What is your ALL TIME WORLD XI TEAM for tests?

[kyear2]

Border, Miandad, Gavaskar, Gooch, Boon, Crowe, Gower. Off of the top of my head, the only great batsmen that Lillee faced that Marshall didn't was the W.I lineup of Greenidge, Lloyd and Viv (and Greenidge and Viiv were now coming into their own in '76). He didn't bowl on the dust bowls of India and had the advantage of bowling bouncers at batsmen without helmets, Marshall come into his own after WSC wheen helmets were the norm.
Lillee was great and I too mean no disrespect to the great man, but there is little to suggest that he was better than McGrath far less Marshall.

 

[watson]

....but there is little to suggest that he was better than McGrath far less Marshall

Except that there is a host of Lillee's peers that would disagree with you Kyear. One cannot dismiss their opinion lightly;

The best fast bowler to have ever played the game. No fast bowler, anywhere, has ever displayed as much determination or ability to swing and cut the ball, not even the great Marshall. Lillee was always in command of his cricket, despite his several on-field trysts with opponents; psychological warfare at his best.

COLIN CROFT

The greatest fast bowler post-war. DK was a real whole-hearted performer.

MARTIN CROWE

I’m not selecting him because he was the biggest downfall in my career, it's just that Dennis, along with Michael Holding, had the best action that a fast bowler could ask for: he was so rhythmic from his run-up through to his follow through. As an opponent, I always looked at him and admired.

GORDON GREENIDGE

The greatest fast bowler of all time. Having played against him, I am able to say how big, strong, aggressive, and confident he was, with a magnificent approach to the wicket, gathering pace.

RICHARD HADLEE

He was totally professional and worked extremely hard at his game. It never mattered if the wicket was not to his liking because he would always bowl his heart out. Dennis made the batsman think and when you batted against him, you knew you were in a battle.

CLIVE LLOYD

There’s no doubt that he was a very strong and fearless bowler. I saw him in a Test match in 1972-73 when he had a hairline fracture of his spine. He came on and bowled for one and a half hours in that condition. He knew he had it as the doctor had told him. He was in a cast for 6 months afterwards.

Also, on our 1976-77 tour he had a hamstring injury in one match but he still got through 40 overs. A person with that much heart and dedication would be an asset to any team. But he was also a great bowler with his courage and I take great pride out of the fact that I had some success against him.

MAJID KHAN

Phenomenal record at Test level, with a great outswinger. He would definitely partner Michael Holding with the new ball.

MALCOLM MARSHALL

Always aggressive and was quick in his second spell as his first; subsequently, Dennis was the captain’s dream.

BARRY RICHARDS

The best fast bowler that I ever saw. He had everything that you could ever ask of a quick bowler: a good run-up, aggression, pace, will to win, and the ability to move the ball at speeds of 90mph and above.

ANDY ROBERTS

The greatest fast bowler of all time. He was a real hard worker who was always probing away against batsman. Regardless of how good the batsman was, Lillee always punished the poor stroke.

LAWRENCE ROWE

I’ve never seen a more accurate fast bowler in my life. He used to make you play every ball. Like the other quicks in my time, his strength was to make the ball rise from a good length. He had problems with his back and was never a fast bowler afterwards, but he still took a lot of wickets. He struggled hard for his wickets, but because of his line and length he was successful.

ZAHEER ABBAS

From: 'IN A LEAGUE OF THEIR OWN - 100 Cricket Legends Select their World XI' (2010)

Incidently, of the 100 'legends' polled, 53 of them selected Lillee as one of the fast bolwers for their ATG team. Marshall came a distant second with only 35 votes. McGrath was no where with a mere 8 votes.

 

[kyear2]

"Marshall, to me, would be the great quick bowler of the period I played against. He was the best bowler I played against. I was just starting off my international career when he was finishing. I had seen him play a lot on TV as well. He was part of that great West Indies side. To me, Marshall is what quick bowling is all about, and it was a challenge, a challenge I did my best at."

Alec Stewart

"…in the All-Time XI of the greatest cricketers, there will be no-one to take the new ball ahead of him."

Wisden.

"he was quite simply the most brilliant bowler of my time"

Graham Gooch

"Malcolm Marshall was the best bowler. He was not huge, released the ball late, bowled sharp, was up there, bowled pretty quick. He just got wickets everywhere, on pitches where we never did."

Jeff Thomson

"He excelled for West Indies and for Hampshire, the county team he loved. He may well have been the greatest quick of them all. Vale Malcolm Marshall. "

Ashley Mallett

Malcolm Marshall: The greatest fast bowler ever*|*sportingenquirer.com

Wasim Akram, Dilip Vengsarkar and Allan Border also called him the best they had seen with Akran calling him his fast bowling idol and ""His skills were to pick the mistakes of batsmen straight away and spot their weaknesses"

Like Lillee, Akram also has his fair share of praise but his test numbers also don't back it up.

 

[ohnoitsyou]

I've always thought it was quite telling that Lillee is seen as beeing on par with Hadlee and Imran, yet Marshall is seen as comfortably better than either.

 

[kyear2]

For me Lillee is basically on par with Hadlee and Holding.

 

[smash84]

Except that there is a host of Lillee's peers that would disagree with you Kyear. One cannot dismiss their opinion lightly;
.[/B]

You probably missed out a few other names as well including Imran Khan, Viv Richards and Javed Miandad (yeah despite arguably having with Lillee the most infamous battle fought on a cricket pitch)

 

[smash84]

I am always surprised at the number of rave testimonials that Lillee receives. Maybe we do lose a lot by just running statsguru

 

[Gowza]

today's team:

Gavaskar
Hutton
Bradman
Chappell
Lara
Sobers
Gilcrhist
Procter
Marshall
O'Reilly
Lillee

 

[kyear2]

If we go strictly by anecdotal evidence and testimonials then there is a five man group that is in contention for the title of the world's greatest. Lillee, Marshall, Akram, Warne and Barnes. No one comes close to the acclaim that they receive. I just belive that the anecdotal and the statistical should match up and if that is the case then McGrath would probably replace Lillee, Akram and Warne.

So which do we trust more anecdotal (romanticism) or statistical (cold hard facts) evidence, or some combination of both.

 

[smash84]

So which do we trust more anecdotal (romanticism) or statistical (cold hard facts) evidence, or some combination of both.

A 2 run difference in bowling average doesn't necessarily mean superiority of one bowler over the other. A lot of such variation could probably be explained by other factors such as team fielding, support from other end etc etc.

Cold hard stats wouldn't tell you that batsmen were shaken up by Lillee but they holed out to Max Walker for e.g.

So maybe small variation in averages shouldn't really be given as much weightage as is probably assigned at CW.

 

[honestbharani]

Messing with a bowling attack with full variety while maintaining a team that's still reasonably balanced * …..

Hutton
Gavaskar
Bradman
G.Chappell
Sobers
Gilchrist
Wasim
Warne
Lillee
Garner
Murali


* because I should be writing something

Now that is an interesting exercise...


I remember recently Australia played a XI where they could call upon Left Arm Fast, Right Arm Fast, Right Arm Offie, Leggie and Left Arm Offie and Leggie and Medium Pace as well.. Was quite amazing. Believe it was Australia against Windies sometime in the late noughties.. Not sure though..

 

[kyear2]

A 2 run difference in bowling average doesn't necessarily mean superiority of one bowler over the other. A lot of such variation could probably be explained by other factors such as team fielding, support from other end etc etc.

Cold hard stats wouldn't tell you that batsmen were shaken up by Lillee but they holed out to Max Walker for e.g.

So maybe small variation in averages shouldn't really be given as much weightage as is probably assigned at CW.

That us a good point. It also applies to all bowlers who has played.

 

[NUFAN]

So maybe small variation in averages shouldn't really be given as much weightage as is probably assigned at CW.

I would like to think that the majority of people on here don't give much weightage to small statistic variations. Actually, I haven't seen an argument for ages where someone has just said player x is better than player y because his average is slightly better.

 

[Coronis]

Pollock averages 60.97. Therefore he is better than Headley, who only averaged a piddly 60.83.

 

[akilana]

but Headley was my childhood hero and my dad told me he was the best batsman he saw therefore he is the better of the two.

 

[smash84]

I would like to think that the majority of people on here don't give much weightage to small statistic variations. Actually, I haven't seen an argument for ages where someone has just said player x is better than player y because his average is slightly better.

Yes but what other arguments have you seen of McGrath or Marshall being better than Lillee?

 

[viriya]

If we go strictly by anecdotal evidence and testimonials then there is a five man group that is in contention for the title of the world's greatest. Lillee, Marshall, Akram, Warne and Barnes. No one comes close to the acclaim that they receive. I just belive that the anecdotal and the statistical should match up and if that is the case then McGrath would probably replace Lillee, Akram and Warne.
So which do we trust more anecdotal (romanticism) or statistical (cold hard facts) evidence, or some combination of both.

That's an interesting exercise, but cold-hard facts should back up the acclaim. Sometimes, even the past greats are biased for/against a player.

A classic example is how they didn't include Murali in the ICC Test Team of the Year in 2004 and picked Warne over him, even when Murali was actually nominated for the Test Player of the Year (Warne wasn't) in the first place. It was an obvious snub that had no logical explanation. If Warne had a better year - he would've been nominated over Murali in the Test Player of the Year shortlist.

In the period considered (1 Aug 2003 - 31 Jul 2004):
Murali: 8 tests 68 wkts 17.47 avg
Warne: 5 tests 36 wkts 22.25 avg

Reaction of his non-selection here:
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/09/08/1094530697444.html?from=storylhs

 

[Slifer]

I say this in all seriousness, and I don't disrespect Marshall at all, but he probably bowled in the weakest batting era ever (80s), while Lillee possibly bowled in the best.

I would also add, and this is significant, that Marshall bowled 36 overs per test, while Lillee bowled 43.

With all due respect this just isn't so. Lillee and Marshall's careers literally overlapped so the only teams that Lillee played that Marshall didn't was WI and vice versa. U are not goin to convince me or ne one else with knowledge of that era that the Indian, Pakistani, English or Nz teams were that much stronger for Lillee's era vs MM. Obviously, MM cannot play against his own team so that definitely shouldn't count against him. And Lillee played the overwhelming majority of the teams at home (through no fault of his own I admit). I will admit that Oz in the early 80s were a pretty poor batting lineup but towards the end of the 80s he played some pretty good Oz lineups with: Taylor, Waugh M/S, Jones, Boon etc.

 

[Agent Nationaux]

What's the point of arguing over Marshall and Lillee? Let's just agree that both are in the All Time Test XI and that the greatest Test bowler of all of time is either one of the two.

Imran
Marshall
Lillee

My 3 man attack.

 

[watson]

What's the point of arguing over Marshall and Lillee? Let's just agree that both are in the All Time Test XI and that the greatest Test bowler of all of time is either one of the two.

Imran
Marshall
Lillee

My 3 man attack.

The point is not to argue Marshall over Lillee, or Lillee over Marshall, but rather to highlight the fact that there are good and sufficient reasons to consider either fast-bowler as the best/greatest of all time. This should not be an exercise of exclusion.