What is your ALL TIME WORLD XI TEAM for tests?

[Muloghonto]

This is true. Particularly in modern cricket. It's very rare for a team to play two spinners, even when they are both excellent. As seen with Warne and MacGill.

Here's a question....if Murali was Australian and if the Australian team could've selected Murali and Warne during their period of dominance, would they have played both in the same time regularly?

The biggest reason why Warne and McGill played so little together is because they are similar bowlers. If you are picking two main spinners on surfaces that are not square turners, you need to cover all aspects of spin. I assure you, if someone like Kumble was an Aussie, Australia would've played atleast 25-30% of thei matches outside the subcontinent with 2 spinners and 100% of all matches on the subcontinent.
This is because even though Kumble was a leggie too, he brings skills to the table that Warne does not possess and exploits certain pitch conditions better than Warne. This leads to a much better spin attack than Warne and 'shadow of warne' filling in from the other end.

 

[viriya]

Murali was hardly the stereotypical offspinner though. If there were an offie who was ever going to dominate in Australia, it would be Murali.
As the (admittedly limited) stats show, however, he wasn't exactly dominant on Australian pitches. Probably would have partnered Warne whenever they toured though.

Murali's record in Australia is very limited, it's relatively poor for a couple reasons - he bowled early in his career when he was nowhere near the bowler he became and he refused to tour when he was at his peak because of Howard's comments (biggest mistake of his career imo). In the only other tour he made he had some moments but didn't do well as expected. I don't see how he would not be a threat in Australia if he had more opportunities in Tests - he did well in ODIs there.

There was also that failed ICC World XI experiment where he had a great spell when he completely bamboozled Katich and Gilchrist in an over.
Murali's magic | Cricket News | ICC Super Series | ESPN Cricinfo

 

[Spark]

Murali's record in Australia is very limited, it's relatively poor for a couple reasons - he bowled early in his career when he was nowhere near the bowler he became and he refused to tour when he was at his peak because of Howard's comments (biggest mistake of his career imo - SL could've really pushed Australia in that series with Malinga the surprise package and Sangakkara hitting his peak). In the only other tour he made he had some moments but didn't do well as expected. I don't see how he would not be a threat in Australia if he had more opportunities in Tests - he did well in ODIs there.

There was also that failed ICC World XI experiment where he had a great spell when he completely bamboozled Katich and Gilchrist in an over.
Murali's magic | Cricket News | ICC Super Series | ESPN Cricinfo

This is completely irrelevant.

 

[Dan]

Well, yeah, but that'd explain why he was average in Australia as opposed to downright awful (which is what usually happens for touring offies). Fine overseas but half the time you're replacing a fairly important part of any usual Test side playing in Australia with a bowler who can't really bat and whose returns aren't exactly amazing. It just wouldn't be worth it unless you were absolutely sure the pitch was going to take serious turn reasonably early - and horses-for-courses selections aren't exactly what we're thinking about here, are we? Remember: for the most part, if he did get picked and he did bowl a lot he'd just end up bowling a whole bunch of Warne's overs and is the theoretical gain in quality/variety really worth ****ing up your team balance like that for?

Yeah, I agree with the points you're making there, however I'm just suggesting that holding the returns of Swann/Vettori against him is a little unfair, because the only thing they have in common with Murali is the direction in which their stock ball turns.

Turning from leg to off isn't inherently superior than turning from off to leg on Australian pitches. The associated methods of turning from off to leg are what are ineffective in Australia. Murali's methods were very different to the standard off break bowler.

And yeah, if you picked both you marginalise your quicks to be be borderline useless - there's a limited number of overs to be bowled. Bad idea when you have Glenn McGrath in your side.

 

[viriya]

This is completely irrelevant.

I'm not sure how you can judge his Australia record on just 5 total matches, with 2 played in 1995 when he was nowhere near the bowler he became, 1 played in a farce of a ICC world XI match, and just 2 more after. It's hardly enough of a sample size to assume that he would've maintained that same record if he played more tests considering how much better his record was elsewhere.

Either way, I don't know why picking the ATG XI became a discussion on off-spinners in Australia - it should be irrelevant to the discussion.

 

[Spark]

Yeah, I agree with the points you're making there, however I'm just suggesting that holding the returns of Swann/Vettori against him is a little unfair, because the only thing they have in common with Murali is the direction in which their stock ball turns.

Turning from leg to off isn't inherently superior than turning from off to leg on Australian pitches. The associated methods of turning from off to leg are what are ineffective in Australia. Murali's methods were very different to the standard off break bowler.

And yeah, if you picked both you marginalise your quicks to be be borderline useless - there's a limited number of overs to be bowled. Bad idea when you have Glenn McGrath in your side.

Yeah I can see that. But to be honest, most touring spinners have a shocking time of it in Australia - the pitches really, really aren't good for spin bowlers who haven't adjusted to the fact that you can't bowl more than two inches short of a good length or you'll be useless.

I'm not sure how you can judge his Australia record on just 5 total matches, with 2 played in 1995 when he was nowhere near the bowler he become, 1 played in a farce of a ICC world XI match, and just 2 more after. It's hardly enough of a sample size to assume that he would've maintained the same record if he played more tests considering how much better his record was elsewhere.

Either way, I don't know why picking the ATG XI became a discussion on off-spinners in Australia - it should be irrelevant to the discussion.

I was objecting to the bolded part of the post. ODI spin bowling, both bowling it and batting against it, is so fundamentally different from how it works in Tests that it's incredibly difficult to draw comparisons between the two. Even more than samplesizelol problems (which is a problem, granted) - but in any case, the point is based on the argument that picking a second spinner for Australian pitches if they aren't ATG legspin is a really, really bad idea because everyone else seems to have a pretty horrible time of it with only a few isolated exceptions.

The broader point of this discussion, and why I'm pursuing it, is that these ATG XI discussions often seem strangely abstract to me and oddly theoretical in that they seem to ignore practical considerations - which, of course, are what actual team selection centres around. I've always found that odd, and this discussion is very much along those same lines - yeah, on record and reputation picking both Murali and Warne for Australian decks might seem like a winner, but then you actually start thinking about what would happen when you actually tried to play a Test with that sort of team and you quickly realise it's a terrible idea.

 

[Dan]

Ok, for those who are struggling to understand what the debate is actually about, consider it this way:

1. M Hayden
2. J Langer
3. R Ponting
4. M Waugh
5. S Waugh *
6. D Martyn
7. A Gilchrist +
8. S Warne
9. J Gillespie
10. ???
11. G McGrath

Do you pick Brett Lee or Muttiah Muralitharan in that #10 spot?

Keep in mind that:
> This team plays approximately 50% of its matches in Australia
> Biggest overseas tour is to England
> There are only so many wickets to be taken and, hence, overs to be bowled
> Team balance matters

 

[harsh.ag]

Okay, Spark, you piqued my curiosity. Here are some famous offies who did well in Australia:

Jim Laker - 4 tests, 15 wickets @ 21.20
Geoff Miller - 12 tests, 36 wickets @ 22.47
Ian Johnson - 22 tests, 57 wickets @ 25.71
Hugh Tayfield - 5 tests, 30 wickets @ 28.10
Erapalli Prasanna - 8 tests, 31 wickets @ 31.12
Bruce Yardley - 19 tests, 79 wickets @ 32.17
Ashley Mallet - 21 tests, 63 wickets @ 32.80
Lance Gibbs - 14 tests, 59 wickets @ 33.38

Not bad, I would say. I don't think it's an offie thing as such. Maybe more so in recent years. Saqlain has an ordinary record (14 wickets in 4 tests @ 34). Murali, Swann, Harbhajan all have horrible records.

 

[viriya]

Ok, for those who are struggling to understand what the debate is actually about, consider it this way:

1. M Hayden
2. J Langer
3. R Ponting
4. M Waugh
5. S Waugh *
6. D Martyn
7. A Gilchrist +
8. S Warne
9. J Gillespie
10. ???
11. G McGrath

Do you pick Brett Lee or Muttiah Muralitharan in that #10 spot?

Keep in mind that:
> This team plays approximately 50% of its matches in Australia
> Biggest overseas tour is to England
> There are only so many wickets to be taken and, hence, overs to be bowled
> Team balance matters

Murali had a strike rate just 2 balls higher than Brett Lee in Tests (not what you would think I know), while averaging 2 more wickets per Test than him (6 vs 4). If you agree that his brand of wrist-spinning off-spin bowling would generate turn in Aussie surfaces and would not be an issue, I think this is a no-brainer. He also had a better record in England than Warne did.

 

[Spark]

Okay, Spark, you piqued my curiosity. Here are some famous offies who did well in Australia:

Jim Laker - 4 tests, 15 wickets @ 21.20
Geoff Miller - 12 tests, 36 wickets @ 22.47
Ian Johnson - 22 tests, 57 wickets @ 25.71
Hugh Tayfield - 5 tests, 30 wickets @ 28.10
Erapalli Prasanna - 8 tests, 31 wickets @ 31.12
Bruce Yardley - 19 tests, 79 wickets @ 32.17
Ashley Mallet - 21 tests, 63 wickets @ 32.80
Lance Gibbs - 14 tests, 59 wickets @ 33.38

Not bad, I would say. I don't think it's an offie thing as such. Maybe more so in recent years. Saqlain has an ordinary record (14 wickets in 4 tests @ 34). Murali, Swann, Harbhajan all have horrible records.

Obvs when we're talking about a side including Murali and Warne we're only considering the past 20 years, I have no idea what the pitches were like before then.

There are actually three finger spinners who IIRC have done ok in the past few years in Australia - and this is based purely on what I remember when I watched the Tests, I don't have these numbers off the top of my head - Lyon, Benn and Herath. Lyon and Benn obvs get serious bounce which is a big plus, and Herath changed his standard length really effectively to suit Australian pitches (an absolute necessity) and bowled with superb control of flight. So those make sense.

Notice none of those three are known for getting big turn. Other ways to skin a cat etc

 

[harsh.ag]

Ok, for those who are struggling to understand what the debate is actually about, consider it this way:

1. M Hayden
2. J Langer
3. R Ponting
4. M Waugh
5. S Waugh *
6. D Martyn
7. A Gilchrist +
8. S Warne
9. J Gillespie
10. ???
11. G McGrath

Do you pick Brett Lee or Muttiah Muralitharan in that #10 spot?

Keep in mind that:
> This team plays approximately 50% of its matches in Australia
> Biggest overseas tour is to England
> There are only so many wickets to be taken and, hence, overs to be bowled
> Team balance matters

Or we can consider it this way (Same lineup as Watson's debut test):

1. M Hayden
2. J Langer
3. R Ponting*
4. D Martyn
5. M Clarke
6. A Gilchrist +
7. S Watson
8. S Warne
9. J Gillespie
10. ???
11. G McGrath

In that match, they played MacGill and he and Warne took 13 out of 20 wickets. Now, how about an offie here? (My post above shows how "offies are bad in Australia as a rule" is mistaken)

 

[harsh.ag]

Obvs when we're talking about a side including Murali and Warne we're only considering the past 20 years, I have no idea what the pitches were like before then.

There are actually three finger spinners who IIRC have done ok in the past few years in Australia - and this is based purely on what I remember when I watched the Tests, I don't have these numbers off the top of my head - Lyon, Benn and Herath. Lyon and Benn obvs get serious bounce which is a big plus, and Herath changed his standard length really effectively to suit Australian pitches (an absolute necessity) and bowled with superb control of flight. So those make sense.

Notice none of those three are known for getting big turn. Other ways to skin a cat etc

Yeah, Lyon's done well. Similar record to Mallet and Yardley from above. I honestly think Murali would have done well (given more matches and an atmosphere which would be on his side presumably), and I would prefer him above Lee at the very least.

 

[Spark]

Yeah, Lyon's done well. Similar record to Mallet and Yardley from above. I honestly think Murali would have done well (given more matches and an atmosphere which would be on his side presumably), and I would prefer him above Lee at the very least.

I dunno. All three got their wickets through more or less containing bowling, waiting for the batsman to wait a mistake (I mean, Lyon's 5-for at the MCG...) because there simply wasn't enough assistance to forcibly take their wickets.

Seems a bit... jarring to take one of the great attacking bowlers in Murali and reduce him to a holding role. Remember, you've already got Warne there with his box of magic tricks to try and coax the batsman out.

I mean, spin bowling in Australia - and in a way this partially applies to Warne - basically comes down to not getting slaughtered, and since the batsman is fully expecting that you should get slaughtered, he might do something dumb and get out.

 

[Dan]

You'd only pick MacGill/Muralitharan in that side if the deck suited spin from Day 2 onwards. Otherwise give me Lee/Clark/Johnson as a third seamer, and play a pure bat ahead of Watson (aka every usual Australian line-up from the era).

On a standard Australian deck, which undoubtedly is more conducive to fast bowling rather than spin, going in with 2 quicks, 2 spinners and a part timer as your third seamer is not a good idea. It's suicidal team balance.

 

[viriya]

I dunno. All three got their wickets through more or less containing bowling, waiting for the batsman to wait a mistake (I mean, Lyon's 5-for at the MCG...) because there simply wasn't enough assistance to forcibly take their wickets.

Seems a bit... jarring to take one of the great attacking bowlers in Murali and reduce him to a holding role. Remember, you've already got Warne there with his box of magic tricks to try and coax the batsman out.

What if we were to make an All-Time XI to play in India. Do we take both Murali and Warne out of the side because they had ordinary records there? Is Ponting an automatic drop as well?

Or an All-Time XI in NZ, is Sobers dropped because he averaged 15 there? Or one in Pak, do you drop Lillee because he averaged 100+ there?

I think you can get a little too smart when nit-picking small sample sizes to figure out who to pick in a particular country - it's not fair on a great player to think they would not do well given more opportunities.

 

[Spark]

What if we were to make an All-Time XI to play in India. Do we take both Murali and Warne out of the side because they had ordinary records there? Is Ponting an automatic drop as well?

Or an All-Time XI in NZ, is Sobers dropped because he averaged 15 there? Or one in Pak, do you drop Lillee because he averaged 100+ there?

I think you can get a little too smart when nit-picking small sample sizes to figure out who to pick in a particular country - it's not fair on a great player to think they would not do well given more opportunities.

That's a really good question, tbh. Focussing alone on the Ponting question, that depends on a hell of a lot of things. Like, what "version" of the player are you picking? Pre-2007 or so and you'd be incredibly brave to pick Ponting, as it wasn't just luck that made Ponting fail early on; he had a significant technical flaw with regards to how he played spin bowling under those conditions (extravagant front-foot lunge without getting to the pitch, hard hands etc etc). But he slowly corrected that, and by the last third of his career he was batting in Indian conditions perfectly well (compared to his team mates, that is). But of course, you might pick him anyway because of established team continuity - so has this team been playing together, roughly unchanged, for a while in various conditions, or have they just been cobbled together? Because frankly I see all the players around Ponting's level as roughly equal in quality so you're going to lose so little (if at all) in "inherent" quality by picking someone else of that calibre that there are far more important considerations when you're picking a side for a specific set of Test matches.

The point about sample size is absolutely fair and I often make it myself. But in the end, there are often actual reasons why players do or don't do well in certain conditions. It could just be bad luck (by which I mean bad timing - e.g. tours happened to coincide with periods of bad form, which is very possible when you only tour a country twice in a career, especially if the tours bookend the career) in which case it's totally unfair to make any big judgments based on three or four Tests, but it could also be something deeper. And that you have to pay attention to.

 

[Maximas]

Murali's average of 19 in England/NZ and 26 in South Africa suggests to me that Australia is in fact the outlier and that there weren't deeper problems he had bowling in those kinds of conditions, the quality of opposition and other factors certainly contribute heavily IMO

 

[Spark]

Murali's average of 19 in England/NZ and 26 in South Africa suggests to me that Australia is in fact the outlier and that there weren't deeper problems he had bowling in those kinds of conditions, the quality of opposition and other factors certainly contribute heavily IMO

(Modern) Australian pitches are pretty unique with their combination of being bouncy, rock-hard and dry. They're pretty unique when it comes to spinners, only maybe SA can compare.

 

[Hurricane]

I stayed up with CW on until midnight one night last week and dreamed about picking an ATG XI it was as follows

1 Hobbs
2 Hutton
3 Sobers
4 Tendulkar
5 can't recall
6 Botham
7 Gilchrist
8 Khan
9 Hadlee
10 Murali
11 McGrath

bradman didn't make my dream

 

[Athlai]

Bradman at 3 and Sobers at 5 would be a nice enough way to end the dream.