Why can't anyone decide on two openers in an all-time Australian XI?

[Jager]

I've got a strong feeling that Trumper was a slogger.

Just putting it out there...

If so, a really really good one - personally I think he was just carefree

 

[kyear2]

Bat Trumper at 5 - had much success there, far more than opening.

1. Simpson
2. Lawry/Morris
3. Bradman
4. Harvey/Chappell
5. Trumper

Do you really place Harvey above Chappell and Ponting?
Additionally since Trumper played the overwhelming majority of innings as an opening batsman, if he doen't make it there, he shouldn't make it anywhere. It's like playing Worrell, Walcott or Richards as an opening batsman just because they played innings there. Plus the Aussie middle order doesn't need the help, Chappell, Border, Miller, Ponting and Harvey pretty much have things covered. So looking over Trumpers opening figures it would have to be.

Morris and Simpson.

 

[Red]

Do you really place Harvey above Chappell and Ponting?
Additionally since Trumper played the overwhelming majority of innings as an opening batsman, if he doen't make it there, he shouldn't make it anywhere. It's like playing Worrell, Walcott or Richards as an opening batsman just because they played innings there. Plus the Aussie middle order doesn't need the help, Chappell, Border, Miller, Ponting and Harvey pretty much have things covered. So looking over Trumpers opening figures it would have to be.

Morris and Simpson.

Trumper played his innings all over the place. He played 32 opening, but 31 in the middle order (3,4,5,6,7). I think the trend in those days when conditions were much more variable was to move your best bat around in the order.

FWIW, I personally rate Harvey as Australia's equal second best batsman with G. Chappell. Slightly above Ponting as Harvey had no obvious weakness, whereas Ponting is susceptible to good off spin and edging the quicks. Harvey was a great all round batsman against pace or spin, and very good on crap wickets. I rate Border very highly as well. Chappell, Harvey, Ponting and Border are all right up there.

 

[NUFAN]

I dispute the fact that Ponting has a weakness edging quicks and against good offspin. Sure Harby was all over him, but Ponting has produced some brilliant innings against Murali and others.

Now if you said lbw playing the wrong line OR the short ball more recently I would agree. Also reckon Harvey must have had some sort of weakness its just that he wasn't under the microscope as much.

As for the thread question - Morris and Simpson for me, today.

 

[Jager]

I dispute the fact that Ponting has a weakness edging quicks and against good offspin. Sure Harby was all over him, but Ponting has produced some brilliant innings against Murali and others.

Now if you said lbw playing the wrong line OR the short ball more recently I would agree. Also reckon Harvey must have had some sort of weakness its just that he wasn't under the microscope as much.

As for the thread question - Morris and Simpson for me, today.

I think if Harvey was around now he would occasionally be labelled as irresponsible due to his attacking nature - he would go out to the odd loose shot

 

[watson]

1. Simpson
2. Lawry
3. Bradman
4. G.Chappell
5. Miller
6. Border
7. Gilchrist

I'd quite happily put Trumper or Harvey at No.6, but with Bradman, Chappell, Miller and Gilchrist all thrashing the ball about, do you really need another attacking middle-order batsman? Someone has to rotate the strike and keep the house in order. Besides, Border was a legend batting with the tail. His effort in Melbourne with Thomo (1983) springs to mind. Although, in a must win situation, I'd replace Border with Harvey, and Simpson with Trumper.

But to be honest, and as a general rule, if Australia were to face a rampaging Adcock + Heine, Trueman + Larwood, or Marshall + Garner, then I'd want Simpson and Border batting 'for my life'.

 

[Red]

It comes down to personal preference really. I personally love Neil Harvey, that doesn't mean he's necessarily better than Ponting or Border, I'd say they're about equals in most aspects of the game. I include Harvey because I like him and his attitude, and his left handedness works well with Chappell, Bradman and Miller.

I reckon most people would agree you'd have Bradman at 3 and G. Chappell at 4.

Then most include Miller at either 5 or 6 as an all rounder.

Leaving one middle order spot.

Harvey, Ponting and Border are all equally deserving of that spot.

In terms of openers, you could make a good case for any two of Trumper, Morris, Lawry, Simpson and Hayden. And to a lesser extent Langer, Taylor, Slater and a few others.

 

[watson]

Bradman rated Ponsford very highly, and better than Trumper as an opener. Bradman had Ponsford and Morris in his Aussie ATG team.

So let's add Ponsford as a front-line option?

Incidently, I was never a fan of Ponsford because I saw him as rather ponderous at the crease when facing the quicks. However, his courage during the Bodyline series was exceptional, and has to be admired. I think that Ponsford's courage and durability make up for his minor failings and increase his statue.

 

[Flametree]

Is there a reason why Barnes so rarely gets a mention in these discussions? He did average 71 as an opener. Is it just because England weren't much good immediately after the war, or has his rather.... interesting reputation as a person ruined his on-field reputation?

And how about Woodfull?

 

[Red]

Bradman rated Ponsford very highly, and better than Trumper as an opener. Bradman had Ponsford and Morris in his Aussie ATG team.

So let's add Ponsford as a front-line option?

Incidently, I was never a fan of Ponsford because I saw him as rather ponderous at the crease when facing the quicks. However, his courage during the Bodyline series was exceptional, and has to be admired. I think that Ponsford's courage and durability make up for his minor failings and increase his statue.

Yeh, I just forgot him in that list. Absolutely. Woodful too. Been a big week!

Sid Barnes is an interesting case. War took his best years, and he seems to have been a bizarre dude. But Bradman loved his batting and thought that either he or Barnes must play to win all the games in '48.

I have a feeling he is one guy who could have legitimately nearly been as good as the Don.

 

[Debris]

Bradman rated Ponsford very highly, and better than Trumper as an opener. Bradman had Ponsford and Morris in his Aussie ATG team.

So let's add Ponsford as a front-line option?

Incidently, I was never a fan of Ponsford because I saw him as rather ponderous at the crease when facing the quicks. However, his courage during the Bodyline series was exceptional, and has to be admired. I think that Ponsford's courage and durability make up for his minor failings and increase his statue.

Pretty sure that Bradman never saw Trumper bat so how would he know. He is guessing like the rest of us.

 

[kyear2]

So Simpson the consensus pick for one spot, with Trumper and Lawry running neck and neck. With Morris out of the picture and Trumper underwelming as an opener (stats wise at least), combined with the succesful partnership between the two should give Lawry the edge.

Agreement?

That would lead to an Aussie XI of

Bill Lawry
Bob Simpson ^
Don Bradman *
Greg Chappell ^
Allan Border
Keith Miller
Adam Gilchrist +
Shane Warne ^
Dennis Lillee
Bill O'Reilly
Glenn Mcgrath

With Simpson though would another leggie be required, or should they then go with the speed and swing of Lindwall or the LH variation of Davidson, both of whom would strengthen the lower order batting. Or just stick to the team as is and let Simpson focus on his batting and slipping.
On another note, a slip cordon of Simpson, Chappell and Warne is unequalled.

 

[kyear2]

Imagine that team againts one of

Gordon Greenidge
Conrad Hunte / Frank Worrell (opened 4 times in tests)
George Headley
Vivian Richards
Brian Lara
Garry Sobers
Clyde Walcott
Malcolm Marshall
Curtly Ambrose
Michael Holding
Lance Gibbs / Andy Roberts

Everton Weekes

 

[kyear2]

Or

Barry Richards
Graeme Smith
Jacques Kallis
Graeme Pollock
Dudley Nourse
Aubrey Faulkner
Dennis Lindsay
Mike Procter
Dale Steyn
Hugh Tayfield
Allan Donald

or Finally

Jack Hobbs
Len Hutton
Wally Hammond
Dennis Compton
Ken Barrington
Ian Botham
Allan Knott
Fred Trueman
Harold Larwood
Syd Barnes
Jim Laker

 

[Red]

So Simpson the consensus pick for one spot, with Trumper and Lawry running neck and neck. With Morris out of the picture and Trumper underwelming as an opener (stats wise at least), combined with the succesful partnership between the two should give Lawry the edge.

Agreement?

That would lead to an Aussie XI of

Bill Lawry
Bob Simpson ^
Don Bradman *
Greg Chappell ^
Allan Border
Keith Miller
Adam Gilchrist +
Shane Warne ^
Dennis Lillee
Bill O'Reilly
Glenn Mcgrath

With Simpson though would another leggie be required, or should they then go with the speed and swing of Lindwall or the LH variation of Davidson, both of whom would strengthen the lower order batting. Or just stick to the team as is and let Simpson focus on his batting and slipping.
On another note, a slip cordon of Simpson, Chappell and Warne is unequalled.

Fair enough Kyear. Good team. I'd still take Trumper over Lawry, purely on the basis of wanting to score quickly to win. And I'd take Harvey over Border (just).

On a pedantic note (as I rate fielding very highly), Miller was a brilliant slipper, while Warne was just adequate I reckon. Border a good slip as well. I'd say the starting slip cordon for this team would be:
1st- Simpson
2nd- G.Chappell
3rd- Miller

Border was good at midwicket and Bradman good in covers. I have no indication of what type of fielder Trumper was. I think Lawry was good in close, bat-pad etc.

On Simpson's bowling, if you have Warne and O'Reilly in the team, you wouldn't need Simmo to bowl, especially with 5 frontline options.

I really feel the pain leaving Lindwall out of these line-ups, but with McGrath and Lillee definite for me, the selection of Miller as a high quality third quick who can also bat at 5 or 6 allows both Warne and O'Reilly to play together, which I love the idea of. In pace conditions (old WACA), I'd leave out either of O'Reilly or Warne and bring Lindwall in no dramas.

Imagine that team againts one of

Gordon Greenidge
Conrad Hunte / Frank Worrell (opened 4 times in tests)
George Headley
Vivian Richards
Brian Lara
Garry Sobers
Clyde Walcott
Malcolm Marshall
Curtly Ambrose
Michael Holding
Lance Gibbs / Andy Roberts

Everton Weekes

You know more about WIs than me, do you reckon Headley could open? Seems more balanced to me if he does.

Those two teams (Aus and WIs) would be the strongest I think. England would probably have:

Hobbs
Sutcliffe
Hutton
Barrington/Compton/May
Hammond
Botham/Woolley
Knott
Larwood
Trueman
Underwood/Laker/Rhodes
Barnes

 

[watson]

I used to play Botham or Woolley at No.6 but now believe that their batting record is not quite good enough for a No.6 batsman. The medium paced skills of Hammond also make the inclusion of Botham less essential (heresy I know!)

It has also become apparent that SF Barnes should be viewed as a fast leg-break bowler and finger-spinner. Not a fast-medium seam bowler. Therefore, he could easily take over the role as the No.1 England spin bowler.

I have warmed to Harold Larwood after Jager's many posts and think that a pace attack of Larwood-Trueman- Snow would be brutal. Therefore;

01. Hobbs
02. Hutton
03. Hammond
04. Barrington
05. Compton
06. May*
07. Knott#
08. Larwood
09. Snow
10. Trueman
11. Barnes

 

[Jager]

watson

Also I think your point on Barnes is what makes him a secret weapon in drafts - if you pick him up, you can make him a seamer or a spinner depending on your other bowling picks.

Godly attack there, for sure. I've warmed to Snow now that you've mentioned him a few times, as a matter of fact.

I'd do the batting order differently though - I'd exclude Barrington for Hutton

1. Hobbs
2. Sutcliffe
3. Hutton
4. Hammond
5. May
6. Compton

Doesn't quite look right, but it's the best way to get all of the best English batsmen into the side. The problem is that there's 3 openers and 3 batsmen who should be playing in the top 4 obviously, but it's the best I can do

 

[Red]

For me, leaving Botham out is a big gamble.

It's difficult because he had a long career, and he tapered badly at the end.

I think at one point in his career, he was every bit as good a pace bowler as anyone else mentioned.

And, far out, his belligerent batting is something I'd want in my team. I remember once as a really young kid watching him completely and utterly destroy Merv Hughes, treated him like a fourth grade fill in trundler. And Merv was going well back then too. Balls were flying everywhere.

 

[AndyZaltzHair]

01. Hobbs
02. Hutton
03. Hammond
04. Barrington
05. Compton
06. May*
07. Knott#
08. Larwood
09. Snow
10. Trueman
11. Barnes

Must say this is one of the best combination of England XI, covers every ground; tempting to put Woolley out there but I think with Hammond as fifth option, all bases are covered

 

[watson]

Needs a left hander in the middle-order, and therefore would have liked to play Leyland instead of Compton or May. But didn't want to upset the apple cart too much