you mean by extremely weak team, and how it would be a measure of judgement for his production.

In reply to imusic

Anyhow, you ask me to make a case for the Tiger, so I give it a shot.

That said, I don't understand why WI only dominated during the 15 year period in 80's, and we had some great great players before that.

Obviously, Kanhai is in a class by himself, and can't get a pick. That's the conundrum.

In reply to Curtis

That’s a tough one to reconcile. But again, who does he replace?

Tough decisions.

In reply to imusic

Do you struggle with who were the FC contemporaries of Ranjitsinhi, Hobbs, Hendren, Bradman?
Maas George made runs everywhere in the Caribbean and England. Man even changed his game to
counter Bill O'Riely and tonned up in Oz. It was said in Oz that they saw him as the best off-side player.
They packed the legside to the then greatest leggie in the world and by the end of the tour they
said he was the best on-side player in the world. Maan leff Maas George alone eh.
Curtis thinks Sparrow's Calypso about World Champs WI after they defeated Oz around 65 so is a joke?
When Sobers became Cappo after Worrell we were arguably already World Champs, Sobers' XI just sealed the deal.
By the way anyone knows Nurse's avg. Had he not retired so early it would've topped 50. Man retired after a double ton.
I also remember when the Commie said (68?) Butcher was leaving the game after the English tour to settle in America.

In reply to imusic

I am a die-hard RBK The Great Babu fan but from what I have heard Weekes though perhaps not as exciting was a better batsman than Kanhai and many say it is not even close.
In my WI XI Babu replaces GCG at #2 especially if it is against Oz in Oz. Castled Lloyd cannot cappo over Worrell. Worrell was as good a leader of men there ever has been, higher avg.
than The Cat as well as a much more useful bowler.

In reply to Brerzerk

Bill O’Reilly eh?

Interesting seeing that there is no record of George Headley playing against Bill O’Reilly.

Where did you get your info? Brezerkepedia?? Jes playin man

Again….not disputing he wasn’t the best WI batsman of his era and one of the best in the game at the time.


Anyway……CHECK THIS OUT if you’re so inclined. I’m not the only one with questions.

In reply to Brerzerk

thing is, weekes record on wickets that aren't typically west indian aren't that good. never scored a hundred in australia in 5 tests, which is a small sample tbh, but he only scored one in 9 tests in england. Kanhai scored 2 in australia and averaged a healthy 43.

In reply to Curtis

professionalization of the sport, the politics of the time(you can't ignore; it was actually the same spirit that motivated sunil gavaskar and especially Imran Khan, both who modernized the cricket of their respective countries) and the fact that lille and thommo made the WI realize that intimidation worked. WI would have never dominated for 15 years if australia didn't hammer them 5-1. That is the series that changed cricket.

In reply to StumpCam

We are engaged in a subjective exercise, so anything goes I suppose. I have nothing against Gibbs, but that team does not need a spinner. Those pacers in my team did well in all conditions. Regarding Kanhai, I did not see him play and I know little about him. Shiv's numbers are undeniable, but my favorite Guyanese player was Kalli, who was a great player of both spin and pace bowling. Come to think of it, I think Kalli may have opened the batting for the West Indies a few times. So let's replace Greenidge with Kalli

In reply to Jumpstart

Ok my bad

here is a 4 prong i would like to leggo on wunnuh all time 11

Roberts
Croft
Patterson
Walsh

In reply to anthonyp
Picking an all-time 11 is purely academic. But here are my choices:
Hunte
Kanhai
Viv
Lara
Walcott
Sobers
Hendriks
Marshall
Roberts
Hall
Gibbs

In reply to Walco

We agree on this.

Best Guyanese batsman of all time to date.

In reply to imusic

Bro, I read and responded to that tripe yrs ago (author posted it on FB) and the fella in a fit of anger blocked me.
Now, if all you can find to quibble with is that I mistakenly wrote about Bill O'reilly 144wkts @22 instead of The Great Clarrie Grimmet 216wkts @24
then Galang hahaha. Maas George went to Oz faced a great leggie with a 7/2 field and mastered him yet you question his pedigree and that of the WI FC
bowlers bowling to him. The abilities of a man tonning up when no one else past 35 and then top score next innings ought not to be questioned. He was ahead of all his peers but Bradman who played only in England and Oz. (you mentioned Headley only played vs 2 teams) Headley played in 3 regions, Bradman two.

My all time XI

Conrad Hunte
Gordon Greenidge
George Headley
Brian Lara
Viv Richards
Garry Sobers
Clyde Walcott
Malcolm Marshall
Michael Holding
Curtly Ambrose
Lance Gibbs

In reply to CricSham

from now on we're buddies Kanhai at 2, Yes! no matter the opponents but especially vs. Oz in Oz and Pak in Pak

In reply to Jumpstart

I am going to post two links for you to refer to.
https://www.espncricinfo.com/cricketers/everton-weekes-53241/bowling-batting-stats

https://www.espncricinfo.com/cricketers/everton-weekes-53241/tests-odi-t20-records

This is a man who reminded me of our local system, letting me know the players I saw on Saturdays have families and local jobs, there are not professionals like we see in India, Australia, England and other countries.

I have always asked this question: Why is Desmond Haynes considered a great and Chris Gayle is not? Their test records are very similar. Haynes played as part of a great test team. Gayle did not. So consider who had the greater challenge and burden as a batsman.

Haynes played 116 tests scoring 7487 runs at an average of 42.29 with 18 hundreds and 39 fifties.

Gayle played 103 tests scoring 7214 runs at an average of 42.18 with 15 hundreds and 37 fifties. And may I add, two triple centuries against top oppositions and bowlers.

In ODIs, Haynes played 238 matches scoring 8648 runs at a strike rate of 63.09 and an average of 41.47 with 17 hundreds and 57 fifties.

Gayle played 301 ODIs scoring 10,480 runs at a strike rate of 87.19 and an average of 37.83 with 25 hundreds and 54 fifties.

I won't add T20I as Haynes did not have that opportunity.

With basically comparable test and ODI records, why do people consider Haynes a WI great but not Gayle?

In reply to imusic

I was at Kensington that evening in 1977 or 1978 when Jeff Thompson was tearing through the West Indies top order. I literally feared for the lives of the West Indies batsmen. Kalli was the only batsman who played Thommo comfortably that evening. He was dismissed with a ball that rose unexpectedly from a good length, but unlike the other West Indies batsmen, never seemed bothered by Thommo. Viv was swiping and the others were running. Since that day, I have had maximum respect for Kalli.

I also know people who saw Lawrence Rowe make his 302 at Kensington. Rowe had a huge partnership with Kalli during that match, and I know people who swear to this day that Kalli looked better than Rowe. And we all know that Rowe was very easy on the eyes. I think Kalli made 119 in that match.

In reply to doosra

You are a cruel fella In the second test I gine leggo this 4 prong on the all time 11 with no helmets allowed and no limit on bouncers:
Charlie Griffith
Sylvester Clarke
Wayne Daniel
Castro

I wish you had not picked Croft and Patterson

In reply to b4u8me2

I started a thread on this very subject a few years back. I will try to find it in the archives and post the link.

In reply to b4u8me2

That’s your answer right there. And I still say Gayle faced tougher opposition than Haynes did.

In reply to Walco

At least he didn’t pick Syl Clarke

In their choices of the best 4 specialist bowlers, I generally don’t see people compartmentalizing them into opening bowler vs 1st or 2nd change bowler. It’s just about who are the best four.

So why his insistence about having “specialist openers”? Does it really matter when choosing an all time XI?

Sometimes #3 and #4 batsmen effectively become openers whenever the openers fail. Do they own performances diminish in those situations? I think not.
Specialist openers my foot!

So for me it’s:

Weekes
Headley
Lara
Richards
Kanhai
Sobers
Walcott (wk)
Marshall
Holding
Bishop
Ambrose

In reply to imusic

Fully agree. Except that there should be a 5th name carved in stone:
Curtly Elconn Lynwall Ambrose

In reply to Seechy

Shiv? I know you must be joking.

In reply to Brerzerk

Thank you bro. For the uninitiated on this board Kanhai is not a sentimental pick. After Hunte, he was indisputably our best opener. Yes, at #3 he literally opened for the majority of his career. Does anyone remember how many openers Hunte had throughout his career? I think it was somewhere in the vicinity of a dozen different openers. Kanhai was at the crease by the second or third over.

In reply to CricSham

Second highest run scorer and most capped Test player in WI history with almost 12,000 test runs (8th highest overall in the world), ICC player of the year 2008, 901 best career rating, 51+ career average, 56+ average at no.5, 30 test centuries, record 7 consecutive half centuries, and 69-ball century to go with his almost 9,000 ODI runs? No, I'm definitely not joking.

There's a reason why he made Wisden's WI all-time XI.

Can you imagine any of the other 10 top run-scorers in Test cricket being left out of their country's all-time XIs?