Playing selector: Lets pick the best test XI of different eras

[bagapath]

i would love to reply to each and every one of these posts. really interesting discussion. wish this were happening when i am not this pressed for time!

loving it guys!

keep it going!!!

I have to say this. i am beginning to like this 46-65 team a lot. but i am going to stick to my earlier opinion that the 86-05 team has the best bowling attack - mainly because of the spinners. the other teams are equal or better in pace bowling dept. but not in spin bowling.

 

[chaminda_00]

One question if the 46 to 65 side had the same amount of training and resources provided to them, as the 85-06 sides wouldn't they win by an innings quite easier. Diffently got the raw talent to match any side.

Also SS i doubt anyone would have a S/R of 35 in pitches back then, Trueman had one of the best S/R and his was 49. People only had S/R of 35 back in the 1800s and early 1900s, wrong era mate.

 

[Saurav Ganguly]

I wonder what "Saurav Ganguly"'s view of Sobers as an allrounder compared to Imran is? Everybody is generally agreed that Sobers IS the better allrounder.

As a batsman:Gary Sobers>>>>>>>Imran Khan
As a bowler:Imran Khan>>>>>>>>>>Gary Sobers

 

[Saurav Ganguly]

Imran and Miller are much of a muchness, especially given this is older Imran were talking about.

Miller may be a statistical replica of Imran but I feel that both Botham & Imran were slightly better allrounders than him because they have a much better wickets/match ratio when compared to Miller.

 

[The Sean]

Miller may be a statistical replica of Imran but I feel that both Botham & Imran were slightly better allrounders than him because they have a much better wickets/match ratio when compared to Miller.

That's true, and they do have better S/R, though Miller's average is comparable to Imran and much better than Botham, and his economy rate is better than both.

The big thing about Miller's wickets/match ratio, however, is that while he played 55 Test matches, he probably only did about 40-45 Tests worth of bowling due to the fact that there were numerous matches he didn't bowl in at all due to his persistent back injury, and many more where he did minimal bowling. Imran/Botham both struck more regularly than Miller overall (and of course I realise that Imran didn't bowl due to injury over a couple of years as well), but I don't think the difference is as huge as the wickets/Test ration might say.

And the other thing you have to remember with Nugget - he really only bent his back when he was bowling to good batsmen! And if he really needed to work off the previous nights hangover...

 

[Matt79]

As a batsman:Gary Sobers>>>>>>>Imran Khan
As a bowler:Imran Khan>>>>>>>>>>Gary Sobers

That's cool - if you're not the reincarnation of BhupinderSingh, you can ignore that comment. If you are, you're showing amazing self restraint.

Imran was certainly a better bowler than Sobers, although Sobers' variety in bowling pace and spin goes some way to closing the gap in terms of his value to the team as a bowler. And obviously yes, Sobers was a better batsman.

If you had to pick one of them to be in your team, who would it be?

 

[Saurav Ganguly]

That's true, and they do have better S/R, though Miller's average is comparable to Imran and much better than Botham, and his economy rate is better than both.

The big thing about Miller's wickets/match ratio, however, is that while he played 55 Test matches, he probably only did about 40-45 Tests worth of bowling due to the fact that there were numerous matches he didn't bowl in at all due to his persistent back injury, and many more where he did minimal bowling. Imran/Botham both struck more regularly than Miller overall (and of course I realise that Imran didn't bowl due to injury over a couple of years as well), but I don't think the difference is as huge as the wickets/Test ration might say.

Actually,Imran played solely as a batsman in the team from 1983-86 i.e 4 years.I'm not saying that Miller was a very inferior allrounder to Imran & Botham,but that these two guys were slightly better than him because they bowled on much more on batting friendly wickets(thats true especially in case of Imran) as compared to Miller.

 

[Matt79]

Miller may be a statistical replica of Imran but I feel that both Botham & Imran were slightly better allrounders than him because they have a much better wickets/match ratio when compared to Miller.

Yeah the Miller v Botham or Miller v Khan comparison is a bit dependent on when in the player's career you're talking about. Khan definitely declined as a bowler in the second half of his career, understandably, as he picked up injuries, and its a quirk of the time divisions that the two teams under discussion had Miller for entirety of his test career, and Imran for only the second half. Miller's overall record as a bowler is more impressive than Imran post-85, for mine. Over the span of Imran's career, he was probably a better bowler than Miller. and obviously he improved as a batsman as his bowling declined.

 

[The Sean]

Actually,Imran played solely as a batsman in the team from 1983-86 i.e 4 years.I'm not saying that Miller was a very inferior allrounder to Imran & Botham,but that these two guys were slightly better than him because they bowled on much more on batting friendly wickets(thats true especially in case of Imran) as compared to Miller.

Was it really that long? I had no idea he didn't bowl for 4 years, I thought it was only two. I'm not sure about the pitches Beefy and Imran bowling on being any more particularly batsman friendly than the ones Miller bowled on, but fair enough mate - each to his own. To me, they're unquestionably the 2nd, 3rd and 4th greatest all round cricketers in the history of the game, and I guess it comes down a lot to personal preference as to the order you put them in.

 

[Saurav Ganguly]

That's cool - if you're not the reincarnation of BhupinderSingh, you can ignore that comment. If you are, you're showing amazing self restraint.

Imran was certainly a better bowler than Sobers, although Sobers' variety in bowling pace and spin goes some way to closing the gap in terms of his value to the team as a bowler. And obviously yes, Sobers was a better batsman.

If you had to pick one of them to be in your team, who would it be?

It depends on whats the strength of rest of the team is.If I have team with a very strong batting lineup but a good but not excellent bowling attack,I would go with Imran.But if its the other way around(strong bwling but fine but not good batting lineup,I would go with Gary Sobers.

 

[Matt79]

Hard to argue with that logic.

Welcome to CW by the way...

 

[The Sean]

Ditto - welcome to the forum!

 

[Saurav Ganguly]

Yeah the Miller v Botham or Miller v Khan comparison is a bit dependent on when in the player's career you're talking about. Khan definitely declined as a bowler in the second half of his career, understandably, as he picked up injuries, and its a quirk of the time divisions that the two teams under discussion had Miller for entirety of his test career, and Imran for only the second half. Miller's overall record as a bowler is more impressive than Imran post-85, for mine. Over the span of Imran's career, he was probably a better bowler than Miller. and obviously he improved as a batsman as his bowling declined.

Imran might've declined but he averages 50 with the bat & 20 with the ball in last 50 odd tests of his career.So,my ranking of these 3 allrounders would be:

1. Imran Khan
2. Ian Botham
3. Keith Miller

 

[Saurav Ganguly]

Thanks for your welcome,The Sean & Matt79.

 

[Matt79]

Yep, captaincy certainly brought out the best in him. Another string in his bow in terms of how good an allrounder he is.

The "pick one out of Sobers or Imran" question is a bit tough - I always dodge the issue whereever I can by including both - eg
Hobbs
Gavaskar
Bradman
Hammond
Richards
Sobers
Gilchrist
Imran
Warne
Marshall
Lillee

 

[The Sean]

Imran might've declined but he averages 50 with the bat & 20 with the ball in last 50 odd tests of his career.So,my ranking of these 3 allrounders would be:

1. Imran Khan
2. Ian Botham
3. Keith Miller

One thing that always stood out for me when personally ranking Miller and Imran over Botham (only marginally, mind you) was their respective performances against the strongest opposition. One of my criteria when ranking the greatness of a cricketer is how that player performed against the very best - and one of the few faults I can find with Botham is that for virtually the duration of his Test career, the dominant team in the world were the West Indies, and they were the one team that he never truly stepped up against - a batting average of 21 and bowling average of 35 against them are far inferior to his career figures.

Imran, on the other hand, was magnificent against the Windies, both as a player and captain - drawing two series against them in the mid-late 80s when everyone else was being blitzed. Miller too had a penchant for raising his game against the very best - the two other major powers in world cricket during his career were England and WI, and it's no coincidence that his greatest performances came against those two countries.

Again though, it's all personal opinions.

Here's a question though - most of us consider Sobers to be the greatest all rounder, with a combination of Miller-Imran-Botham filling up positions 2-3-4. But who would round out the top 5? I consider Hadlee a great bowler who could bat strongly in the lower order more than a genuine all rounder, so I would previously have said Kapil Dev, possibly just ahead of Noble or Rhodes. But the more I read about Aubrey Faulkner, the higher he climbs in my personal rankings - his record is superb, and some of his performances for a team that was still a distant third in world cricket at the time were astonishing.

 

[The Sean]

Yep, captaincy certainly brought out the best in him. Another string in his bow in terms of how good an allrounder he is.

The "pick one out of Sobers or Imran" question is a bit tough - I always dodge the issue whereever I can by including both - eg
Hobbs
Gavaskar
Bradman
Hammond
Richards
Sobers
Gilchrist
Imran
Warne
Marshall
Lillee

Great side - very similar to the one I'd pick. I'd be tempted to put Grace in as one of the openers, but his peak came before the Test era, so my team would look something like:

Hobbs
Gavaskar
Bradman
Richards
Tendulkar
Sobers
Gilchrist
Marshall
Warne
Lillee
Barnes

Miller/Imran 12th Man

EDIT - which I've just realised is, swapping Marshall for Imran, the exact team Richie Benaud picked as his all time XI. I always said that Benaud bloke knew what he was talking about...

 

[Saurav Ganguly]

Yep, captaincy certainly brought out the best in him. Another string in his bow in terms of how good an allrounder he is.

The "pick one out of Sobers or Imran" question is a bit tough - I always dodge the issue whereever I can by including both - eg
Hobbs
Gavaskar
Bradman
Hammond
Richards
Sobers
Gilchrist
Imran
Warne
Marshall
Lillee

Imo,everyone should select Sobers in their altime XI as a batsman(selecting him as a batsman doesn't mean he would not bowl) & then one amongst Imran,Botham & Miller for the allrounder(#6) or at a bowlers spot at # 8.

 

[The Sean]

Imo,everyone should select Sobers in their altime XI as a batsman(selecting him as a batsman doesn't mean he would not bowl) & then one amongst Imran,Botham & Miller for the allrounder(#6) or at a bowlers spot at # 8 spot.

Also a fair call mate, I'd love a team like this...

Hobbs
Gavaskar
Bradman
Richards/Tendulkar
Sobers
Miller/Imran
Gilchrist
Marshall
Warne
Lillee
Barnes

The only problem being which of the / options to leave out of the side!

 

[Matt79]

One thing that always stood out for me when personally ranking Miller and Imran over Botham (only marginally, mind you) was their respective performances against the strongest opposition. One of my criteria when ranking the greatness of a cricketer is how that player performed against the very best - and one of the few faults I can find with Botham is that for virtually the duration of his Test career, the dominant team in the world were the West Indies, and they were the one team that he never truly stepped up against - a batting average of 21 and bowling average of 35 against them are far inferior to his career figures.

Imran, on the other hand, was magnificent against the Windies, both as a player and captain - drawing two series against them in the mid-late 80s when everyone else was being blitzed. Miller too had a penchant for raising his game against the very best - the two other major powers in world cricket during his career were England and WI, and it's no coincidence that his greatest performances came against those two countries.

Again though, it's all personal opinions.

Here's a question though - most of us consider Sobers to be the greatest all rounder, with a combination of Miller-Imran-Botham filling up positions 2-3-4. But who would round out the top 5? I consider Hadlee a great bowler who could bat strongly in the lower order more than a genuine all rounder, so I would previously have said Kapil Dev, possibly just ahead of Noble or Rhodes. But the more I read about Aubrey Faulkner, the higher he climbs in my personal rankings - his record is superb, and some of his performances for a team that was still a distant third in world cricket at the time were astonishing.

Warwick Armstrong? Or Grace?

Plus Faulkner was a spinner and spinning allrounders are a fair bit thinner (Benaud, him and...) on the ground that pace bowling allrounders...