If the all-time XI is any indication, this is the golden age of Indian cricket. Four players in the list - Sachin Tendulkar, Rahul Dravid, Virender Sehwag, MS Dhoni - are currently in the national side and two others, Anil Kumble and Javagal Srinath, retired fairly recently. The trouble with golden ages is that they are seldom recognised as such by those living through them. In sport especially, greatness is usually bestowed retrospectively. Perhaps it is no coincidence that India are currently the No. 1 side in the world.
That six of the XI made their debuts after November 1989, when Tendulkar first announced himself to the world, is a tribute to the Mumbai man’s impact.
The XI
Sunil Gavaskar
Virender Sehwag
Rahul Dravid
Sachin Tendulkar
Vijay Hazare
Vinoo Mankad
Kapil Dev
MS Dhoni
Anil Kumble
Javagal Srinath
Erapalli Prasanna
Cricinfo didn’t give any ‘Readers’ XI’. I guess there would be more current players in the XI if readers’ votes were considered. They are still calling for Laxman in the comments!
Its interesting that none of the Pakistan all-time XI players is playing currently and the most recent retiree is Inzi I guess.
Sunil Gavaskar is the best out of them and my favourite. I am surprised that Anil Kumble and parsanna have been chosen ahead of Bedi and Chandrashekar.
This indian bowling esp. the seam attack is weak heavily relying on the two spinners. They w’d struggle to dismiss quality batters outside the sub-continent. But then Kapil Dev is the only decent seamer India have produced in their entire history. Srinath was never more than an average bowler. Zaheer too is just about ok.
You have to be judged by your performance against the best side (Windies) of your time
Interesting to see that experts X1 and Readers X1 are almost identical other than Laxman in place of Vijay Hazare in Readers X1. I think this is most agreed upon team? Most of the players like Gavaskar, Sehwag, Tendulkar, Dravid, Dhoni, Kapil selected themselves anyway.
but isn't that always the case? apart from 1 or 2 names I have not seen much disparity between most all-time cricinfo and readers' XIs. Most of the guys literally pick themselves in every team.
but isn't that always the case? apart from 1 or 2 names I have not seen much disparity between most all-time cricinfo and readers' XIs. Most of the guys literally pick themselves in every team.
yeah but no other team has only 1 player difference. If I remember correctly, I have seen differences from 2-4 players in different teams.
I have no idea how good prasaanna bedi chandrashekhar actually were. I started watching cricket in the mid 90s.
People usually have a habit to exaggerate the quality of old players. I am not saying these guys were not good..I have no clue like I said! Just that history usually exaggerates quality.
4 of the 11 are in the current side. Now that's something?
Pak is lucky that they are not playing Ind bilaterally in the recent yrs. Otherwise Ind wouldve dented Pak's better "1 on 1" record with India significantly :D
^ Of the 12 test matches played head to head (2000 - 2010), India has won 4 and Pakistan 3 in the recent years. India would need 36 tests to make win/loose ration with Pakistan 1:1 assuming current this ratio continues.
Assuming India's performance post 2007 continues (16 wins and 7 losses in 37 matches against all countries) they would still need 13 tests against Pakistan before they can break even. I am not sure the BIG 4 would be playing those many tests (or any test at all) with Pakistan until they retire.
I have no idea how good prasaanna bedi chandrashekhar actually were. I started watching cricket in the mid 90s.
People usually have a habit to exaggerate the quality of old players. I am not saying these guys were not good..I have no clue like I said! Just that history usually exaggerates quality.
4 of the 11 are in the current side. Now that's something?
Pak is lucky that they are not playing Ind bilaterally in the recent yrs. Otherwise Ind wouldve dented Pak's better "1 on 1" record with India significantly :D
I have seen all 4 bowl and in my view bedi and chandrashekhar were better bowlers than kumble and parsanna.
^ Of the 12 test matches played head to head (2000 - 2010), India has won 4 and Pakistan 3 in the recent years. India would need 36 tests to make win/loose ration with Pakistan 1:1 assuming current this ratio continues.
Assuming India's performance post 2007 continues (16 wins and 7 losses in 37 matches against all countries) they would still need 13 tests against Pakistan before they can break even. I am not sure the BIG 4 would be playing those many tests (or any test at all) with Pakistan until they retire.
just joking bud. but I was only talking about the last 2-3 yrs not since 2000.. the indian test team is far better than what the pak test team has been.. Anyway.. its irrelevant... historical stats dont matter 2 much to me.. im not just saying this abt ind vs pak.. abt ind vs pak in WCs too where india has the upper hand.. thats all trivial jibes at each other..
I have no idea how good prasaanna bedi chandrashekhar actually were. I started watching cricket in the mid 90s.
People usually have a habit to exaggerate the quality of old players. I am not saying these guys were not good..I have no clue like I said! Just that history usually exaggerates quality.
4 of the 11 are in the current side. Now that's something?
Pak is lucky that they are not playing Ind bilaterally in the recent yrs. Otherwise Ind wouldve dented Pak's better "1 on 1" record with India significantly :D