The Best XI of the World T20

Now that the dust has begun to settle following England's triumph, it seems an apt time to select our best XI of the World T20. Most of the picks are fairly obvious, but there are a few close calls and a fairly contentious selection for the all-rounder spot at number seven. We'd like to see this side take on the Worst XI of the tournament that we named yesterday. On current form, the result would be a formality, but you could certainly imagine Michael Clarke's dunces giving the Best XI a pretty close match if form and confidence could be rediscovered.

Anyway, without further ado, here is our side:

Mahela Jayawardene (Sri Lanka): 302 runs, average 60.40, strike rate 159.78, 11 sixes - Started the competition like a train with scores of 81, 100 and 98 not out, but was derailed by the pace of Australia and know-how of England. Despite this the leading scorer in the tournament has more than earned his place in the side.

Craig Kieswetter (England): 222 runs, average 31.71, strike rate 116.84, 11 sixes - You wouldn't have known that this was Kieswetter's first international tournament. Fearless at the top of the order and along with Lumb, crucial in laying the foundations for England's batting. Is not yet the finished article especially with the gloves. Just pips Kamran Akmal thanks to his fifty in the final.

Kevin Pietersen (England): 248 runs, average 62.00, strike rate 137.77, 7 sixes - The Man of the Tournament was reborn and revitalised and had a domineering presence at the crease not seen since Viv Richards' halcyon days. The manner in which he smashed Shaun Tait for six in the final was as breathtaking as it was nonchalant. It all bodes very well for the Ashes.

Cameron White (Australia, Captain): 180 runs, average 45.00, strike rate 146.34, 12 sixes - The man who should be Australia's Twenty 20 captain was the leading six-hitter in the competition. Played a familiar role in resurrecting the Australian innings together with the Hussey brothers after the top order had failed. His innings against Pakistan in the semi-final was nearly as vital as Michael Hussey's.

Eoin Morgan (England): 183 runs, average 36.60, strike rate 128.87, 5 sixes - The excellence of England's top order meant that we didn't see much of Morgan's unorthodox hitting in the latter part of the tournament. But his contrasting knocks in the first two matches against West Indies and Ireland were spectacular and enough to get him in ahead of David Hussey. It looks like the 23 year old Irishman is going to be some player.

Michael Hussey (Australia): 188 runs, average 94.00, strike rate 175.70, 9 sixes - A finisher? Someone to resurrect an innings or put the gloss on an already good score? A big hitter? Take your pick because Hussey can play all these roles with aplomb. His 60 not out off only 24 balls was the innings of the tournament and his strike rate was the best of those that had more than two innings. What a luxury to have Hussey walking to the crease at six or seven.

Angelo Mathews (Sri Lanka): 119 runs, average 23.80, strike rate 121.42, 3 sixes, 4 wickets, average 20.75, economy rate 6.91 - A contentious pick maybe, but with Kieron Pollard and Shahid Afridi having poor tournaments, Mathews pips Steve Smith, Tim Bresnan, Scott Styris and Daniel Vettori to the all-rounder slot. Had a good economy rate with the ball and his innings against India helped Sri Lanka into the semi-finals.

Graeme Swann (England): 10 wickets, average 14.40, economy rate 6.54 - The rise and rise of Swann continued. Not only takes regular wickets with his attacking bowling but does so at a miserly economy rate. His spell in the final put another nail in the Australian coffin. The best spinner in the tournament even if Steve Smith too one more wicket.

Stuart Broad (England): 8 wickets, average 17.50, economy rate 6.72 - Mitchell Johnson may have just had better figures, but Broad didn't suffer the aberration that was Umar Akmal's assault on the Australian bowler in the semi-final. In any case, Broad's mostly short of a length bowling was highly effective in the middle and the end of the twenty overs. Mohammad Aamer and Ryan Sidebottom also came close to selection here.

Dirk Nannes (Australia): 14 wickets, average 13.07, economy rate 7.03 - The leading wicket-taker in the competition only made his first-class debut at the age of 29. His bursts with the new ball along with partner-in-crime Tait, blew away most teams except Pakistan in the semi-final and England. On this form, should be in the Aussie one day side too.

Shaun Tait (Australia): 9 wickets, average 14.55, economy rate 5.53 - Despite the ease with which Pietersen played him in the final, Tait was magnificent throughout the competition. His economy rate was one of the best and the Indian top order are still probably having nightmares about facing him on the Bridgetown wicket.

 

Comments

[Mock Wah]

I don't know, its gone quite like the way the tournament has. It's too english for my liking ;) perhaps have Ajmal and/or Aamer in. Mathews just dint have much for competition.

[The Reverse Sweep]

I plead guilty to including a lot of Englishmen in the team. We did win it! I didn't include it in the post, but Ajmal was the second best spinner in the tournament in my opinion. If only he could bowl that over to Hussey again...

[Shridhar Jaju]

When I was a child, I learnt that when you attack, you might give away a few runs... but this theory does not seem to apply to swann... who was his coach??

[Mahek]

The only change I'd make is either Ajmal or Langeveldt for Broad.

[The Reverse Sweep]

Yes, Swanny does seem to buck the trend here, although Warne was another attacking spinner that didn't leak runs. I guess it is a mixture of attack, variation, accuracy and psychology that helps Swann achieve this.

[The Reverse Sweep]

Fair point on Ajmal, but I felt I couldn't really include him after that final over to Hussey. Langeveldt was impressive too but mostly with the new ball. I should have mentioned him, but I'd still go for Nannes and Tait, with Aamer and Sidebottom my next two choices

[Mahek]

I think Langeveldt bowled better at the end of the innings rather than at the start, most of his wickets came after the halfway mark of the innings. Nannes isn't the best death bowler around and that skill is Langeveldt's specialty so to me it makes sense to let Nannes bowl upfront and have someone like Langeveldt to end the innings.

[Mock Wah]

I'd agree with Mahek on Langeveldt. But what I implied was Mathews was not so good to make a dream team. Perhaps Swann could play higher up, and Ajmal/Aamer could fit in. Also Sammy was really good with the ball, perhaps better than Mathews u reckon?

[The Reverse Sweep]

You could be right Mahek. You may have to forgive me for a bit of jingoistic celebration of England finally winning a limited overs trophy for my pick of Broad above Langeveldt!!

[The Reverse Sweep]

Thanks Mock Wah. The choice of Mathews was indeed a contentious one and Swann could bat at seven I suppose to allow Ajmal or Aamer in. I'll stick with my original choice but will admit that it was a borderline one. Without that last over to Hussey, it would have been hard for me to leave out Ajmal.

[Mahek]

Haha, I should know something about jingoism. Afterall, my country thrives on it :)