All Time Test XI Which Team will Win ?

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

Wow nice one Tate is a very good option as he also can bat little bit but for now i went for Grimmett as he was pivotal along with Reilly , i took Bradman at no5 as george headley scored all his 10 centuries at no3, Hammond was very good at no3 scored 14 centuries but also good at no4 scored 7 centuries at that position, Bradman has very good average at no3, no5 and no7 so went for no5 as he was capable of scoring triple and double centuries with the help of tailenders.

Surely you would want The Greatest to bat higher.On a consistent basis it would be way beneficial for the team to have Bradman at 3.
Hammond and Headley are some of the best ever,should do well regardless of batting positions.

 

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

1900 - 39
Change this to

6) Faulkner 7) Ames 8) Gregory 9) Larwood 10) O'Reilly 11) Barnes

McCabe is the man when needed.Not sure you would want to drop him.

 

[CricketFan90s]

Another option is Garner instead of Lillee. His height would add to the attack.
Hadlee, Marshall, Imran, Garner plus Underwood

Garner has better strike rate and average than Lillee but may have to stick to Lillee as he was the trend setter for 70s and a world record holder for most wickets. if we add world series cricket wickets of 67 his total wickets will go upto 355+67 = 422 which was amazing number in 70s and early 80s. However, Garner was the main reason for England's blackwash in 1984 so he is a danger man.
I am confused again
Lillee or Garner ? i will not take Holding as i feel Lillee is more multi dimensional compared to Holding.

 

[CricketFan90s]

McCabe is the man when needed.Not sure you would want to drop him.

McCabe was considered technically superior to Bradman and very good hooker of the ball. Australians still regard 3 of his innings as the best they have ever seen. 48 avg with the bat in 1930s which i rate higher than career averages of 36 and 40 by woolley and Faulkner in 1920s and 1910s.
But i may be wrong if someone comes up with a better logic

 

[CricketFan90s]

Surely you would want The Greatest to bat higher.On a consistent basis it would be way beneficial for the team to have Bradman at 3.
Hammond and Headley are some of the best ever,should do well regardless of batting positions.

i have to agree with you will go Bradman no3, Headley no4 and Hammond no5 ( as hammond also need to do some bowling will keep him at no5 )

 

[Socerer 01]

Surely you would want The Greatest to bat higher.On a consistent basis it would be way beneficial for the team to have Bradman at 3.
Hammond and Headley are some of the best ever,should do well regardless of batting positions.

wasn’t she a model, when did she become a mixed cricketer too

 

[CricketFan90s]

wasn’t she a model, when did she become a mixed cricketer too

Who is a Model ?

 

[Socerer 01]

Who is a Model ?

oh you’re new here doubt you’d know… that was an account here posing as a model and thirst trap

 

[CricketFan90s]

oh you’re new here doubt you’d know… that was an account here posing as a model and thirst trap

I have no idea about it.

 

[CricketFan90s]

My New Video after Todays Discussion Let me know if anyone does not agree with the 4 Teams and please vote which team is stronger in the poll.

 

[OverratedSanity]

McCabe was considered technically superior to Bradman and very good hooker of the ball. Australians still regard 3 of his innings as the best they have ever seen. 48 avg with the bat in 1930s which i rate higher than career averages of 36 and 40 by woolley and Faulkner in 1920s and 1910s.
But i may be wrong if someone comes up with a better logic

Why? Wasn't the 1930s one of the highest scoring decades ever?

 

[CricketFan90s]

Why? Wasn't the 1930s one of the highest scoring decades ever?

Sutcliffe had an average of 64.34 from 51 innings in 1920s and 55 from 34 innings in 1930s
Hammond had an average of 67.56 from 30 innings in 1920s and 59.70 from 99 innings in 1930s
only 2 players who scored some good number of runs in 2 decades so unable to decide on it

 

[CricketFan90s]

My New Video after Todays Discussion Let me know if anyone does not agree with the 4 Teams and please vote which team is stronger in the poll.

I have changed my mind and removed Lara and included Waugh

 

[OverratedSanity]

I have changed my mind and removed Lara and included Waugh

Disgusting

 

[The Sean]

Just checked the Stats Anderson took 429 wickets at an average of 23.79 with 24 five wickets in England Woooooow
but outside England 224 wickets at an average of 31.16 with 8 five wickets not good.

Yes, but this team is only from 2010 onwards and in that time Anderson's away record is 180 wickets at 27. Plus an average of 20 in six neutral Tests as well.

 

[CricketFan90s]

Disgusting

Lara can be included but will come in the place of Ponting but for now went for Ponting as he is more experienced at No3 but i don't mind replacing him with Lara. Lara scored 375 and 400 at No3 and averaged 60.46 in 66 innings scoring 9 centuries. Ponting at no3 196 innings at an average of 56.27 and scored 32 centuries with highest score of 257.

So let me know from you and others if they are ok with Lara to come as No3 instead of Ponting

 

[CricketFan90s]

Yes, but this team is only from 2010 onwards and in that time Anderson's away record is 180 wickets at 27. Plus an average of 20 in six neutral Tests as well.

Anderson is a Legend he is like Walsh getting better with Age. He deserves to be included in the All Time XI for his consistency. Best Bowler of 2010 Ashes with 24 Wickets.

 

[Socerer 01]

Lara can be included but will come in the place of Ponting but for now went for Ponting as he is more experienced at No3 but i don't mind replacing him with Lara. Lara scored 375 and 400 at No3 and averaged 60.46 in 66 innings scoring 9 centuries. Ponting at no3 196 innings at an average of 56.27 and scored 32 centuries with highest score of 257.

So let me know from you and others if they are ok with Lara to come as No3 instead of Ponting

gee you do like your numbers don’t you

 

[CricketFan90s]

gee you do like your numbers don’t you

What’s your opinion?

 

[CricketFan90s]

Disgusting

You have not replied give your explanation