Watson's All-Time-Great Ashes Contest

[Eds]

Very interested to see who fill your final two slots in the England lineup. I myself would've found it very, very difficult to leave out Jardine & Larwood for an all-time Ashes contest, but judging by the makeup of your English XI, you plan to do just that.

 

[harsh.ag]

One of the Holy Grail debates of English cricketing history about to be addressed here by Watson when he picks one out of Harold Larwood and Fred Trueman for his last bowling spot. I am guessing Barnes is out of reckoning because of his not-so-great Ashes record, and the fact that the team already has Bedser and Verity.

 

[Red]

Australia XI
01. Bob Simpson
02.
03. Don Bradman
04. Greg Chappell
05. Allan Border
06. Keith Miller
07. Adam Gilchrist
08. Richie Benaud
09. Ray Lindwall
10.
11. Bill O'Reilly

Interesting. I'm assuming you're going to select either Lillee or McGrath at 10, and which ever one misses out will be hard done by. Also, I find it hard to believe Warne isn't going to get a gig in a Ashes contest. In any event, I like the idea of a bowling attack featuring Lillee/McGrath, Lindwall, Miller, Benaud and O'Reilly. Very handy. And your batting depth is great with Lindwall at #9. I can't imagine this team being ripped through easily.

 

[watson]

Very interested to see who fill your final two slots in the England lineup. I myself would've found it very, very difficult to leave out Jardine & Larwood for an all-time Ashes contest, but judging by the makeup of your English XI, you plan to do just that.

If Larwood is picked then I will rely very heavily on his Bodyline series stats, First Class stats, and above all, 'personal testimonies'. I don't think that Larwood measures up to other English ATGs based purely on Test match figures (even allowing for known injuries).

LIke Benaud, Larwood needs an 'angle' to get him into an ATG team.

 

[Red]

And I'd love to see Tubby taking that last openers slot, making the cordon:

Taylor, Simpson, Chappell, Miller, Border and Benaud in the gully.

Amazing!

 

[kyear2]

and i'd love to see tubby taking that last openers slot, making the cordon:

Taylor, simpson, chappell, miller, border and benaud in the gully.

Amazing!

 

[watson]

And I'd love to see Tubby taking that last openers slot, making the cordon:

Taylor, Simpson, Chappell, Miller, Border and Benaud in the gully.

Amazing!

Mark Tubby Taylor is definitley in the mix - however, his Strike Rate happens to be less than Bill Lawry's - 'The corpse with pads on.'

(Incidently, at this stage of proceedings I have no idea who I'd like to partner Simpson. Too difficult to decide really)

 

[Red]

I love Tubby. He'll probably make my fave XI because he is just a legend. Great opener, great bloke, great slipper, great captain

 

[MartinB]

One of the Holy Grail debates of English cricketing history about to be addressed here by Watson when he picks one out of Harold Larwood and Fred Trueman for his last bowling spot. I am guessing Barnes is out of reckoning because of his not-so-great Ashes record, and the fact that the team already has Bedser and Verity.

I am not going to try to guess Englands last Fast bowler.

Ashes record of many of England's top bowlers since WW1 is actually quite similar, there is only 1 run difference between Trueman, Tyson, Snow and Willis and a further run to Bedser, Voce and Botham. This perhaps explains why several commentators rated Snow above Trueman.

I would think Larwood and Barnes are in the mix (although with Bedser, Verity picking Barnes might be an over kill).

England bowlers against Australia:

England Bowlers against Australia

 

[Eds]

If Larwood is picked then I will rely very heavily on his Bodyline series stats, First Class stats, and above all, 'personal testimonies'. I don't think that Larwood measures up to other English ATGs based purely on Test match figures (even allowing for known injuries).

LIke Benaud, Larwood needs an 'angle' to get him into an ATG team.

Don't get me wrong I wouldn't have Larwood anywhere near England's All-Time Test XI, and probably not in the A side either. However, in an all-time XI based on contributions against Australia, he'd probably be the first bowler I pick.

 

[watson]

Don't get me wrong I wouldn't have Larwood anywhere near England's All-Time Test XI, and probably not in the A side either. However, in an all-time XI based on contributions against Australia, he'd probably be the first bowler I pick.

Barry Richards and Mike Procter make most peoples ATG RSA team based primarily on their First Class careers. So to be fair we should take a similar approach to Larwood because his record against Australia in England cannot be a true reflection of his ability. His two Tests in 1926 were played as a novice, and in 1930 he was affected by illness or injury throughout the series;

The next Ashes series was in England in 1930 in which, after being hinted at in 1928/29, the genius that was Donald Bradman fully flowered. The series was without doubt the low point of Larwood's career and should certainly not be taken as in any way representative of his career. In the first Test of the series Larwood was taken ill during the course of the game and did not return until the third Test when, not fully fit, he was completely mastered by Bradman and he again missed the fourth Test before returning for the fifth. In that final Test Larwood again failed to exercise any control over the Australian batting. Bradman batted superbly, as did the ill starred Archie Jackson, but despite the mauling he suffered it did not escape Larwood's attention that, for a time after the Oval pitch had been freshened up by a shower, Bradman looked less than comfortable when Larwood dug the ball in at him. In addition to his other fitness worries Larwood was, throughout this summer, also troubled by dental problems but in keeping with the personality of the man he never sought to make any excuses and, of course, the nature of his problems in 1930 are not disclosed by mere statistics.

Cricket Web - Features: Our Cricket Heroes - Harold Larwood

Therefore, it is not possible to properly rate Larwood in England against Australia. In Australia the picture is just as confusing because his results in 1928-29 and 1932-33 were vastly different for obvious reasons. Do we favour the hapless Larwood of 1928-29 or the hero Larwood of 1932-33? It is a case of, "Will the real Harold Larwood please stand-up?"

 

[watson]

England's No. 11: Fred Trueman

It is a well worn cricketing adage that, “fast bowlers hunt in pairs”.

Therefore, the final bowling spot goes to Fred Trueman at the expense of a spinner or swing bowler. I really wanted to get Sydney Barnes into the side for obvious reasons, but considered it a stronger imperative to select a partner for John Snow who is equally quick and aggressive. In my mind, two great fast bowlers operating in tandem is consistently the best method for breaking through the top order and then dismissing the opposing team cheaply.


Martin Chandler penned a ‘Bio’ on Harold Larwood back in 2009, and wrote;

When, as it often is, the topic of fast bowling is discussed in the context of the word 'greatness' many, particularly those interested only in the modern era, simply turn to their books of statistics and point to Larwood's overall Test record of 78 wickets in 21 matches at more than 28 apiece. Those figures are, for them, sufficient to dismiss Larwood from the discussion. To overlook Larwood in that way is, however, a fundamental mistake. In Larwood's time international cricket was a batsman's game, particularly in Australia, where wickets were prepared for heavy run scoring in timeless matches, which is the main reason for the dearth of genuine fast bowlers in the period.

If statistics have to be used as the measure of Larwood's ability then it is overall First Class statistics that should be looked at and if that is done the true extent of Larwood's class is revealed. On no less than five occasions Larwood topped the national averages in England, a degree of domination over his contempories which has never been equalled. Richard Hadlee, also based at Trent Bridge, achieved the feat four times but Hadlee apart only Brian Statham achieved the feat even twice. Malcolm Marshall for example, who had a long county career with Hampshire, and who was recently put forward in a CW Poll as the greatest fast bowler of all time, achieved the feat only once.
Our Cricket Heroes - Harold Larwood

Cricket Web - Features: Our Cricket Heroes - Harold Larwood

Since First Class statistics appear to be the key to rating Harold Larwood, it seems appropriate to out-line the First Class careers of some great English fast bowlers. Maurice Tate is also included because he is a near contempory of Larwood (Tate debuted for England in the same year that Larwood began his First Class career – 1924). It’s difficult to rank them in order short of pouring over the relevant history books, but I’ve had a go none-the-less;

FC Record: Harold Larwood (1924-38)
Balls = 58,027
Wickets = 1427
Ave = 17.51
SR = 40.6
ER = 2.58
5w = 98
10w = 20

FC Record: Fred Trueman (1949-69)
Balls = 99,701
Wickets = 2304
Ave = 18.29
SR = 43.2
ER = 2.53
5w = 126
10w = 25

FC Record: Maurice Tate (1912-37)
Balls =150,461
Wickets = 2784
Ave = 18.16
SR = 54.0
ER = 2.01
5w = 195
10w= 44

FC Record: Frank Tyson (1952-60)
Balls = 38,173
Wickets = 767
Ave = 20.89
SR = 49.7
ER = 2.51
5w = 34
10w= 5

FC Record: John Snow (1961-77)
Balls = 60,958
Wickets = 1174
Ave = 22.73
SR = 51.9
ER = 2.62
5w = 56
10w = 9

FC Record: Bob Willis (1969-84)
Balls = 47,986
Wickets = 899
Ave = 24.99
SR = 53.3
ER = 2.80
5w = 34
10w= 2

At first glance it seems to me that the stat’s for Larwood and Trueman are equally impressive. Tate and Tyson are very close to their benchmark, with Snow and Willis not that far away from the pack.

It is significant that the difference in Average between Larwood and Maurice Tate is a mere 0.65 because Tate is sometimes rated higher than Larwood by those who watched them in the 1920s and 30s. Walter Hammond is a case in point;

Was Larwood as great as Spofforth? Again, I must hide behind words, because I really I do not know. On his day, I think Larwood was top of them all; I do not believe anyone has ever been quite as devastating as he could be; but he was not as consistent as Spofforth, nor was he so good on any except a chosen pitch......

But I know this: in my World XI of All-Time, as well as Bradman at No.3, I want Maurice Tate (1924 vintage) to open the bowling. He took 2,700 wickets and made over 21,000 runs; he played in a Test match at forty years of age; and if you think you know of a better cricketer, then let’s hear of him!

Cricket My World, page 167 (1947)

At the end of the relevant chapter Hammond chose Spofforth and Tate as the opening bowlers for his ‘World XI of All-Time’. So despite playing along side Larwood for several years in the England team, Hammond wasn't inclined to pick him for his hypothetical team, even as a first change bowler.

The Test match records against Australia for those same bowlers (minus Tate) make for some interesting reading, mainly because Bob Willis turns out to be the surprise package;

Fred Trueman in ENG (1953-64)
Tests = 11
Wickets = 50
Ave = 24.04
SR = 47.9
ER = 3.00
5w = 4
10w = 1

Bob Willis in ENG (1977-1981)
Tests = 11
Wickets = 56
Ave = 21.42
SR = 44.9
ER = 2.86
5w = 4
10w = 0

John Snow in ENG (1968-75)
Tests = 14
Wickets = 52
Ave = 27.26
SR = 62.8
ER = 2.60
5w = 2
10w = 0

Harold Larwood in ENG (1926-30)
Tests = 5
Wickets = 13
Ave = 41.84
SR = 90.4
ER = 2.77
5w = 0
10w = 0

Frank Tyson in ENG (1956)
Tests = 1
Wickets = 1
Ave = 34.00
SR = 84.0
ER = 2.42
5w = 0
10w = 0

John Snow in AUS (1970-71)
Tests = 6
Wickets = 31
Ave = 22.83
SR = 58.2
ER = 2.35
5w = 2
10w = 0

Frank Tyson in AUS (1954-59)
Tests = 7
Wickets = 31
Ave = 25.03
SR = 52.9
ER = 2.83
5w = 2
10w = 1

Harold Larwood in AUS (1928-33)
Tests = 10
Wickets = 51
Ave = 26.82
SR = 56.4
ER = 2.85
5w = 3
10w = 1

Fred Trueman in AUS (1959-63)
Tests = 8
Wickets = 29
Ave = 27.48
SR = 67.6
ER = 2.43
5w = 1
10w = 0

Bob Willis in AUS (1971-83)
Tests = 24
Wickets = 72
Ave = 29.80
SR = 66.3
ER = 2.69
5w = 3
10w = 0

I wouldn’t want to place too much emphasis on those numbers because each Test match series has its own special context. However, it still seems reasonably clear to me that both Trueman and Willis enjoyed bowling on their home turf to Australian batsman. That is, these two quicks appear to be the stand-out bowlers in English conditions.

Interpreting each bowler’s record in Australia, and finding stand-out bowlers in Australian conditions is a different matter, and more difficult. Snow had a fantastic series in 1970-71, but it is only a single series. Unfortunately the myopic English selectors forgot to select him for the 1974-75 tour.

Tyson is also a stand-out in Australian conditions because of his famous and successful series under Len Hutton in 1955-56. However, his stat’s in Australia are badly effected by an innocuous tour in 1958-59 where he played in only 2 Tests because of injury.

Larwood of course had a bumper time during the Bodyline tour of 1932/33 because Jardine’s tactics and field placings skewed things in his favour. However, his numbers are dragged down due to a mediocre series in 1928-29 where his 18 wickets cost 40.22 runs each.

The figures of Trueman and Willis seem to indicate that they bowled reasonably well in Australian conditions without being remarkable. It is also a curious fact that Willis played twice as many Ashes Tests in Australia compared to England.

Therefore, in conclusion, if we combine each players First Class record with their home and away records against Australia, it seems obvious to me that Fred Trueman should get the final bowlers spot in this Ashes team. There doesn't appear to be much doubt that he was simply brilliant in English conditions, and good enough in Australian conditions. Importantly, he will compliment his new ball partner John Snow because of Snow’s obvious affinity for hard Australian wickets and the added bounce that they gave to his seam bowling. It would have been nice if Tyson and Larwood had played more Tests against Australia in England because I don't like being biased against them due to lack of evidence - but they didn't play more Tests and there's nothing that I can do about that.

Put simply, in this Ashes team, Trueman will spearhead the attack in England, and then Snow will spearhead the attack during the return tour to Australia. And between the two of them, I think that they’ll do an excellent job.

To conclude, here is Scyld Berry’s synopsis of England’s greatest fast bowler. It is as good as any;

Action man Trueman was the greatest of the great

When John Arlott was writing Fred Trueman's biography, he asked the Yorkshire and England bowler what the title should be. Trueman replied that it should be called the definitive biography of ‘ t’finest bloody fast bowler that ever drew breath’.

Trueman was not far out in his self-assessment. He was not the greatest bowler in terms of speed: when the sapient Australian Jack Fingleton first saw Trueman in 1953, when he was at his quickest, he thought Trueman's long run-up made him look faster than he was. He cannot be considered the greatest fast bowler of all time in terms of performance, either: that would have to be, if not one of his predecessors, then the Australian Dennis Lillee or the West Indian Malcolm Marshall. But from a visual point of view, Frederick Sewards Trueman, OBE, was and always will be the greatest.

Michael Holding had a beautiful bowling action, Harold Larwood too, but nobody has matched Trueman for a classical side-on action. It was magnificent theatre, and being no fool but full of street wisdom, coming as he did from a mining community, the man himself knew it.
Fast bowlers of today, brought up in a sedentary lifestyle, have to train in the gym to build up their leg muscles. Fred's father was a miner at Stainton in south Yorkshire, he himself left school at 14 to work in a factory, and powerful legs - the basis of a fast bowler's work - came naturally. As he walked back to his mark, Trueman would toss his mane of black hair, pivot on those legs of beef, and start his run-up.

It was like a wave coming up the beach and crashing on to the shore, and something near a tidal wave at that. He did not run in a semi-circle, but he did come in at an angle, leaning forward, gathering momentum, not tall but the embodiment of physical power. And the gracefulness of his run, by itself, would take away the breath away.

When Trueman reached the crease, his left arm was pointing towards the batsman as a veiled threat. When he lifted his left side into the air, his right arm was simultaneously ****ed back, fully armed and ready to strike. The end-result was normally an outswinger to the right-handed batsman, if he had not been entranced by the spectacle which had unfolded before him.

In his youth, when he strained primarily for speed, Trueman was seen as the great white hope who could end the Australian supremacy which had existed since the Second World War. After making his first-class debut for Yorkshire in 1949, along with his future captain Brian Close, Trueman made his Test debut against India in 1952. He took eight wickets for 31 at Old Trafford, and helped to reduce India to nought for four at Headingley, the worst start in Test history. Close recalled yesterday that an Indian batsman asked the umpire to have a sightscreen moved. The umpire asked him where he wanted it: between me and the bowler, said the batsman.

"Trueman will get you" the Australian tourists were told by British servicemen on their voyage to England in 1953. It did not quite work out like that: it was Alec Bedser who got them with his medium-pace and inswing. But Trueman was released from National Service with the RAF to play in the fifth Test at The Oval, and with four wickets for 86 did his part in the winning of the Ashes which crowned Coronation year.

For sheer speed Frank Tyson was Len Hutton's choice to go to Australia in 1954-55. There might have been some unruliness on Trueman's first tour of the West Indies the previous winter; in any event he did not make the trip to Australia. But he learned meanwhile in county cricket, by bowling a thousand overs per season for Yorkshire and perfecting his craft as an outswing bowler who could also cut his pace down and bowl off-cutters.

The late Fifties and early Sixties were Trueman's boom period, when he became the celebrity 'Fiery Fred' and headed towards becoming the first bowler to take 300 Test wickets. He succeeded Denis Compton as a Brylcreem boy, and was often pictured with a foaming pint in hand, although he was no beer-drinker, or else a pipe. The material rewards were not what they are today, and together with the lack of official recognition for his cricket wisdom, may have contributed to his curmudgeonliness in old age.
He was more effective at home than abroad. To this day nobody has taken more Test wickets in England than Trueman's 229, and in only 47 home Tests. He took 78 Test wickets abroad because he only went on four tours, to the West Indies twice and to Australia and New Zealand twice. Those were the tours that mattered.

If he had not spent so much energy on taking wickets - 2,304 of them in first-class cricket at 18 runs each, making him the 18th leading wicket-taker of all time - he would have made a fine all-rounder. He scored over 9,000 first-class runs and scored three centuries. He was a brilliant fielder too, mainly at short leg, where he had the strength and athleticism to squat after a long spell, when normal bowlers would have needed a winch to rise.

That he was a brilliant captain too, if only on an occasional basis, was proved when he led Yorkshire to victory over the 1968 Australians at Bramall Lane: the tourists knew what they were up against, the 'sixth Test' they called it, but Trueman's Yorkshire still won handsomely. In his day fast bowlers were commonly supposed to be thick, but his shrewdness as a captain - then as a commentator on Test Match Special - began to alter public perceptions.

When Tyson faded, Trueman gradually took over as England's strike bowler and inherited Brian Statham for a partner. The Lancastrian, who died six years ago, and the Yorkshireman made one of England's most famous pairs. Statham immaculate accuracy and steadiness, Trueman outswing and aggression: they did everything for England, except win the Ashes.

Trueman's finest series came in 1963, when he took 34 wickets in the five Tests against West Indies. He had everything then, speed and swing, combativeness and cunning. Pomp was a word used in frequent conjunction with Fred. Pomp with a hint of swagger.
By the time the cameras were filming him in 1964, as he approached the unique number of 300 Test wickets, Trueman had passed his peak. He was only 33, but the heavy workload had taken its toll. It was a sedate outswinger, which the Australian Neil Hawke nicked to Colin Cowdrey at slip at the Oval in the final Test of the summer, that gave Trueman his 300th victim. "Whoever does it will be bloody tired" was his comment when asked if his record would ever be overtaken.

After his final Test in 1965, he played on for Yorkshire until the end of 1968, then had a few Sunday League games for Derbyshire as the spirit was still willing. In his later years he gave forthright opinions to The People as well as to radio listeners, who became used to Trueman's observation that he 'could not understand what is going off out there'.

Trueman gained further celebrity when his daughter Rebecca married the son of the film star Raquel Welch. He played golf and spoke at dinners, trenchantly and humorously. As a bowler he had been renowned for many a 'bon mot'. He asked one batsman who kept nicking him where he had learned that stroke - Edge-baston?

Six weeks ago it was announced that Trueman had cancer. It rapidly spread and early last week he lapsed into a coma. His death was announced shortly after midday. Just before 3pm, when they took the field for Sri Lanka's innings, the England players and match officials clapped before observing a minute's silence, while the Headingley crowd stood in respect.

"It goes without saying he was one of the finest bowlers to put on an England shirt," the England captain Andrew Strauss said.

England's two opening bowlers - one of them another son of Yorkshire, Tim Bresnan, and Kabir Ali - then proceeded to bowl so waywardly that Sri Lanka scored 54 runs off the first three overs. No matter the sport's changes and evolutions, it would not have happened in Trueman's day. 'Fiery Fred' was an all-time great.

Action man Trueman was the greatest of the great - Telegraph

 

[watson]

So far, the England attack is;

08. Hedley Verity
09. John Snow
10. Alec Bedser
11. Fred Trueman

'5th' Bowlers: Ted Dexter and Walter Hammond

 

[The Battlers Prince]

A very lethal attack first up. You're right it should be more than a handful against most top orders. Difficult to "crash" through an ATG side, but if any English were to do it that's as good as most.

 

[watson]

A very lethal attack first up. You're right it should be more than a handful against most top orders. Difficult to "crash" through an ATG side, but if any English were to do it that's as good as most.

4 frontline bowlers and 2 competent part-time bowlers is a typical set-up for Test match teams (Border and Taylor had the Waugh twins to back-up McDermott or McGrath et al). Now wondering whether to go for the extra bowling with an allrounder, or put an ATG batsman at No.6. Which choice would give a more balanced team?

 

[Red]

Must have.

 

[watson]

Ian Botham V AUS (not including his later years)

Batting:1977 to 1985
Tests = 29
Runs = 1422
Ave = 30.25
SR = 63,82
HS = 149
100s = 3
50s = 6

Bowling: 1977 to1985
Tests = 29
Wickets = 136
Ave = 26.4
SR = 54.1
ER = 2.89
5w = 8
10 = 2

 

[OverratedSanity]

Can't not have Botham in an Ashes team imo

 

[watson]

Can't not have Botham in an Ashes team imo

With Botham at No.6 the English batting line-up becomes unbalanced - no two ways about it.

So it becomes a matter of weighing up: Decrease in batting depth V Increase in bowling strike-power.

The other related questions are;

1. Can Trueman-Snow-Bedser-Verity-Dexter-Hammond bowl out Bradman et al without Botham's help?
2. Can the English batting line-up post competitive totals against the 3 Aussie quicks and 2 spinners without the help of May or Compton or whoever at No.6?

They're actually interesting questions and the answers shouldn't be clouded by Botham's mega-persona.

(Playing the Devils Advocate here)

 

[OverratedSanity]

With Botham at No.6 the English batting line-up becomes unbalanced - no two ways about it.

So it becomes a matter of weighing up: Decrease in batting depth V Increase in bowling strike-power.

The other related questions are;

1. Can Trueman-Snow-Bedser-Verity-Dexter-Hammond bowl out Bradman et al without Botham's help?
2. Can the English batting line-up post competitive totals against the 3 Aussie quicks and 2 spinners without the help of May or Compton or whoever at No.6?

They're actually interesting questions and the answers shouldn't be clouded by Botham's mega-persona.

(Playing the Devils Advocate here)

I understand where you're coming from, but imo his persona actually does cloud the other factors and I don't think it's wrong that they do. Botham is one man whose stats don't tell close to the entire story and is, for me, the one man who comes to mind when I think about the Ashes. (atleast from the 80s generation) This is obviously very subjective and personal but there's no denying that he had a touch of genius and virtually unmatched match winning ability at his peak. His Ashes exploits are legendary and personally I'd squeeze him into the team in place of someone arguably more deserving because of his inexplicable ability to randomly pull a hundred rabbits out of a hat.