• 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.

Who is the worst player of all time that would be selected in every XI in history?

Prince EWS

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
ataraxia said:
Greig is too good imo. I'm interested in a team which JR Reid doesn't get into -- there's surely one as he's a tier below Woolley / Greig.
Click to expand...
He'd have probably made Waugh's Australia and Chapman's England ahead of a batsman because they lacked good fifth bowling options but batted all the way down, but there might be some teams with a solid middle order and a gun allrounder that he'd miss out in. The WI team LT listed might not pick him - not as good as Kallicharran with the bat, and his bowling value add wouldn't really be needed because of Sobers.
 
Prince EWS

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
ankitj said:
Plenty of teams. Will he make India of today? I don't think.
Click to expand...
Haha that's a good one actually. I think he'd made it sometimes when they were unsure of their pace/spin balance because he did both, but I'm sure they'd leave him out sometimes too.
 
ataraxia

ataraxia

International Coach
trundler said:
Australia 1920 with Macartney and Armstrong.
Click to expand...
Kelleway was an auto-inclusion right? Reid's fairly comfortably better. btw I love the variety of sides posted here - and this thread in general
Prince EWS said:
He'd have probably made Waugh's Australia and Chapman's England ahead of a batsman because they lacked good fifth bowling options but batted all the way down, but there might be some teams with a solid middle order and a gun allrounder that he'd miss out in. The WI team LT listed might not pick him - not as good as Kallicharran with the bat, and his bowling value add wouldn't really be needed because of Sobers.
Click to expand...
Was there ever Holding/Garner/Roberts/Gibbs 70s WI? Reid/Sobers + three bowlers is decent balance; how were WI's openers then? Fredericks/Greenidge?
ankitj said:
Plenty of teams. Will he make India of today? I don't think.
Click to expand...
As a specialist bat. But a couple of years back - I'm sure there's a test.
 
trundler

trundler

Request Your Custom Title Now!
ataraxia said:
Kelleway was an auto-inclusion right? Reid's fairly comfortably better. btw I love the variety of sides posted here - and this thread in general

Was there ever Holding/Garner/Roberts/Gibbs 70s WI? Reid/Sobers + three bowlers is decent balance; how were WI's openers then? Fredericks/Greenidge?

As a specialist bat. But a couple of years back - I'm sure there's a test.
Click to expand...
I disagree about Kelleway being worse. Think he might be better in both departments actually. The best part of this thread is finding possible answers then scrutinising them.
 
ataraxia

ataraxia

International Coach
Huh, I've never really rated him - and certainly not over Reid.

Genuinely good post-war, but 8 out of 15 pre-war matches were against SA. **** bowler pre-war -- 38 avg is hot garbage re 1910s standards. I reckon pre-war Kelleway was a slightly greater bat than Reid and worse bowl; post-war lesser bat and greater bowl.

Anyway, Reid's surely replacing a JM Taylor, Pellew type if not an AR? mid 30s bat avgs, and inflated cos Aus 20s lol flat. Anyway it makes for a silly number of ARs.
 
trundler

trundler

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Reid's batting is boosted by old timey India bashing too tho. How good a batsman was he? I'm not sure if I'd take him over a 36 average batsman without his bowling but I don't know anything about him.
 
ataraxia

ataraxia

International Coach
Better batsman than his average, in an absolutely horrid side is how I remember him. Decent average (and econ) for an NZ dark ages specialist bowler. I suppose my opinion of him is heavily biased lol
 
trundler

trundler

Request Your Custom Title Now!
ataraxia said:
Better batsman than his average, in an absolutely horrid side is how I remember him. Decent average (and econ) for an NZ dark ages specialist bowler. I suppose my opinion of him is heavily biased lol
Click to expand...
Hmm, Hanif is rated as being much better than a 43 average batsman for this reason too.

I have somewhat heretical views on all rounders too because of which I'm mostly thinking of guys who took less than 2 WPM as competitors for MOB spots.
 
ataraxia

ataraxia

International Coach
Guys who average 33 are weird - like, one may pick Reid over Vettori for AT NZ because balance and he (Reid) was viewed as a top bat, but then there's only a 3-point average difference.

1.5 WPM is great imo. Fits the 5th bowler slot perfectly. Why I rate Kallis so much.
 
trundler

trundler

Request Your Custom Title Now!
ataraxia said:
Guys who average 33 are weird - like, one may pick Reid over Vettori for AT NZ because balance and he (Reid) was viewed as a top bat, but then there's only a 3-point average difference.
Click to expand...
Allow me to introduce you to a doctrine that solves this quandary. Lower order averages don't count. Nor do averages for low WPMs. :ph34r:
 
TheJediBrah

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
ataraxia said:
Guys who average 33 are weird - like, one may pick Reid over Vettori for AT NZ because balance and he (Reid) was viewed as a top bat, but then there's only a 3-point average difference.

1.5 WPM is great imo. Fits the 5th bowler slot perfectly. Why I rate Kallis so much.
Click to expand...
I mean there's also like, as we all know, averages aren't standardised and vary greatly depending on era, conditions, team, opposition, role and probably dozens of other things I can't be bothered mentioning.

A guy averaging 33 in 1900 v a guy averaging 33 in 2010 from different countries are not necessarily even close to equal just because they have the same average

Look at Victor Trumper's average isn't it like 30 something
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top