All time XI

[tooextracool]

I think Botham did not do enough justice to his batting talents. He had scored 11 centuries in his first 51 tests and only 3 more in the next 51 of which only ONE in the last 38 !!. As I wrote to someone else here, he was good enough to play for England as a batsman but I feel he was not willing to work at his batting. He should have taken his batting more seriously and he would have averaged in the 40's.

because kallis is such a brilliant bowler? i wouldnt even consider kallis to be an all rounder because he wouldnt make it into any side on his bowling alone.

 

[luckyeddie]

See what you mean. I think he perhaps ate a few too many pies and no doubt lost it a bit towards the end, a big shame.

I think you'll find it was a few too many, er, 'hash brownies'.

Doesn't matter to me, though. He (Botham) was (read this carefully) the most charismatic player I have ever seen in my lifetime, and am ever likely to see.

Not one of my favourites by any means - but I would crawl on my (ample) belly through a bar-room full of heart-broken Aussies to watch him in his pomp just once more.

 

[twctopcat]

I think you'll find it was a few too many, er, 'hash brownies'.

Doesn't matter to me, though. He (Botham) was (read this carefully) the most charismatic player I have ever seen in my lifetime, and am ever likely to see.

Not one of my favourites by any means - but I would crawl on my (ample) belly through a bar-room full of heart-broken Aussies to watch him in his pomp just once more.

He did love those 'hash' brownies didn't he, very mellow. He looked pretty damn fetching in WC '92 in that 'skin tight' kit.
Seriously i'm perhaps a bit biased but the first cricket i ever saw was when my dad sat me down to watch his botham's ashes video tape, wow. If i never saw any cricket apart from those tests i would probably die a happy man. Truly brilliant stuff.

 

[delkap]

Best Test XI

I am only considering all-time greats or players I hv seen in recent times. Cricket is more competitive now, compared to 1880-1970's Hence just because someone had an unbelievable record in say 1940's doesn't make him all time great. Most of the good players then were either English or Australian and just played on limited venues. Considering recent decades give a true picture.

1. Sunil Gavaskar (opener with most runs, plenty of 100's against WI during 70s and 80's when WI bowling was at its fearsome best)
2. Don Bradman (he can surely bat at any position)
3. Rahul Dravid (best no.3 in recent history)
4. Sachin Tendulkar (any doubt?? Bradman called him the best..)
5. Gary Sobers (Best all-rounder ever)
6. Brian Lara (has played some incredible innings, Aust will know)
7. Adam Gilchrist(w.k) (best keeping batsman)
8. Richard Hadlee (fastest to 400 wkts by a mile)
9. Wasim Akram (capt) (best left-arm fast bowler, variety)
10. Glenn Mcgrath (match-winner in most situations)
11. Mutthiah Muralitharan(record-holder in wkts)

12th man: Shaun Pollock

Extras: Shane Warne, Courtney Walsh, Ricky Ponting, Matthew Hayden (current form has been exceptional)

 

[Craig]

Dravid? Gilchrist? Pollack?

 

[luckyeddie]

On the contrary Delkap - considering recent history gives the falsest picture possible.

Even Headingley this week and any New Zealand pitch you might wish to consider over recent years ar a typical West Indian seamers' paradise would probably have been considered a batting paradise when compared to the wickets which existed in yesteryear.

 

[tooextracool]

Dravid?

dont see any reason why dravid shouldnt be in there...

 

[roseboy64]

Dravid's not good enough yet to be in a best XI.When he gets more centuries than Lara he'll be considered.

 

[Craig]

dont see any reason why dravid shouldnt be in there...

I don't consider him to be worthy of a spot ahead of George Headley at number 3.

 

[delkap]

George Headly played 22 matches comared to Dravid's 78 and yet only averaged 2 above him. Dravid isn't finished yet.

 

[Craig]

To be fair there was not as much Test cricket played then.

Plus players didn't have the advantage of aeroplanes to travel around to play more cricket.

 

[luckyeddie]

George Headly played 22 matches comared to Dravid's 78 and yet only averaged 2 above him. Dravid isn't finished yet.

See notes about uncovered pitches passim.

There's one other factor that I've never seen anyone mention in any 'then and now' debate - and that's protective clothing.

Batsmen up until the 1970's wore CAPS ( ) when batting - and I've often wondered whether being aware of the possibility that the next ball that you face might be the last you ever would, ever swayed a batsman's judgement.

How many times have you seen modern batsmen get hit on the helmet 2 or 3 times in an innings, yet go on to score heavily?

 

[Waughney]

This years boxing day test springs to mind

 

[luckyeddie]

This years boxing day test springs to mind

That's right. Didn't Sehwag wear a couple, Ponting and Ganguly got tagged likewise.

 

[Deja moo]

See notes about uncovered pitches passim.

There's one other factor that I've never seen anyone mention in any 'then and now' debate - and that's protective clothing.

Batsmen up until the 1970's wore CAPS ( ) when batting - and I've often wondered whether being aware of the possibility that the next ball that you face might be the last you ever would, ever swayed a batsman's judgement.

How many times have you seen modern batsmen get hit on the helmet 2 or 3 times in an innings, yet go on to score heavily?

But couldnt it be that the fear of being hit on the head caused the pre 70s batsmen to ensure that they concentrated extra-hard on the delivery , as opposed to batsmen nowadays who are lulled into a sense of complacency because of the protective gear ?
IMO ,if we outlaw all protective gear now , the present batsmen ( the good ones atleast) will raise their game to avoid being hit.

 

[luckyeddie]

But couldnt it be that the fear of being hit on the head caused the pre 70s batsmen to ensure that they concentrated extra-hard on the delivery , as opposed to batsmen nowadays who are lulled into a sense of complacency because of the protective gear ?
IMO ,if we outlaw all protective gear now , the present batsmen ( the good ones atleast) will raise their game to avoid being hit.

I think you'll find that they would play 'differently', probably being much less likely to get forward.

Note here that in no way am I suggesting that protective clothing is outlawed (the health and safety people would go nuts) - but if coaches thought for one minute that it would help their little darlings concentrate a little harder, don't you think that they would have tried it?

 

[Waughney]

That's right. Didn't Sehwag wear a couple, Ponting and Ganguly got tagged likewise.

Chopra copped 2 or 3, 1 really viscous one from Brett Lee, I still can't work out how India didn't lose a wicket in that first session.

 

[tooextracool]

That's right. Didn't Sehwag wear a couple, Ponting and Ganguly got tagged likewise.

and mark richardson....

 

[Raj123]

Chopra copped 2 or 3, 1 really viscous one from Brett Lee, I still can't work out how India didn't lose a wicket in that first session.

1. butter fingers
2. out of rhythm bowler

 

[Waughney]

and mark richardson....

We were talking about the boxing day Test Aus v Ind 2003