Playing selector: Lets pick the best test XI of different eras

[Lillian Thomson]

Wasn't really that good a player compared to some people. The biggest legend ever, but not worthy of being in the company of Hammond and co.

It's impossible to judge WG Grace as a Test Cricketer. He was past 30 before he even had the opportunity to play Test Cricket and was over 50 when he played his final Test and he only played 22 Tests in 19 years.

 

[JBH001]

Wasn't really that good a player compared to some people. The biggest legend ever, but not worthy of being in the company of Hammond and co.

d00d, no offense, but thats a load of bullcrap.

I won't go into the arguments about the fact that he was beginning his decline when test cricket began. But, if you have the time you should read comments about his batting from his contemporaries and the immediate succeeding generation.

'The Champion' was held in a veneration bestowed on no-one else.
This based on the fact that he literally formed the foundations of modern batting, and the runs he scored in the 1870s in English FCC on woeful pitches, and also, of course, his personality.

It really would be a travesty to this whole process if he is barred even from selection.

 

[aussie tragic]

Okay, I’ve done the stats for the 1919-39 XI batsmen and I propose the selection criteria to be:Minimum Tests: 12, Batting Average: 40.00

This then means the following players make the cut:

Openers: Bill Brown (Aus), Herbie Collins (Aus), Jack Fingleton (Aus), Jack Hobbs (Eng), Bruce Mitchell (SA), Bill Ponsford (Aus), Herb Sutcliffe (Eng), Bill Woodfull (Aus)

# 3: Don Bradman (Aus), Wally Hammond (Eng), George Headley (WI), Charles Macartney (Aus), George Tyldesley (Eng)

# 4: Kumar Duleepsinhji (Eng), Patsy Hendren (Eng), Dudley Nourse (SA), Herbie Taylor (SA)

# 5: Joe Hardstaff Jr (Eng), Douglas Jardine (Eng), Maurice Leyland (Eng), Stan McCabe (Aus), Eddie Paynter (Eng), Jack Ryder (Aus)

Somehow, I think we should just select Bradman in at # 3 and move all other # 3's to the # 4 poll

 

[silentstriker]

Okay, I’ve done the stats for the 1919-39 XI batsmen and I propose the selection criteria to be:Minimum Tests: 12, Batting Average: 40.00

This then means the following players make the cut:

Openers: Bill Brown (Aus), Herbie Collins (Aus), Jack Fingleton (Aus), Jack Hobbs (Eng), Bruce Mitchell (SA), Bill Ponsford (Aus), Herb Sutcliffe (Eng), Bill Woodfull (Aus)

# 3: Don Bradman (Aus), Wally Hammond (Eng), George Headley (WI), Charles Macartney (Aus), George Tyldesley (Eng)

# 4: Kumar Duleepsinhji (Eng), Patsy Hendren (Eng), Dudley Nourse (SA), Herbie Taylor (SA)

# 5: Joe Hardstaff Jr (Eng), Douglas Jardine (Eng), Maurice Leyland (Eng), Stan McCabe (Aus), Eddie Paynter (Eng), Jack Ryder (Aus)

Why only 1920+? I would have liked Grace & Ranji to compete for a spot (not that I would necesarrily vote for them, but they were important players historically).

 

[aussie tragic]

Why only 1920+? I would have liked Grace & Ranji to compete for a spot (not that I would necesarrily vote for them, but they were important players historically).

And don't forget Trumper and Warrick Armstrong

They'll be in the pre-1914 XI, whereby we'll probably lower the batting average entry criteria to 32 (so WG can get in )

 

[silentstriker]

And don't forget Trumper and Warrick Armstrong

They'll be in the pre-1914 XI, whereby we'll probably lower the batting average entry criteria to 32 (so WG can get in )

Haha, good man.

 

[PhoenixFire]

d00d, no offense, but thats a load of bullcrap.

I won't go into the arguments about the fact that he was beginning his decline when test cricket began. But, if you have the time you should read comments about his batting from his contemporaries and the immediate succeeding generation.

'The Champion' was held in a veneration bestowed on no-one else.
This based on the fact that he literally formed the foundations of modern batting, and the runs he scored in the 1870s in English FCC on woeful pitches, and also, of course, his personality.

It really would be a travesty to this whole process if he is barred even from selection.

Doesn't compare to any greats of that era mate.

 

[bagapath]

i propose we keep the batting ave cut off at 30 for the pre 1914 team. and keep the bowling strike rate at less than 60 so that it reflects the pitches they played on.

for the 1919 - 1939 team it is better to select don at no.3 directly and keep the other middle order greats in contention for the no.4 and no.5 slots.

 

[bagapath]

AT! did you see the stats i posted earlier?

 

[aussie tragic]

AT! did you see the stats i posted earlier?

Yeah Mate, thanks for making it easier

I seperated out the pre-1914 era and added the following batsmen so far:

Jack Fingleton (Aus), George Tyldesley (Eng), Kumar Duleepsinhji (Eng), Douglas Jardine (Eng), Maurice Leyland (Eng), Jack Ryder (Aus)

btw, how did you miss Douglas Jardine, or was that an intentional protest over Bodyline

Oh yeah, I also deleted E Rowan (SA) as he doesn't meet the era criteria of 12 tests and ave > 40

 

[The Sean]

Will we at some point combine the Pre 1914 and 1919-39 teams to take on the 1946-06 side? The 46-06 team covers 60 years of Test cricket, and draws from a resource pool of up to 10 Test playing nations. 1919-39 covers only 20 years, and only 4 countries, just two of whom could be considered genuine powers. Likewise, the pre 1914 side covers only 27 years, and even fewer cricketers.

I have no problem picking teams for both eras, but if we are going to propose a final match-up, then I'd think it would be fairer to combine the two pre-1939 eras into one side to take on the 46-06ers.

 

[aussie tragic]

Will we at some point combine the Pre 1914 and 1919-39 teams to take on the 1946-06 side? I have no problem picking teams for both eras, but if we are going to propose a final match-up, then I'd think it would be fairer to combine the two pre-1939 eras into one side to take on the 46-06ers.

Just like we combined the 1986-05, 1966-85 and 1946-65 XI's into the 1946-06 team, we will also combine the 1919-39 and 1877-14 teams into the 1877-39 team....

 

[The Sean]

Just like we combined the 1986-05, 1966-85 and 1946-65 XI's into the 1946-06 team, we will also combine the 1919-39 and 1877-14 teams into the 1877-39 team....

Brilliant, thanks.

 

[aussie tragic]

Time to post the 1946-2006 World Test XI:

1. Sunil Gavaskar (51.12)
2. Len Hutton (54.62)
3. Viv Richards (50.23)
4. Sachin Tendulkar (55.11)
5. Brian Lara (52.88)
6. Gary Sobers (57.78) and (Bowl: 34.03)
7. Adam Gilchrist (48.66)
8. Malcom Marshall (18.85) and (Bowl: 20.94)
9. Shane Warne (17.32) and (Bowl: 25.41)
10. Muttiah Muralitharan (11.75) and (Bowl: 21.73)
11. Glenn McGrath (7.36) and (Bowl: 21.64)

And the 1946-2006 World Test Second XI:

1. Gordon Greenidge (44.72)
2. Saeed Anwar (45.52)
3. Ricky Ponting (58.95)
4. Greg Chappell (53.86)
5. Everton Weekes (58.61)
6. Imran Khan (37.69) and (Bowl: 22.81)
7. Alan Knott (32.75)
8. Richard Hadlee (27.16) and (Bowl: 22.29)
9. Jim Laker (14.08) and (Bowl: 21.24)
10. Dennis Lillee (13.71) and (Bowl: 23.92)
11. Curtley Ambrose (12.40) and (Bowl: 20.99)

 

[The Sean]

Two great sides.

Interestingly, while the First XI definitely has the batting edge, I'd back the second XI's bowling to be at least the equal, if not the superior of the Firsts. Particularly with regard to the pace attack - where Lillee-Ambrose-Hadlee-Imran outguns Marshall-McGrath-Sobers quite clearly for mine. Warne-Murali of course give the Firsts the spinning edge, but as an overall attack under all conditions I'd still lean toward the Seconds.

Looking forward to seeing what combinations the pre-war teams throw up to challenge them.

 

[silentstriker]

Well you have the four vs. two advantage in terms of main bowlers. But basicall you have #1 and #2 vs. #3 - #6. But I still agree. Was a mistake picking both spinners.

 

[adharcric]

No way, the first attack is clearly superior. You guys are underestimating the prospect of Murali and Warne bowling in tandem.

 

[aussie tragic]

1920-39 World XI has now commenced

btw, I placed Bradman into the # 3 slot without a poll, the Opener poll has now started and I'm cutting the poll time down to only 3-days for this team.

Please note this team is a bit light on allrounders as Armstrong, Faulkner and Rhodes are all excluded from this era (they are in the pre-1914 era). This just leaves the following who qualify as an allrounder (criertia Batting > 25; Bowling < 35):

Jack Gregory (Aus), Morris Nichols (Eng), Walter Robins (Eng) & Maurice Tate (Eng)

Edit: Gubby Allen (Eng) has also been added to the allrounders

 

[The Sean]

Frank Woolley?

 

[aussie tragic]

Frank Woolley?

During 1920-39, Frank Woolley played 42 tests and only took 44 wkts @ 43 so I didn't include him as an allrounder.