Salamuddin's All Time Test Match X1

[archie mac]

Hello Archie, long time no speak, how are you doing mate.

Richard has done a good job explaining that Lillee had that Warneesque X-Factor which led to them both becoming possibly the most overrated bowlers in cricket. Any claim that Lillee was 'the complete fast bowler' is easily disproven by the fact that he often found left-handers a far more challenging propostition, was not among the elite at running through the tail due to the lack of a good yorker, and his record in the subcontinent does not compare with Marshall and McGrath who performed everywhere and anywhere.

I would agree that O'Reilly was undeniably the pre-eminent bowler of the inter-war period and also has a justifiable claim to the title of greatest Australian spinner, but would be interested to know your reasoning for ranking him above Murali.

G'day mate,

Just on Lillee I agree re-the yorker and that he was not good at bowling to the tail, but I would take a fast bowler to dismiss the top order anyday, and then bring on the lesser bowlers to dismiss the tail. Also he hardly played in the SC (I think we had this discussion before?)

Not to upset anyone, but I don't believe Murli bowls fairly, this is just my personal opinion, and I do not want to have the: does he doesn't he argument with people. As it is like trying to convince 'the right to life people' that abortion is the Woman's choice and vice versa

 

[Jono]

He looked pretty darn impressive at Bridgetown, Richard. And had he had more support in the second dig, I really did see him make a big score there. And he got a pretty good delivery in the first dig, which would have consumed most left handers, IMHO. He did struggle for 3 innings (the 2nd in the first test and the whole 2nd test) but he really looked as sharp as he ever did at both Bridgetown and at St. Johns. But he did look out of sorts in the 4 tests against England. And I have seen plenty of batters go through 4 tests looking out of sorts. And he did manage a 70 with THAT form too there, didn't he? And if I am not wrong, he got a couple of lousy decisions as well. Not sure about that, but gotta check.

Haha Honest, I've never seen a man follow and know so much of a player's career not from the team they support as you do with Lara.

 

[Matt79]

Posted this previously but, what the hey:

Hobbs
Gavaskar
Bradman
Hammond
Richards/Weekes
Sobers
Gilchrist
Warne
Akram
Marshall
Lillee

My second XI would be something like:
Hutton
B. Richards
Headley
Tendulkar
Richards/Weekes (whichever was left out of the 1st team)
A. Flower
Imran
Hadlee
Lindwall
Ambrose
O'Reilly

 

[adharcric]

No McGrath?

 

[Matt79]

I'd rate McGrath ahead of Imran, and marginally ahead of Hadlee, but their batting gives the team a much more solid look and I can deal with having two such "inferior" bowlers in my team. Akram is probably the least secure quick in the 1st XI and Ambrose would replace him. McGrath is the next quick off the mark, but Davidson is also unlucky, as is SF Barnes, Allan Donald, and half a dozen others...

For arguments sake: 3rd XI something like
Ponsford
Morris
Walcott
G. Pollock
Lara (I forgot Headley in my 2nd XI - editted to rectify this above)
Botham
Healy
Davidson
Laker
Trueman
McGrath

 

[Richard]

Haha Honest, I've never seen a man follow and know so much of a player's career not from the team they support as you do with Lara.

Shame you didn't know me in Aravinda de Silva's career.

 

[honestbharani]

Haha Honest, I've never seen a man follow and know so much of a player's career not from the team they support as you do with Lara.

Well, generally even I wouldn't.



But it's LARA!!!!


I have followed Warney's career rather closely too, actually. IN fact, I followed his career a bit more closely than I do Murali's.


The thing is that till a year and a half ago, I was a student and I basically had all the time in the world to follow all my fave players from other teams and stuff. Now, with work, I only follow very very few players. Lara, Murali, KP and a few more. And of these I only try to follow Lara live as much as possible. The others, I tend to go for highlights.


That is the reason I am not able to post too much here too.

 

[JBH001]

Well, its been a while since I put up an XI...

So, with a little thought, but not much really, here it is.

1. J B Hobbs
2. L Hutton
3. D Bradman
4. G Chappell
5. V Richards
6. A Gilchrist
7. S Warne
8. M Marshall
9. D Lillee
10. M Muralitharan
11. S Barnes
12. K Miller

 

[archie mac]

Well, its been a while since I put up an XI...

So, with a little thought, but not much really, here it is.

1. J B Hobbs
2. L Hutton
3. D Bradman
4. G Chappell
5. V Richards
6. A Gilchrist
7. S Warne
8. M Marshall
9. D Lillee
10. M Muralitharan
11. S Barnes
12. K Miller

Bit of a tail, maybe Miller for Lillee or Marshall?

 

[The Sean]

It's been a while for me too, but this seems as good a thread as any to come back to...

Jack Hobbs
WG Grace
Don Bradman
Vivian Richards
Sachin Tendulkar
Garry Sobers
Adam Gilchrist
Richard Hadlee
Malcolm Marshall
Shane Warne
Sydney Barnes

And just to show, as others have, how open this is - here's a second and third XI that could beat it:

2nd XI

Len Hutton
Sunil Gavaskar
Walter Hammond
George Headley
Brian Lara
Keith Miller
Imran Khan
Alan Knott
Dennis Lillee
Muttiah Muralitharan
Glen McGrath

3rd XI

Herbert Sutcliffe
Victor Trumper
Ricky Ponting (no, I'm not kidding...)
Graeme Pollock
Greg Chappell
Ian Botham
Wasim Akram
Ray Lindwall
Jack Blackham
Curtley Ambrose
Bill O'Reilly

Now I'm started I want to give a 4th, 5th, 6th etc.... I feel like Geoff Armstrong.

EDIT - just realised I'd discounted Grace on the basis of not playing enough Test cricket, but then picked Barry Richards in the 3rd XI.

So screw it - Grace in the firsts with Hobbs, Sunny opening the seconds with Hutton, and Vic demoted to form a brilliant combination with Sutcliffe for the thirds. And apologies to Barry, who has to make do with a spot now in the 4th XI.

 

[The Sean]

I'd rate McGrath ahead of Imran, and marginally ahead of Hadlee, but their batting gives the team a much more solid look and I can deal with having two such "inferior" bowlers in my team. Akram is probably the least secure quick in the 1st XI and Ambrose would replace him. McGrath is the next quick off the mark, but Davidson is also unlucky, as is SF Barnes, Allan Donald, and half a dozen others...

For arguments sake: 3rd XI something like
Ponsford
Morris
Walcott
G. Pollock
Lara (I forgot Headley in my 2nd XI - editted to rectify this above)
Botham
Healy
Davidson
Laker
Trueman
McGrath

Mate, did you really just pick three XIs without the words Keith, Ross or Miller?

 

[Matt79]

Yep - and I also didn't mention Vic Trumper. As I said, it was off the top of my head and late at night and... yeah, no excuses really!

Slot Trumper in for Barry Richards in the 2nd XI, and replace Ponsford with Richards in the 3rd. Boot Botham out in favour of Miller in the 3rd, and I might be talking some sense.

Please don't drum me out of the club or take my secret decoder ring away...

 

[silentstriker]

First XI:​

1. Hobbs
2. Gavaskar
3. Bradman
4. Tendulkar
5. Sir Viv
6. Sobers
7. Gilchrist
8. Imran
9. Marshall
10. McGrath
11. Murali

Second XI:​

1. Hutton
2. Sutcliffe
3. Hammond
4. Chappell
5. Lara
6. Headley
7. Miller
8. Knott
9. Warne
10. Trueman
11. Barnes

Third XI:​

1. Barry Richards
2. Weekes
3. Ponting
4. Pollock
5. Walcott
6. Botham
7. Healy
8. Hadlee
9. Trueman
10. Ambrose
11. Laker

 

[Ikki]

SS, I thought you said you rated Warne higher than Murali? (not starting a debate here)

My 1st XI:

1. Hobbs
2. Hayden
3. Bradman
4. Lara
5. Viv
6. Sobers
7. Gilchrist
8. Imran
9. Warne
10. Lillee
11. McGrath

The way things are going I wouldn't think it bold to say Hussey and Ponting will be challenging places in that squad.

EDIT: Didn't think I was that biased but I have 6 Aussies in the squad.

 

[silentstriker]

SS, I thought you said you rated Warne higher than Murali? (not starting a debate here)

Ask me tomorrow, and likely I'll have changed my mind again. I don't think the doosra (anyones' doosra, including Bhajji) is legal, but the cricketing authorities say it is, and thats the way the cookie crumbles. I go back and forth on whether I should put him there. I personally like watching Warne and Australia more, and I do think that if you look at Warne's figures in SL and extrapolate how he would be if he played half his games there, you'd have to say that they are virtually equivalently in terms of quality of spin, with Warne coming out ahead only due to the doubts surrounding Murali and also for Warne's superior batting.

 

[Ikki]

Ask me tomorrow, and likely I'll have changed my mind again. I don't think the doosra (anyones' doosra, including Bhajji) is legal, but the cricketing authorities say it is, and thats the way the cookie crumbles. I go back and forth on whether I should put him there. I personally like watching Warne and Australia more, and I do think that if you look at Warne's figures in SL and extrapolate how he would be if he played half his games there, you'd have to say that they are virtually equivalently in terms of quality of spin, with Warne coming out ahead only due to the doubts surrounding Murali and also for Warne's superior batting.

I said I wouldn't start a debate ...I say this because you brought it up: give Murali Warne's home figures (which are pretty effin good - Murali's Australia record is shocking) and give Warne Murali's home figures (which are actually worse than Warne's) and Warne is superior in pretty much every area.

 

[silentstriker]

SS, I thought you said you rated Warne higher than Murali? (not starting a debate here)

My 1st XI:

1. Hobbs
2. Hayden
3. Bradman
4. Lara
5. Viv
6. Sobers
7. Gilchrist
8. Imran
9. Warne
10. Lillee
11. McGrath

The way things are going I wouldn't think it bold to say Hussey and Ponting will be challenging places in that squad.

EDIT: Didn't think I was that biased but I have 6 Aussies in the squad.

Hayden in the first all time XI is ridiculous. He would be in third XI at best, there have been too many good openers. Lots of English ones, in fact.

 

[PhoenixFire]

Hayden in the first all time XI is ridiculous. He would be in third XI at best, there have been too many good openers. Lots of English ones, in fact.

5th or 6th at best for me tbh.

 

[Ikki]

Hayden in the first all time XI is ridiculous. He would be in third XI at best, there have been too many good openers. Lots of English ones, in fact.

Sorry I disagree. Hayden now may not look like it but at his peak you would have been hard pressed to find 'lots of English ones' better. In fact, his current career figures as they stand are impressive. Not Bradmanesque but definitely in there.

Unpopular, I know. But I know more of Hayden than the rest. Hayden having played in an actual era I watched, and I find him fitting.

 

[The Sean]

Hayden in the first all time XI is ridiculous. He would be in third XI at best, there have been too many good openers. Lots of English ones, in fact.

Agreed. If I've got Grace in my first XI, then Haydos walks out with Gordon Greenidge to open for the 5th XI. If Grace isn't considered (as in my team above which has Hobbs and Sunny opening), then one of Matty or Gordon would move up to the 4ths. I rate Hayden a lot more than many on this forum, and yet I still couldn't legitimately get him any higher than that when you consider the great openers through history. Indeed, many would say I'm a biased even putting him that high.