English ATG Team- Open Voting

[LongHopCassidy]

Harsh on Tiger & Clarrie, in my estimation.

I did speak in haste when I said they never faced them, but I aver that neither of Hobbs or Sutcliffe made hay of either bowler in their pomp.

Edit: Though if you include Mailey, their records do look a lot better when you factor in the 1926 beatdown.

 

[Red]

Openers are Hobbs and Hutton.

Because of the various potential combinations possible for this English line up, we will select two opening bowlers next. Once again, this list is a guide, and you may suggest any (legitimate) alternatives:

Please choose two opening bowlers:

Ian Botham (will also be included in later categories)
Bob Willis
Fred Trueman
Brian Statham
Alec Bedser
Andrew Flintoff (will also be included in later categories)
John Snow
SF Barnes
Maurice Tate
George Lohmann
Bill Voce
Harold Larwood
Frank Tyson (for Nufan)

These bowlers will be available for later selection (after the middle order is selected) to complete the attack if unselected here.

 

[fredfertang]

Harold Larwood and Brian Statham

 

[watson]

Fred Trueman and John Snow

 

[BoyBrumby]

Bah. Sickening choice as to who misses out.

SF Barnes & FS Trueman.

Supreme egoists but supreme bowlers too. Wonder if the demon Frederick ever met the great man and if the result was recorded for posterity?

 

[Blakus]

Barnes and Trueman.

 

[Prince EWS]

Barnes and Trueman for me as well.

Bedser to bowl first change.

 

[a massive zebra]

Barnes and Trueman

 

[NUFAN]

Frank Tyson and Fred Trueman.

I genuinely consider them to be England's best two opening bowlers, so would appreciate it if Tyson is added to the list.

 

[Red]

would appreciate it if Tyson is added to the list.

 

[The Sean]

SF Barnes & FS Trueman.

Barnes and Trueman.

Barnes and Trueman for me as well.

What these blokes said for me too please.

 

[NUFAN]

Thanks for adding Tyson Monk.

Just to explain, whenever I select these sort of teams, I picture the old players being transported to more recent conditions rather than the current players being transported back to old playing conditions. Therefore, I have big question marks on Barnes ability to bowl as a new ball bowler. I don't want this to turn into a 'did he bowl fast or was it spin' debate, but just explaining why I've gone against the recent grain and not selected SF Barnes.

 

[Days of Grace]

Trueman and Larwood

 

[Hurricane]

Barnes and Trueman

This - but want an honourable mention to Willis.

 

[watson]

Barnes was quick when he wanted to be, but no where near as quick as Larwood, Trueman, Snow or Tyson who would all properly appreciate a shiny new ball.

Also, by operating with the new ball his prime wicket taking delivery - the leg-spinner - has been somewhat nullified. I don't think that it is possible for a finger spinner to impart maximum revs on a new ball.

 

[Howe_zat]

Trueman + Larwood

 

[JBMAC]

Trueman and Tyson( one o the astest i not the astest pommie bowlers I have ever witnessed)

 

[kyear2]

Even if one goes with the premise that Barnes was a fast bolwer, he averaged 21.5 with a s/r of 54 vs Australia and 9.85 and 25 vs South Africa. Was his numbers againts Australia that much better that other bolwers of the era?
Similarily Frank Tyson averaged 25 with a s/r of 53 vs Australia but againts New Zealand, Pakistan and South Africa averaged 10.94, 11.4, 16.27 respectively.

My final vote goes to Fred Trueman and Bob Willis. Tyson just missed out, though his pace would be rather unsettling. Really Trueman and either of Tyson or Willis I would be happy with.

 

[Jager]

Larwood and Barnes

 

[BoyBrumby]

Even if one goes with the premise that Barnes was a fast bolwer, he averaged 21.5 with a s/r of 54 vs Australia and 9.85 and 25 vs South Africa. Was his numbers againts Australia that much better that other bolwers of the era?

Most wickets v Oz in the 1900s

& the 1910s.

Maybe not as much in as I'd have guessed, actually.