Teja.
Global Moderator
Yeah, that's a fair point and well made.
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
What is your ALL TIME WORLD XI TEAM for tests?
- Thread starter micz
- Start date
smash84
The Tiger King
I love this team
viriya
International Captain
Lara for Headley (not enough Tests - not saying he's not up there)
Gavaskar for Hobbs (comparable average vs better bowling)
would make it my XI.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Completely AWTA.
Coronis
International Coach
ha
viriya
International Captain
In all seriousness Gavaskar's 13 hundreds vs WI is not what it seems, only 5 came vs a bowling attack that included at least 2 of Roberts, Croft, Marshall, Garner and Holding.
He still batted at a time when world cricket had better bowling than the 1915-1929 period though. Hobbs played mainly in the 20s when the best bowlers he faced were Mailey, Gregory and Faulkner - good but not great bowlers.
Coronis
International Coach
Conveniently ignoring the pre war years. Also Hobbs averaged close to 60 whereas Gavaskar averaged close to 50. Apart from his dropoff towards the end of his test career. When he was you know, 46+.
viriya
International Captain
Even in the pre-war years, Hobbs didn't face Turner, Trumble or Spofforth.. He didn't face his countrymen Barnes, Lohmann, Briggs, Peel either of course. The only name that comes up is maybe Monty Noble.
51 vs 57 is quite a big difference but you have to take into account that Gavaskar played more than double the number of test matches Hobbs did. If he had retired at Hobbs's 102 test innings Gavaskar would've had a 57.47 average. Hobbs had a pre-war average of 57.32 - not much different from his overall number.
Last edited:
watson
Banned
All good points by viriya. Although we shouldn't forget Grimmett (dismissed Hobbs twice), or under-rate Cotter, Saunders, Hordern, Whitty, Vogler, Armstrong, Noble, Mailey, Gregory and McDonald too much.
But yeah, I'm still tending more toward Gavaskar and Hutton these days, rather than Hobbs for the simple reason that we all know that modern fast bowlers are consistently better than their pre-WW2 counterparts.
But yeah, I'm still tending more toward Gavaskar and Hutton these days, rather than Hobbs for the simple reason that we all know that modern fast bowlers are consistently better than their pre-WW2 counterparts.
Last edited:
the big bambino
International Captain
Jack Gregory was one of the great names of cricket and Mailey one of its greatest leg spinners inspite of attempts to revise their reps downwards.
Last edited:
watson
Banned
Hobbs V Gregory
Tests = 17 (1920 to 1928)
Runs = 1624
Ave = 60.14
Hobbs V Gregory + McDonald
Tests = 4 (1920)
Runs = 255
Ave = 42.50
From those stats it looks at though he did very well against Jack Gregory. However, 17 Test matches is not a lot of Test matches and represents just 28% of his total 61 Tests. If we team Gregory up with McDonald then that number of Tests falls to just 4.
The point being of course that Gavaskar played more Test matches against genuine fast bowling. Not just against one or two genuine fast bowlers of good quality, but a whole plethora from John Snow to Malcolm Marshall. I haven't looked at the percentage yet, but I suspect that it will be higher than 28%.
ohnoitsyou
International Regular
This Week.
Hutton
Grace (3)
Bradman
Chappell (7)
Viv
Gilly
Imran (2)
Hadlee (1)
Warne (6)
Barnes (4)
Murali (5)
Legitimately think this bowling attack doesn't need Marshall, wouldn't add anything to either the old or new ball bowling.
Hutton
Grace (3)
Bradman
Chappell (7)
Viv
Gilly
Imran (2)
Hadlee (1)
Warne (6)
Barnes (4)
Murali (5)
Legitimately think this bowling attack doesn't need Marshall, wouldn't add anything to either the old or new ball bowling.
Last edited:
The Sean
Cricketer Of The Year
And if Hobbs had retired in 1928 rather than 1930 he'd have an average of 61. Over a period of twenty years.
The number of matches played is essentially meaningless when you're comparing players 60 years apart, assuming they played a full number of matches relative to their era. And Hobbs' pre-war average is mentioned not because it elevates his career average markedly, but because batting was generally far more difficult than it was after the war, and yet he still averaged 57.
Last edited:
The Sean
Cricketer Of The Year
Why would you give the ball to Grace before Barnes?
the big bambino
International Captain
Its an interesting stat but Hobbs faced other challengers and his ave is still high 50s. Neither does it bear repeating that Sunny managed to dodge (by circumstance not design) the best WI and even Aussie teams. So I don't think a distinction can be made btwn the 2 on this issue. On another matter; apart from the unique example of the WI I wouldn't always agree that post ww2 attacks are consistently better than before that war.
ohnoitsyou
International Regular
Same reason I would give it to Murali before Warne or Hadlee before Imran
The Sean
Cricketer Of The Year
That answer doesn't make a lot of sense to me, but do I take it to mean that you think Grace was a better bowler than Barnes? Or at the very least a faster one who should get a newer ball?
Last edited:
Teja.
Global Moderator
Post 1990 XI:
1. G.C. Smith
2. V. Sehwag
3. B.C. Lara
4. S.R. Tendulkar
5. J.H. Kallis
6. S.R. Waugh
7. A.C. Gilchrist
8. S.M. Pollock
9. W. Younis
10. M. Muralitharan
11. G.D. McGrath
Was a tough choice between Waqar, Ambrose, Wasim, Donald and Steyn for No. 9 and feel bad to leave the second best bowler of the period and third most important cricketer after Kallis and Murali out. (Warne)
I rate Ponting more than Waugh but Waugh is a better fit for No. 6. Openers are definitely the weak link.
1. G.C. Smith
2. V. Sehwag
3. B.C. Lara
4. S.R. Tendulkar
5. J.H. Kallis
6. S.R. Waugh
7. A.C. Gilchrist
8. S.M. Pollock
9. W. Younis
10. M. Muralitharan
11. G.D. McGrath
Was a tough choice between Waqar, Ambrose, Wasim, Donald and Steyn for No. 9 and feel bad to leave the second best bowler of the period and third most important cricketer after Kallis and Murali out. (Warne)
I rate Ponting more than Waugh but Waugh is a better fit for No. 6. Openers are definitely the weak link.