What is your ALL TIME WORLD XI TEAM for tests?

[fredfertang]

WG would make a perfect 12th man.

Not sure about that - I can almost hear his high-pitched voice

"The spectators haven't paid their admission money to watch me carry the drinks"

 

[Hurricane]

Granted he didn't dominate his era as much as the Don did - but WG came pretty close.

Must be in the running to take SRT's spot on the grounds the latter never scored the triple that he should have.

 

[the big bambino]

Taking in his whole career I'd suspect WG may have dominated his era to a greater extent than Bradman.

 

[Prince EWS]

Taking in his whole career I'd suspect WG may have dominated his era to a greater extent than Bradman.

Yeah there's certainly an argument for it, especially when you consider the fact that he also took a lot of wickets.

 

[Jono]

WG is such an interesting one. Tends not to make these XI, wonder if its because often we are choosing the XI based on test cricket and he didn't play many. I guess those choosing G Pollock and B Richards could choose Grace, whereas those leaving G Pollock and B Richards out for lack of tests would liekly also leave Grace out for that reason.

 

[G.I.Joe]

So true. People picking Richards but not Grace establish a general principle betrayed by a curious amnesia.

 

[zaremba]

At moments like this I can't help mentioning Grace's 1871 season. He scored 10 centuries; everyone else scored 7 between them. He averaged twice what the next best player managed, and his run aggregate was getting on for 3 times more than the next best. He also took over 70 wickets at an average of 17.

 

[Prince EWS]

At moments like this I can't help mentioning Grace's 1871 season. He scored 10 centuries; everyone else scored 7 between them. He averaged twice what the next best player managed, and his run aggregate was getting on for 3 times more than the next best. He also took over 70 wickets at an average of 17.

And as always, when you mention this I can't help but dig up this old post of mine:

I've been having a look at Grace's First Class career with this method.

If you treated the England First Class season (inclusive of all Tests, county games, etc) in the same way I've treated a Test calender year here, Grace's standardised batting average in the 862 matches he played in the English summer would be 72.03. Using the same "value" formula I used here which gave the Don a 12.47 rating, Grace gets a rating of 12.97 for his First Class batting in England.

If that doesn't seem impressive enough, his standardised average dropped off significantly towards the end of his career as he played on well into his late 50s. After 17 years of cricket and 293 matches his standardised average was still sitting pretty at over 102. In his prime - after 10 years of cricket and 143 matches - his standardised average stood at a ridiculous 123.71.

And that's before we even start looking at his bowling - no small matter of 2800 First Class wickets.

 

[Red]

Pretty easy to make runs if you're a cheat and bully other players and umpires in to giving you not out when you are….

 

[Prince EWS]

Pretty easy to make runs if you're a cheat and bully other players and umpires in to giving you not out when you are….

Pretty hard to pull that off without having made lots of runs beforehand though.

 

[Red]

Pretty hard to pull that off without having made lots of runs beforehand though.

Might be true, but I'm not a fan of the man. Cheating is cheating imo. Imagine being a less known bowler who bowls the biggest name in cricket out and he puts the bails back on and says "the spectators came to watch me bat, not you bowl".

I'd tell the **** to go **** himself.

 

[Prince EWS]

Haha I think people tend to make way too much out of that one anecdote tbh. We're kidding ourselves if we think cheating actually played a significant part in his record at all IMO.

 

[Jarquis]

Anecdote also comes from an exhibition match, so in all fairness he was right.

 

[Red]

Still cheating. Get out you overrated bearded ****.

 

[Red]

"After the Australians had experienced him for the first time, a commentator Down Under observed that, "For so big a man, he is surprisingly tenacious on very small points." He was notorious for employing, in order to pursue victory or personal achievement, a variety of wiles and tricks that may be thought of as, well, hardly cricket. He was also, throughout his career, quite breathtakingly grasping when his eye caught the glint of hard cash." cricinfo

 

[harsh.ag]

Nah, Grace was the man. Greatness personified. Made runs by the bucketloads. Tried to make sure there was money in the game for players. Made sure exhibition matches made money and the game progressed and flourished. If the bowler got his wicket in an exhibition match, that would be reward enough. And Australians criticizing the best English player! My, my, my

 

[zaremba]

"They came to watch me bat, not you umpire" is certainly no worse than, say, "that's piss-weak umpiring Aleem". Poor form, but not cheating, and really doesn't stop the utterer being a great player.

 

[grecian]

"They came to watch me bat, not you umpire" is certainly no worse than, say, "that's piss-weak umpiring Aleem". Poor form, but not cheating, and really doesn't stop the utterer being a great player.

You are right of course, but I don't get angry about it, it's part of what makes him immortal, honestly in 120 years time will anyone be quoting Kallis' (who I think is a true modern great) comments back at people.

 

[zaremba]

TBF the only recent player likely to be quoted in 120 years' time is Eddo Brandes.

 

[grecian]

Possibly, but I have a feeling Indians will be quoting Sachin for a millenium.

I still think Jimmy Ormond is my fave anecdote of cricket, but I guess it needs context.