1999
M Waugh
Gilchrist
Ponting
Lehmann
S Waugh
Bevan
Moody
Warne
Reiffel
Fleming
McGrath

2003
Hayden
Gilchrist
Ponting
Lehmann
Matryn
Bevan
Symonds
Hogg
Bichel
Lee
McGrath

2007
Hayden
Gilchrist
Ponting
Clarke
Hussey
Watson
Symonds
Hogg
Bracken
Tait
McGrath

Hayden = Waugh - Hayden was more prolific and a bigger hitter, but M Waugh was better against pace bowling and got more tough runs.

Clarke > Lehman - 1 point for 2007
S Waugh > Martyn or Hussey - All great players, but S Waugh was the best under pressure - 1 point for 1999
Bevan > Watson - 1 point for 1999, 1 point for 2003
Symonds > Moody - 1 point for 2003 and 2007
Warne >> Hogg - 2 points for 1999
Bichel> Reiffel or Bracken - 1 point for 2003
Lee > Tait or Fleming - 1 point for 2003

1999 - 4 points
2003 - 4 points
2007 - 2 points

As you can see, not much in it, but 199 had a much tougher time winning the trophy. Duncan I agree, WI and Pakistan were much better in the 90s.

Bracken was better than Bichel IMO. Nobody new how to play him. Bichel could bat so not sure if you are including that into your analysis but as a bowler Bracken was better.

Others I agree with.

Bracken and Bichel were both decent players in great teams.

When Bracken played test cricket, everyone knew how to play him, He really struggled. Bichel was similar when he got an extended run in the side and didn't have the luxury of great bowlers at the other end, he struggled.

I agree that Bracken was a slightly better ODI bowler, but Bichel seemed more of a fighter. Totally committed with bat, ball or in the field. For a fringe player, I would prefer that.

If I could select an XI from all those players it would be this:

Gilly
Hayden
Ponting
Hussey
Waugh
Bevan
Symonds
Warne
Lee
Tait
McGrath

2 points 1999: Warne and Waugh
3 points 2003: Lee, Bevan and Symonds
3 points 2007: Hussey, Tait, Symonds

All the others played in all 3 tournaments. I'd actually argue that had Lee been fit in 2007 it would've been the best bowling attack of all three and even without him I think there is an argument for saying that it is the best Aus team in a World Cup ever. Sure the opposition were pretty dire but Australia absolutely crushed everyone who came their way.

If we included 2015 Starc would be added instead of Tait but I don't think this 2015 team is of the same caliber as the other 2.

Game has changed alot from the pre 2007 era to now. Can you back those old players to score 100 in 50 balls? I dont think so. Most of the old players played orthodox shots whereas now you have switch hits, reverse sweep and some other shots that Maxwell play.


Its actually really hard to compare previous teams. Obviously the quality of cricket in general has gone down but its very hard to actually compare teams from previous years. especially in ODIs where lots of rules have changed.

Agreed Viru with regards to the rules.

However, a number of these unorthodox shots would have been useless against the likes of Ambrose, Akram, Warne, Murali etc.

Yes, it may have come off once or twice, but ultimately it would not be possible and innovation never started recently, it's been going on for years, it comes off more now, because there are not many quality bowlers in World Cricket.

I remember the 1992 World Cup where Mark Greatbatch was scoring runs against everyone trying all sorts of different types of shots, but when he came up against Akram, he was getting beaten virtually every ball, eventually he attacked the other bowler and after hitting a couple, got out to a slower ball.

A lot of people forget that innovation in ODI cricket started a long time ago. People think that innovation has only started since T20 cricket, but back in 1992 NZ were trying all sorts of things from Dipak Patel opening the bowling to Greatbatch pinch hitting. Tendulkar moved from being a middle order batsman to being an opener in ODI.

Jayasuriya and Kaluwitharana took it to a whole new level in 1996. This was continued by the likes of Gilchrist, Sehwag, Afridi etc.

Wasim and Waqar reverse swing was vitually impossible to hit in the final few overs (unless your name is Jadeja). Saqlain bowled the doosra and Murali, Mushtaq and Warne were all used as attacking bowlers in ODI cricket during the 90s.

Australia were playing many all-rounders as early as 1987 and England were reverse-sweeping for fun in 1987 and set the standard in the field in 1992. South Africa (and Jonty Rhodes in particular) took fielding to a different level too.

We all know how West Indies with Joel Garner's yorkers and Viv Richards batting and the effect that had on ODIs.

Yh that is a fair point. Im wondering how many bowlers of today worldwide can be classified of those olden greats. I can barely think of any. Maybe starc can come close but the rest are pretty much average in ODIs.

We in England already have Alistair Cook sounding off saying we would have done better if he had not been dropped. Well Alistair the last evidence we have of Captaincy and form in recent Tests and 1 days and being generous it didn't look good did it. No apology, no humility but plenty of lets blame one individual even though that individual was our highest scoring tourer. Question what happens when Mr Cook fails in the West Indies - and he will - you can bet your bottom dollar it will not be Mr Cooks fault.

comment by virudagreat- beating India in india is ..... (U8738)

posted 2 hours, 21 minutes ago

Yh that is a fair point. Im wondering how many bowlers of today worldwide can be classified of those olden greats. I can barely think of any. Maybe starc can come close but the rest are pretty much average in ODIs.
========================================

I think Steyn has been amazing, not as good recently, but he's been amazing for a long time.

Starc may become one, but not there yet. Boult looks good, but a long way to go. Ajmal was good, but I always preferred Saqlain.

I thought Ashwin or Mendis might become amazing spinners, but their careers have stalled as of late.

Can't think of anyone else.

I think steyn in tests Yes. In odis I cant remember a very good performance from him. But then he hasnt played that many odis.

TBH now tests are not going to last forever. We have already heard Collins proposing a 4 day tests. Soon we will hear tests should not be played at all. The hard fact is there is very little room left to improve tests so that people can come to the stadiums.

The India Aus series had fewer spectators than Big Bash. That itself says alot about where test cricket is heading.

In the recent past we have seen so India Australia and England are playing each other alot in tests. how long will that last for before the public gets bored of seeing the same teams.