CW All Time Country XI Discussion Thread

[Slifer]

Confused? Nah. McGrath and Lillee are arguably the greatest bowlers of all time and Davidson was the best left armer. Then you have Miller.

Unless Im mistaken, Davidson didnt get picked for ne of the all time Oz elevens so mentioning him is mute. Had he been selected (which Ive always maintained he should) then u might have a point. Nevertheless man to man

MM vs Lillee = MM
Ambrose vs Mcgrath = Mcgrath
Holding vs Davidson= Holding
GArner vs Miller = Garner

 

[Red]

Yeah, separating #3 and the middle order is a cheat. I'm not having any of that. Lump them together and pick one country.

FWIW there is no problem with having # 3 as a separate position in my opinion. It's a specialist spot as far as I'm concerned.

 

[AndyZaltzHair]

The batting order is colloquially subdivided into:[citation needed]

opening batsmen or openers (the two batsmen who start, or open, the innings)
upper or top order (batsmen at positions three and four in the order)
middle order (batsmen five to seven)
lower order or tail (batsmen eight to eleven)

It's from wiki and mind the info might not be very reliable but it solves no.3/6 issue somewhat

1. Jack Hobbs
2. Len Hutton

3. Don Bradman
4. Greg Chappell

5. Brian Lara
6. Garry Sobers

Since we are including a keeper at no.7, maybe it's possible to divert and bring in a different nationality player at this spot and then the lower order/ tail

 

[G.I.Joe]

FWIW there is no problem with having # 3 as a separate position in my opinion. It's a specialist spot as far as I'm concerned.

You're all crazy! I can understand combining #3 with the openers instead of with the middle order, but there's no way it's a separate entity to both the openers and the middle order. It's not that specialised a position as people try to make it out.

 

[watson]

It's from wiki and mind the info might not be very reliable but it solves no.3/6 issue somewhat

1. Jack Hobbs
2. Len Hutton

3. Don Bradman
4. Greg Chappell

5. Brian Lara
6. Garry Sobers

Since we are including a keeper at no.7, maybe it's possible to divert and bring in a different nationality player at this spot and then the lower order/ tail

Yes fair enough. So which country gives the best pace attack - South Africa or Pakistan? (Assuming that Australia and the West Indies are now banned because they already contributed batsman)

Donald
Procter
Steyn
(Bari or Kirmani or Engineer become the possible Keepers)

OR

Imran
Waqar
Wasim
(Waite or Kirmani or Engineer or Lindsay become the possible Keepers)

And Murali is the obvious spinner.

 

[Red]

You're all crazy! I can understand combining #3 with the openers instead of with the middle order, but there's no way it's a separate entity to both the openers and the middle order. It's not that specialised a position as people try to make it out.

Opening is opening (a specialist position). The middle order is 4-7. Number 3 is a different beast. Not every batsman can thrive there. Some players are more suited to 4-6 than 3, even "better" batsmen.

 

[Coronis]

Personally I'd go with the South Africans here, though most will go with the Pakistanis.

 

[watson]

Opening is opening (a specialist position). The middle order is 4-7. Number 3 is a different beast. Not every batsman can thrive there. Some players are more suited to 4-6 than 3, even "better" batsmen.

That's why I like the category of 'Top Order' batsman because the first 3 batsman have to be 'new ball specialists'. As Geoff Boycott pointed out - "The new ball goes off like a fire-cracker when it hits the pitch."

 

[Coronis]

Its interesting when you take a look at their stats.

Mike Procter - 7 matches, 41 wickets @ 15.02, 36.9 SR
Allan Donald - 72 matches, 330 wickets @ 22.25, 47.0 SR
Dale Steyn - 65 matches, 332 wickets @ 22.65, 41.1 SR

Imran Khan - 88 matches, 362 wickets @ 22.81, 53.7 SR
Wasim Akram - 104 matches, 414 wickets @ 23.62, 54.6 SR
Waqar Younis - 87 matches, 373 wickets @ 23.56, 43.4 SR

Not saying X is better than Y, and I know stats aren't everything, but its just... interesting.

 

[kyear2]

The idea of going with a speciast No. 3 is from Benaud and (I believe) Bradman when they were making their All Time teams, nothin I made up.

Quick question if anyone knows. Who was the better slipper Barry Richards, Sunil Gavaskar or Gordon Grenidge?

 

[kyear2]

The idea of going with a speciast No. 3 is from Benaud and (I believe) Bradman when they were making their All Time teams, nothin I made up.

Quick question if anyone knows. Who was the better slipper Barry Richards, Sunil Gavaskar or Gordon Grenidge?

I know all three fielded in the slips, know Greenidge was quite good, but don't know much about the other two.
How good were they?

 

[AndyZaltzHair]

I know all three fielded in the slips, know Greenidge was quite good, but don't know much about the other two.
How good were they?

Probably Barry Richards; hard to distinguish actually. Remember reading somewhere Greenidge used to stand at gully and Richards at slip when they both played together in county games. Sunil Gavaskar was an excellent slip fielder too from all accounts.

 

[kyear2]

Yea, I had read that Riachards and Greenidge fielded in the slips together at Hampshire and formed a good combination, have seen a couple of good grabs by Sunny as well but neither are speciffically mentioned for the skill. Opener and spinner really are the two weakest positions, depth wise when buliding an ATG XI. Fast bowlers and the middle order reallly have much deeper and stronger filed to choose from.

 

[Laxmandas Kewalramani]

Sir Jack Hobbs
Sir Len Hutton *
Wally Hammond
Ken Barrington
Denis Compton
Peter May
Sir Ian Botham
Allan Knott +
Harold Larwood/George Lohmann
Fred Trueman
Syd Barnes


I'd leave Laker out of the English side and include an extra batsman. I think Botham can take the role of third seamer comfortably and having him batting at 7 seems better than 6 in this context. Apparently Barnes could bowl seam up and spin, so he covers that element. I'd possibly trade Larwood for Lohmann.

With that change made, I think that it's an even money comp between WIs, Australia, SA and England for me.

FWIW I don't rate the WI's pace bowling any higher than I rate Australia's pace bowling or SA's pace bowling. Assuming these teams would face the opposition on a variety of wickets, I'd expect the WI's to struggle overall on spinning decks, but break even on pacey wickets.

Australia have two distinct advantages. One is being able to play Miller at 5, as he is cushioned by Bradman and Gilchrist's high averages at 3 and 7. This allows the other advantage, which is playing two high class spinners without compromising a three prong pace attack. On the whole the Australian team is a better balanced combination imo. I might be biased here, but I think it is. I'd back them to beat the others comfortably over a long series against any of the other teams, played on a variety of wickets.