Current players who can/will make all time XI's

[Lillian Thomson]

I find it striking that in these kinds of debate some people tend to be reluctant to acknowledge a player's genius until the end of his career.

In most cases that's because at the moment they wouldn't get into an All Time XI, but if they achieve enough in the rest of their career they might.....certainly true of Kevin Pietersen.

 

[weldone]

What's England's top order then?

Hobbs
Hutton
Barrington
Hammond
Compton

I don't think he's as good as Compton yet, but I can certainly see him having a case 10 years down the line.

I'd prefer swapping Hammond and Barrington in the batting order...

 

[Richard]

What's England's top order then?

Hobbs
Hutton
Barrington
Hammond
Compton

I don't think he's as good as Compton yet, but I can certainly see him having a case 10 years down the line.

Hobbs
Sutcliffe
Hutton
Hammond
Barrington
Compton
Ames\Knott
for mine.

I'll be very interested to see whether Pietersen constructs a case for replacing Compton and\or Barrington. Never really been sure who to rate better out of those two.

I won't be surprised if we never again see a player of the calibre of the top four from this country TBH.

 

[roseboy64]

None for West Indies.

 

[Arjun]

Why can't Flintoff make the all-time XI? It's tough in Tests, but in ODI's, he fits in just nicely. With Beefy and him at six and seven, you'd have a place for a superior wicketkeeper, such as Knott or Taylor, adding some versatility to that lineup. No doubt there are better bowlers from the past, but if you wish to stretch your batting lineup and still choose a genuine wicketkeeper, he's a good choice.

 

[Arjun]

None for West Indies.

Like I said, that all-time XI is complete, unless you can sneak in Chanderpaul.

 

[Richard]

Why can't Flintoff make the all-time XI? It's tough in Tests, but in ODI's, he fits in just nicely. With Beefy and him at six and seven, you'd have a place for a superior wicketkeeper, such as Knott or Taylor, adding some versatility to that lineup.

Botham would only just get into a 1970s\80s England ODI XI, due to lack of other options. Flintoff would never get close to an England 1900-current-day Test XI either.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Why can't Flintoff make the all-time XI? It's tough in Tests, but in ODI's, he fits in just nicely. With Beefy and him at six and seven, you'd have a place for a superior wicketkeeper, such as Knott or Taylor, adding some versatility to that lineup. No doubt there are better bowlers from the past, but if you wish to stretch your batting lineup and still choose a genuine wicketkeeper, he's a good choice.

If Alan Knott was around today he'd be the first name on an ODI team sheet, probably opening the batting with the current mentality, Bob Taylor wouldn't get a sniff.

 

[Dissector]

Of course, only the last makes it because of his bowling alone, and I doubt if South Africa's all-time XI will ever have a spinner.

You probably haven't heard of Aubrey Faulkner

As for the West Indies, I actually think that Bravo has the potential to sneak in as a second all-rounder behind Sobers. For all the talk of the quartet, the West Indies showed plenty of times that three great quicks were enough to win test matches. Plus Sobers and Bravo himself are quite capable with the ball and I really like the idea of having someone like Bravo coming in at 7 or 8. I think Bravo has the potential to average 40 with the bat and 30 with the ball and if achieves that he could be a contender for the West Indies all-time team.

 

[Richard]

You probably haven't heard of Aubrey Faulkner

Faulkner wouldn't play as a specialist bowler (as wouldn't either of Vogler or Schwarz) though, it'd have to be as an all-rounder. South Africa's seamers of the '50s and '60s and '90s were all better than any of the wristspinners of the '00s..

 

[Dissector]

I didn't say Faulkner would be picked only for his bowling; just that there were potential spinners for a SA XI. Hugh Tayfield is another spinner who would be a strong contender.

 

[Richard]

Only if the match was played on uncovered wickets. If they were covered, not a chance.

 

[zaremba]

South Africa's seamers of the '50s and '60s and '90s were all better than any of the wristspinners of the '00s..

Now there's a bold comparison Richard! Very different types of bowlers, playing in very different eras, one group of whom (I imagine!) you never saw bowl...

 

[Richard]

I don't need to have seen Neil Adcock bowl live to know he was a magnificent bowler TBH. Have read a few bits and pieces about him and seen a few bits of footage (and stills) and he was seriously, seriously good. SA's best pre-Donald.

Sure, Schwarz, Vogler and Faulkner were excellent as well, of course they were. But they all seem to fit the classical "wayward" wristspinner archetype, even though batsmen were generally pretty attacking in the Golden Age era. I have doubts as to whether any were especially better bowlers than Stuart MacGill or Arthur Mailey.

 

[zaremba]

You may well be right. Actually I suspect this is a truth about most players from the so-called "golden age", both batsmen and bowlers. Given that cricket is now played much more widely than then, and played truly professionally and with scientific methods, and given the accumulated developments in play between then and now, I suspect that the standards of modern players are far ahead of the greats of the 19th and early 20th centuries.

 

[Richard]

In some cases, that maybe true. However I find it inconceivable that the likes of Jack Hobbs and Victor Trumper would be anything but superlative at any time in the game's history.

 

[simmy]

KP stands out for England.

So does Cook tbf... as my signature suggests.


I am backing Ross Taylor as an outside shout for NZ if he sorts his head out.

 

[aussie]

I don't need to have seen Neil Adcock bowl live to know he was a magnificent bowler TBH. Have read a few bits and pieces about him and seen a few bits of footage (and stills) and he was seriously, seriously good. SA's best pre-Donald.

Really?, where the only footage i ever saw of him was on a DVD by the name of Cricket the Great bowlers.

Sure, Schwarz, Vogler and Faulkner were excellent as well, of course they were. But they all seem to fit the classical "wayward" wristspinner archetype, even though batsmen were generally pretty attacking in the Golden Age era. I have doubts as to whether any were especially better bowlers than Stuart MacGill or Arthur Mailey.

Interesting i never got that idea especially about Faulkner TBH. Tell me more..

 

[aussie]

You probably haven't heard of Aubrey Faulkner

As for the West Indies, I actually think that Bravo has the potential to sneak in as a second all-rounder behind Sobers. For all the talk of the quartet, the West Indies showed plenty of times that three great quicks were enough to win test matches. Plus Sobers and Bravo himself are quite capable with the ball and I really like the idea of having someone like Bravo coming in at 7 or 8. I think Bravo has the potential to average 40 with the bat and 30 with the ball and if achieves that he could be a contender for the West Indies all-time team.

All true on Bravo but he is still a long way off in achieving such a status to be acclaimed in a windies all-time XI. Even if the one was to pick 3 seamers for them, Lance Gibbs would come in.

 

[Richard]

Really?, where the only footage i ever saw of him was on a DVD by the name of Cricket the Great bowlers.

Can't really remember TBH, it wasn't on any specialist compilation. Was simply during some break or other, IIRR it was in the C4 days. Presumably it'd have been on the 2003 SA tour, but I don't remember for certain. Footage was obviously shot on tour to England. I've often wondered if there was anything of him bowling in Australia too.

Interesting i never got that idea especially about Faulkner TBH. Tell me more..

All of them were classic wristspinners. Before Grimmett (with Barnes an exception) it was near enough accepted as fact that wristspin could not be controlled to particularly good levels, as no-one had ever done it. Schwarz, Vogler and Faulkner were such good attacking bowlers that they could still serve their team well despite leaking runs, of course, but that's what they did.

Of course, it remains true that virtually no wristspinners can bowl with the requistite control. Only a tiny number have ever done it through Test history.