SA Footy

This is going to open the biggest can of worms. Who do you regard as the best International test side to have played this great game.
I know many will say The Windies of the 80's,Steve Waughs 16 match winning streak (The Dominators) or Don Bradmans all mighty "Invincibles".
I'll throw 1 in even though they did not play a test my old man reckons the best side he has seen play was South Africa through the appartheid era through the rebel tests (Those poor bastards are unlucky aren't they )

LaughingKookaburra wrote:This is going to open the biggest can of worms. Who do you regard as the best International test side to have played this great game.
I know many will say The Windies of the 80's,Steve Waughs 16 match winning streak (The Dominators) or Don Bradmans all mighty "Invincibles".
I'll throw 1 in even though they did not play a test my old man reckons the best side he has seen play was South Africa through the appartheid era through the rebel tests (Those poor bastards are unlucky aren't they )

I might open an even bigger can of worms. I reckon the WI team of the 80's were the best simply because I reckon every Aust team (barring the Bradman era) have been helped considerably by umpiring decisions on their own soil.

I don't think it's always happened, but during our more successful eras, it certainly has.

Prehaps thats what makes Australia so great as of late, the mind over the umpires aswell (Eg Warne and McGrath and even Gillespie at his best).
I honestly think Steve Waughs dominators is the best side to have played the game.The side had every thing (plus was helped with the mentoring by Taylor and Border in the build up)

This was discussed briefly on another thread a few months back (ie Waugh's team vs Lloyd's 11). Personally i think the WI side of the late 70's and early 80's was better than Waugh's side.

That South African side is actually a very good nomination. I'd still back West Indies 1984/85 as the best I have seen. Another thing that tends to happen is strong teams often seem to get the rub of the green with umpires. Good sides also get the job done away from home as well and for that no side surpassed the West Indies of the 80's who won everywhere and also like Australia of recent times, produced more than 11 champion cricketers during an extended period.

The only thing against the South African combination was that they were not fully tested by an Australian side on a decline under Bill Lawry at the end before they were kicked out of the sport due to Apartied. England cleaned up Lawy's team as well.

regards,

REB

For the record, the 1984/85 Side that blasted Australia out for 76 in Perth in 1984 (What a move giving the Windies that track to open every season LOL)

D Haynes
G Greenidge
R Richardson
V Richards
C Lloyd
H Gomes
J Dujon
M Marshall
M Holding
J Garner
C Walsh

simply awesome. Even Pollock would struggle IMO.

regards,

REB

I know there were better players around back in the 80's,but also were not as technical as they are now.Also their schedules were not as hectic but they also did not train as much then as they do now.Arguments both ways......Just watching hilights though I know it was calypso cricket but surely this current side was "Smarter" (probably due to technoligy) than the windies and no footwork against the current Australians means trouble.

Rik E Boy wrote:That South African side is actually a very good nomination. I'd still back West Indies 1984/85 as the best I have seen. Another thing that tends to happen is strong teams often seem to get the rub of the green with umpires. Good sides also get the job done away from home as well and for that no side surpassed the West Indies of the 80's who won everywhere and also like Australia of recent times, produced more than 11 champion cricketers during an extended period.

The only thing against the South African combination was that they were not fully tested by an Australian side on a decline under Bill Lawry at the end before they were kicked out of the sport due to Apartied. England cleaned up Lawy's team as well.

regards,

REB

For the record, the 1984/85 Side that blasted Australia out for 76 in Perth in 1984 (What a move giving the Windies that track to open every season LOL)

D Haynes
G Greenidge
R Richardson
V Richards
C Lloyd
H Gomes
J Dujon
M Marshall
M Holding
J Garner
C Walsh

simply awesome. Even Pollock would struggle IMO.

regards,

REB

Weakest Link - Gomes. Other than that, all A grade players in their own right.

LaughingKookaburra wrote:(Those poor bastards are unlucky aren't they )

Yes. The poor black bastards didn't get to play much of anything from 1948 till the early 1990's. This is why Nelson Mandella and Desmond Tutu are such revered figures today.

regards,

REB

gadj1976 wrote:Weakest Link - Gomes. Other than that, all A grade players in their own right.

Quite true but Gomes did average 40 in the middle order and scored nine centuries.

regards,

REB

gadj1976 wrote:

Rik E Boy wrote:That South African side is actually a very good nomination. I'd still back West Indies 1984/85 as the best I have seen. Another thing that tends to happen is strong teams often seem to get the rub of the green with umpires. Good sides also get the job done away from home as well and for that no side surpassed the West Indies of the 80's who won everywhere and also like Australia of recent times, produced more than 11 champion cricketers during an extended period.

The only thing against the South African combination was that they were not fully tested by an Australian side on a decline under Bill Lawry at the end before they were kicked out of the sport due to Apartied. England cleaned up Lawy's team as well.

regards,

REB



For the record, the 1984/85 Side that blasted Australia out for 76 in Perth in 1984 (What a move giving the Windies that track to open every season LOL)

D Haynes
G Greenidge
R Richardson
V Richards
C Lloyd
H Gomes
J Dujon
M Marshall
M Holding
J Garner
C Walsh

simply awesome. Even Pollock would struggle IMO.

regards,

REB

Weakest Link - Gomes. Other than that, all A grade players in their own right.

Gomes wasn't a champion, but was still a very good player, a grafter who came in predominantly at first drop, a little bit in the Justin Langer mould. Given the other 5 strokemakers he was probably required to add something different to their batting order.

Also refering to the 92,99 and 2003 world cups

LaughingKookaburra wrote:Also refering to the 92,99 and 2003 world cups

One day cricket is a different matter altogether.

LaughingKookaburra wrote:I know there were better players around back in the 80's,but also were not as technical as they are now.Also their schedules were not as hectic but they also did not train as much then as they do now.Arguments both ways......Just watching hilights though I know it was calypso cricket but surely this current side was "Smarter" (probably due to technoligy) than the windies and no footwork against the current Australians means trouble.

I agree with you. Modern players do play a lot of matches against some really piss weak opposition that the Windies would have got out for about 25. Another tick for the Carrebean Kings.

regards,

REB

LaughingKookaburra wrote:I know there were better players around back in the 80's,but also were not as technical as they are now.Also their schedules were not as hectic but they also did not train as much then as they do now.Arguments both ways......Just watching hilights though I know it was calypso cricket but surely this current side was "Smarter" (probably due to technoligy) than the windies and no footwork against the current Australians means trouble.

I have this conversation regularly. I watched Botham on Fox at the MCG circa early 80's SMASH a ball to the boundary and he almost made it over the fence. I watch McDonald the next day (for Victoria) SMASH a ball OVER the boundary for six. Who's the bigger hitter? Who's the stronger? Who's the better timer? No one will ever know. I truly believe bat technology means that guys who couldn't normally clear the rope, could clear the rope.

That would mean playing against the Windies with the same bat technology would equate to a massive advantage.........scary. However, "drop in" pitches, increased training techniques and bowling analysis would all eat into that advantage of bat technology (possibly).

GWW wrote:

gadj1976 wrote:

Rik E Boy wrote:That South African side is actually a very good nomination. I'd still back West Indies 1984/85 as the best I have seen. Another thing that tends to happen is strong teams often seem to get the rub of the green with umpires. Good sides also get the job done away from home as well and for that no side surpassed the West Indies of the 80's who won everywhere and also like Australia of recent times, produced more than 11 champion cricketers during an extended period.

The only thing against the South African combination was that they were not fully tested by an Australian side on a decline under Bill Lawry at the end before they were kicked out of the sport due to Apartied. England cleaned up Lawy's team as well.

regards,

REB



For the record, the 1984/85 Side that blasted Australia out for 76 in Perth in 1984 (What a move giving the Windies that track to open every season LOL)

D Haynes
G Greenidge
R Richardson
V Richards
C Lloyd
H Gomes
J Dujon
M Marshall
M Holding
J Garner
C Walsh

simply awesome. Even Pollock would struggle IMO.

regards,

REB

Weakest Link - Gomes. Other than that, all A grade players in their own right.

Gomes wasn't a champion, but was still a very good player, a grafter who came in predominantly at first drop, a little bit in the Justin Langer mould. Given the other 5 strokemakers he was probably required to add something different to their batting order.

Yep, more about context of the players around him rather than a dig at Gomes. Being the weakest link in the Windies of the 80's is a massive compliment I reckon.

Botham's career would have finished six years earlier than it did if he had to train as hard as modern players I'm sure of it LOL.

regards,

REB

Great side that REB.
My only doubt is their ability to have that attack and bowl 90 overs a day.
Back then with no laws they never bowled more than 75.

IIRC, when new laws were introduced about over rates, Adelaide had the last? test of the summer and the windies were announced as series winners over the PA system.
The announcer then stated that because of over rates and fines the windies actually owed money and wouldn't receive a winners cheque.

Rik E Boy wrote:Botham's career would have finished six years earlier than it did if he had to train as hard as modern players I'm sure of it LOL.

regards,

REB

Completely agree REB. I feel the same for guys like Ted Whitten, Graham Cornes, Lindsay Head if they were to play during the modern era of footy!

GWW wrote:

LaughingKookaburra wrote:Also refering to the 92,99 and 2003 world cups

One day cricket is a different matter altogether.

More so refering to South Africa being jinxed becoming clearly the best at any form of cricket at a point of time during the history of cricket

smithy wrote:Great side that REB.
My only doubt is their ability to have that attack and bowl 90 overs a day.
Back then with no laws they never bowled more than 75.

IIRC, when new laws were introduced about over rates, Adelaide had the last? test of the summer and the windies were announced as series winners over the PA system.
The announcer then stated that because of over rates and fines the windies actually owed money and wouldn't receive a winners cheque.

In 1991 Bob Simpson in The Reasons Why stated that the Windies tactic of slow over rates combined with a lightning scoring rate was a major obstacle to overcome (as well as the sheer ability that the side still had even then).

regards,

REB