Who should make the cricket World Cup XI?

Warney picks himself - if not for the fact that he bowled arguably the greatest ever WC spell against SA in the semi in 1999 then because he is a significantly better batsman and fielder than Murali was...

Seiran, What a dilemma -- Warne or Murali? Both distinctly different but equally great. Wish I could have included them both. It's like who was / is greater Bach or Beethoven, Maugham or Maupassant, Saigal or Pankaj, Dean Martin or Pat Boone, Bradman or Hammond...? We have been lucky to witness both living legends Warney and Murali at their best.

Kersi, I think it depends on how you look at the stats. Based on wickets per match Warne has been the stand out spinner with 1.88 wickets per match against Murali's 1.71. Warne also has better batting stats than Murali. Warne has an 11 average at 91 with a H/S of 24 and Murali has a 9 ave at 92 with a high score of 16. Based on wickets per match and batting ability when called upon, I would go with Warne.

Sheek and Marc, what excellent XIs you have chosen! Sheek, Macartney did score a Test century before lunch. But he was not the first to do so. Vic Trumper was the first. Bradman was the third and Majid Khan the fourth.

Hi guys, Just for something different, here's an Australian one-day XI from pre-1975 world cup: 1. Victor Trumper - by all accounts, he would have been born for this type of cricket. Also a medium pacer. 2. Charlie Macartney - from memory 1st player to score a century in a session. Also a useful spinner. 3. Don Bradman - is there anything he couldn't do batting-wise? 4. Neil Harvey - quick scoring leftie to break-up right-handers. 5. Stan McCabe - Bradman reckons he scored the best century he ever saw live. Also a medium pacer. 6. Keith Miller - our greatest all-rounder (still). 7. Don Tallon - reputedly our best keeper before the modern era. 8. Alan Davidson - left-hand/arm wonder all-rounder. 9. Richie Benaud - another fine all-rounder. Captains the team ahead of Bradman. 10. Ray Lindwall - useful bat, fiery bowler, brilliant field. 11. Bill O'Reilly - best spinner before Warne came along. The team has it all - genuine batting depth to no.10; 3 fast men & 2 medium pacers; 2 leggies & a left-arm offie; athletic fielders & safe catchers. There is so much talent to choose from, this potential 2nd XI is worth mentioning: Bobby Simpson, Arthur Morris, Bill Murdoch(k), Warwick Armstrong(vc), Bill Ponsford, Jack Gregory, Jack Ryder, Monty Noble(c), Hugh Trumble, Charles Turner, Fred Spofforth. Not quite as impressive for batting explosives, but genuine batting depth again to no.10; skipper Noble would have 8 bowlers to choose combining pace & spin; fielding overall not as good as 1st XI. Here's a thought - if they had invented one day limited overs cricket in the 1930s, instead of limiting bowlers to a specific number of overs, might they have instead limited batsman to a maximum score of say, 125 or 150 (because of the presence of Bradman)???

1. Gilchrist 2. Mark Waugh 3. Viv Richards 4. Tendulkar. 5. Lara 6. Steve Waugh 7. Imran Kahn 8. Warne 9. Curtly Ambrose 10. Malcolm Marshall 11. Dennis lillee 12. Alan border. 13. Kapil Dev 14. Hadlee 15. McGrath

What about Shane Bond? He got 30 wickets in 16 WC games at an average of 17.26!! He also produced this spell http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JpEzbjwc4TE

Good analogy, Vinay on marital stats! And you are correct about "weighing in" quality of opposition, boundary distance, bat's sweet spots, helmets... But I believe in simplicity and try to give as much enjoyment to people by my no-frills writings and statistics as I give myself. Duckworth-Lewis rule is so complicated and tries to "weigh in" everything but rarely gets it correct. For recent examples I might cite the last two ODIs between SAfrica and India.

No,no! kersi don't be so modest.Based on statistic alone I have no quibble with your team. You would know if it is possible to "weigh" the opposition,equipment,different conditions and rules and then do a statistical anaysis. It would be a lot of work but i think it is the only way to really get closer to the truth. 40 years of marriage as a statistical number would suggest a great marriage. But is that always the case?

Vinay, I selected my team based on stats in WCs. I agree that Lillee and Holding are superior to McGrath and Akram but the selection is based on STATISTICS. Compared to McGrath's 71 wickets and Akram's 55, Holding is behind with 20 scalps although his average of 17.85 and Economy Rate (ER) of 2.94 are sensational. Among the 44 bowlers to capture 19 or more WC wickets, his ER is second only to Richard Hadlee's of 2.88. Lillee and Garner, great bowlers both, are not among those 44 bowlers and hence not considered. I applaud your selection, Vinay. Perhaps my critria are too narrow.

Mark Waugh was the 1996 world cup and averaged over 80, also 10 games in 1999 and still averaged over 40, plus took wickers in 1996 and a classic catch in the 99 final

Barry,Yes,indeed 60 overs,but no powerplays and unlimited bouncers. Garner's economy (Kersi,another job for you) would probably be one of the best going around. I did say everything being equal,Barry and things like bats have improved where the sweetspot is very forgiving. And helmets make a mockery of bravery and technique. More people get pinged now then in the days of terry towelling. Clive Lloyd(along with colin Bland) is the best allround fielder I ever saw. His long legs and arms meant he rarely had to dive. in fact the one time he dived in Adelaide he hurt his back. Garner in the gully was the best of his kind. With his giant albatross wingspan nothing got past him Another who did not have to dive. Notice how the really great fielders seldom dive. ( I'll be mischievous here and liken it to the great footballers) Viv richards' runout of Greg Chappell still thrills after 36 years. Backward of point,swoop,turn and throw in mid air,all in one motion and hit the timber side-on. Eat your heart out Joe Solomon. The deeds live on long after the numbers are forgotten.

Excellent alternate team, Vinay and valuable suggestions, The Berry. But as stated in the beginning, I've gone only by stats. Stellenbosched, you raise an important issue re the absence of SAfrican players. Although SA played only 5 of the 9 WCs, no individual cricketer has played more than 5 WCs. So there is no disadvantage to them. In batting, H Gibbs comes 8th with 1067 runs at 56.15 in 25 matches and Kallis 16th at 923 runs at 51.27 in 29. But I should have mentioned Gary Kirsten making the highest individual score, 189 not out v. UAE in 1996. Also Klusener was outstanding in the 1999 WC and deserved a mention. In bowling, Donald comes 6th with 38 wickets at 24.82 in 25 games.

Interesting that Kersi and Vinay could come up with such vastly different (and great) teams. I think on the whole I prefer Kersi's team. While Vinay's side are unarguably great cricketers I don't know if they were necessarily the greatest one day cricketers, simply because of the ongoing evolution of technique and tactics that saw players of latter generations get more out of their talents. For example, Vinay you mention the Windies 291 - but if I'm not mistaken this was from 60 overs - so probably equivalent to a score of 240-250 which nowadays is seen as a minimum requirement and very chaseable. For the record I agree that most of the team picks itself. The only other suggestion I would put forward for consideration is Mark Waugh for an openers spot. I think he scored three 100's at the 96 World Cup- had longevity, could bowl and was one of the best fieldsmen I've ever seen. Curtley Ambrose was a great one day bowler but I don't remember him dominating a World Cup tournament. Joel Garner and Malcolm Marshall in the same boat. I would also (reluctantly) omit Dev for Warne - just because you couldn't leave him out. I think an attack of Akram, McGrath, Imran, Warne, Murali with Waugh, Tendulkar and Richards as part timers would see opponents struggle to get to 200 ! Hopefully they'd win the toss and bat first !

Kersi,this is an excuse for me to go down memory lane and I know you have researched diligently. However taking a crude weighted average for the equipment,size of boundaries and quality of opposition in the various World Cups I list below my All Time XI, starting point being the 1975 Prudential world Cup. Openers: Gilchrist and Greenidge No.3,without question Viv Richards.brutal,Casablanca swagger,and controlled machismo. No.4 Clive Lloyd-who can forget Lloyd's 102 in that inaugural final and his partnership with Rohan Kanhai. Lloyd hit 12 4's and 2 sixes and the total of 291 was always just out of Australia's reach. No5: Miandad: A real master of angles and a great hustler. He could change the thinking of the bowlers. No 6:Steve Waugh: tough as nails and loved the contest. No7: Kapil Dev: he was west indian in his batting and fielding and a better one day bowler than a Test bowler. In fact he preferred the one day game over the Test matches.Fielding is so important and his catch off Richards in the '83 final changed the game. Holding told me recently that the Windies were complacent in the final and that cost them. No8: Shane Warne: His exploits in the 1999 WC were game changing. He destroyed the SAF top order in the semis. Murali in the 1996 final was overshadowed by Aravinda and jayasuriya in the bowling stakes. No9:Malcolm Marshall:can bowl,can bat and can field. No 10: Michael Holding and No11: Dennis Lillee...two of the greatest fast bowlers in history. Now you tell me, if everything was equal,which team could beat this?

Hi Kersi, I think you have made a good job of choosing your World Cup XI. I would have to point out that there are no South African cricketers in the mix as a result of them not being allowed to build up meaningful statistics over the full history of the CWC. I understand the history, but you have not even looked at someone like Kallis.