Who would you pick in the Greatest Cricket XI of YOUR Lifetime?

[Matt79]

Don Bradman not only had Tallon above Lindwall in his Best XI, he thought enough of Tallon's batting to rather controversially nominate him to bat at 6. He supposedly maintained (assuming Perry didn't make the whole thing up) that Tallon was a much better batsman than he ever got the chance to show in international cricket, having been unable to displace the incumbent for a long time and then WWII coinciding with what Bradman felt would have been his batting peak.

Not sure about all of that, but I think it might be a fair surmise to say that while Lindwall got as much out of himself as a batsman as was possible, Tallon either failed to fulfil his potential on the international stage or else circumstances meant that we never saw the best of him in tests as a batsman.

 

[zaremba]

I've never been convinced by the idea of Lindwall batting at 6 in an all-time Test XI with a FC average of 21.

 

[bagapath]

bradman's XI was the something "not even a mother would like". lillee, lindwall, bedser, oreilly, grimmett (and sobers) is an awesome attack. but it is definitely one bowler too many. that plus tallon's inclusion (though bradman is supposed to have said gilly would've been an automatic selection in the future) and morris as an opener ahead of hobbs, gavaskar and hutton (not even b.richards was better than this trio) makes it a weak team in the context of an all-time XI. I like SJS's team much much more than the don's.

 

[Matt79]

I guess my point was Bradman played with both Tallon and Lindwall and clearly rated Tallon as the better batsman.

As for Morris as opener, his rationale was that he wanted a left right opening combo. So there was a theory behind that choice, even if we don't agree with it.

 

[bagapath]

I guess my point was Bradman played with both Tallon and Lindwall and clearly rated Tallon as the better batsman.

I got that. Simply couldn't resist having a go at bradman's selction because that discussion on these forums had finished long before i became a member.

As for Morris as opener, his rationale was that he wanted a left right opening combo. So there was a theory behind that choice, even if we don't agree with it.

ok, then.

i guess that leaves only the rationale in having 3 pace bowlers and 2 spinners bowling attack (plus sobers) to be explained by the don. haven't read the book.

 

[Burgey]

In that case I would change my side for Tests slightly

1. Hutton
2. Gavaskar
3. Compton
4. Tendulkar
5. Weekes
6. Sobers
7. Miller
8. Tallon
9. Lindwall
10. Lillee
11. Warne
12. Murali

In case someone is wondering how Warne comes in after we take in players from an older era, its simple. By taking Miller, I am able to replace Benaud as the bowling all rounder. But this removes the leg spinner from the playing squad so I bring in Warne.

Haha - SJS that's an insanely great side.

 

[SJS]

Haha - SJS that's an insanely great side.

It has to be if it can leave out Harvey, both the Richards, Pollock, Lara and Chappell OR the great West Indian fast bowlers and yet be justifiable.

 

[SJS]

bradman's XI was the something "not even a mother would like". lillee, lindwall, bedser, oreilly, grimmett (and sobers) is an awesome attack. but it is definitely one bowler too many. that plus tallon's inclusion (though bradman is supposed to have said gilly would've been an automatic selection in the future) and morris as an opener ahead of hobbs, gavaskar and hutton (not even b.richards was better than this trio) makes it a weak team in the context of an all-time XI. I like SJS's team much much more than the don's.

Bradman was a bit unrealistic about his batting order and its depth. In the games that I studied for the stats I gave for Tallon and Lindwall here is the bating order at which they batted.

[B]Bat.ord	Tallon	Lindwall[/B]
7th	1	7
8th	16	6
9th	8	13
10th	10	1

Clearly they were number eight batsmen at best (both of them) and could bat at number seven in special situations. Lindwall batted at number seven (and Tallon at eight) in the entire five Test series against the 1947 Indians with an attack that had Vijay Hazare and an ageing Amarnath as important cogs in the attack. Both Lindwall and Talon might have, conceivably, batted a slot lower had the Indian attack been stronger.

 

[gwo]

Born 86, started watching around 93/94 so I'll go from then...

Sehwag
Hayden
Ponting
Tendulkar
Lara
Kallis
Gilchrist +
Warne (c)
Murali
Ambrose
McGrath

Honourable mentions to Shaun Pollock, Wasim, Waqar, Steve Waugh and Dravid.

tbh McGrath @ 9 plz. clearly better at the end of his career than Murali is nao.

 

[gimmethebat]

Greatest X1

1. Sunil Gavaskar
2. Gordon Greenidge
3. Viv Richards
4. Brian Lara
5. Ricky Ponting
6. Imran Khan
7. Ian Botham
8. Alan Knott
9. Shane Warne
10.Michael Holding
11.Muttiah Muralitharan

I was born in 1962 so i've seen all the above. They would take some beating.

 

[bagapath]

1. Sunil Gavaskar
2. Gordon Greenidge
3. Viv Richards
4. Brian Lara
5. Ricky Ponting
6. Imran Khan
7. Ian Botham
8. Alan Knott
9. Shane Warne
10.Michael Holding
11.Muttiah Muralitharan

I was born in 1962 so i've seen all the above. They would take some beating.

mmm... without getting into the beaten to death - but always tempting - ponting vs sachin debate, my issue with your team is, considering the year you were born in, what made you choose ian botham (or even imran khan) over gary sobers as your all rounder? would be very interested to know your reasoning behind that call. imran and botham are two of my favorite cricketers, no doubt. but if i had seen sobers, based on what i've read so far, i would probably have him in any team i ever get to select

 

[fredfertang]

I'm a similar vintage to gimmethebat and also picked Botham over Sobers - the reason for me, and it is obviously a close call, is that at his peak Botham could, and on several occasions did, change the course of games with bat, ball or both and I feel his ability at that time as a bowler, in this context, outweighs Sobers consistency/reliability with the bat - of course if I was looking at the question on the basis of their overall records then Both would certainly give way to Sobers.

 

[NUFAN]

Would Greenidge make as many teams if it were not for his excellent opening partner Haynes?

 

[honestbharani]

Would Greenidge make as many teams if it were not for his excellent opening partner Haynes?

That is like asking will Warne make so many teams if it wasn't for his great bowling partner McGrath...

 

[Matt79]

1. Sunil Gavaskar
2. Gordon Greenidge
3. Viv Richards
4. Brian Lara
5. Ricky Ponting
6. Imran Khan
7. Ian Botham
8. Alan Knott
9. Shane Warne
10.Michael Holding
11.Muttiah Muralitharan

I was born in 1962 so i've seen all the above. They would take some beating.

That's a pretty damn good team. Similar to what SJS said, if you're able to leave out players like Tendulkar, Hadlee, Marshall, Lillee, Wasim Akram, Ambrose, etc etc AND be able to make valid arguments for all your selections, that's a pretty special team.

I would loved to have seen Knott play, sounds like he was tremendous value.

Welcome to CW by the way - good to have another member who can illuminate us Gen X's and Y's about years gone by.

 

[Matt79]

Would Greenidge make as many teams if it were not for his excellent opening partner Haynes?

Was he lucky to have two great partners in Fredricks and Haynes, or were they lucky to bat with him? It's a potentially endless loop of discussion, similar to Warne-McGrath or the Windies quartets.

 

[Trumpers_Ghost]

That's a pretty damn good team. Similar to what SJS said, if you're able to leave out players like Tendulkar, Hadlee, Marshall, Lillee, Wasim Akram, Ambrose, etc etc AND be able to make valid arguments for all your selections, that's a pretty special team.

I would loved to have seen Knott play, sounds like he was tremendous value.

Welcome to CW by the way - good to have another member who can illuminate us Gen X's and Y's about years gone by.

That's a really good point. As much as I roll my eyes at the ignorence of the likes of Richards, Imran, Border, Javed, Greenidge, Hadlee, Marshall, Shastri, Jones, Botham, Gower, etc........... I am still mostly relying on historical description into the likes of Lillee, Holding, Roberts, Gavaskar, Marsh, G.Chappell, Lloyd, Boycott, Willis, Kapil, Zaheer, Knott, etc; even thoough I saw most of them at the twilight of their careers.

cheers

 

[Jono]

tbh McGrath @ 9 plz. clearly better at the end of his career than Murali is nao.

Murali won his country a test match and ODI with the bat

 

[Matt79]

Ah, but Jono, does he have a test 50?

 

[gimmethebat]

mmm... without getting into the beaten to death - but always tempting - ponting vs sachin debate, my issue with your team is, considering the year you were born in, what made you choose ian botham (or even imran khan) over gary sobers as your all rounder? would be very interested to know your reasoning behind that call. imran and botham are two of my favorite cricketers, no doubt. but if i had seen sobers, based on what i've read so far, i would probably have him in any team i ever get to select

By the time I was old enough to form an opinion, Sir Garfield had pretty much reached the end of his career, and I never really remember him playing anyway. Hope that answers you r question.