Which of these English 90s XIs is better? (22 unique players)

[mr_mister]

Only include what they did in the decade when assessing. I've opted to split the best bowlers and batsmen to make it interesting

Team A

Graham Gooch
Michael Atherton
Nasser Hussain
Robin Smith
Graham Thorpe
Alec Stewart+
Phil Defreitas
Robert Croft
Dean Headley
Allan Mullally
Devon Malcolm

12th man: Peter Such

Team B

Mark Butcher
Nick Knight
Graeme Hick
John Crawley
Mark Ramprakash
Jack Russell+
Dominic Cork
Darren Gough
Andy Caddick
Angus Fraser
Phil Tufnell

12th man: Neil Fairbrother

 

[Chubb]

Team A. Team B may have better bowlers but that’s a hell of a tail and not a lot of runs in the top 6.

 

[Qlder]

Never seen so many average players. Where's poll option for "Both XI suck"

 

[Aidan11]

There's good and rubbish in both but A gets it for the stronger batting line up.

 

[mr_mister]

Is it fair to say England's batting stocks fall off quicker than their bowling stocks at this time?

Still could have added Such or Tudor for semi talented test bowlers

The next best bat I could think of was Fairbrother

 

[Molehill]

If you take the Batting from A and the Bowling from B you end up with the best of 90's England (which was crap).

 

[reyrey]

Chis Lewis and Craig White could be added as all rounders or bowling all rounders

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

A’s bowling attack isn’t so bad. Dean Headley was decent when fit and Malcolm could be very useful on occasions. I have a reasonable appreciation for Robert Croft after attending a match where a Brummy was showing his support with regular exclamations of “Come on Crofty” in a very strong Brummy accent which was brilliant - not that it aided his performance greatly. Peter Such too - WAG.

 

[Starfighter]

Is it fair to say England's batting stocks fall off quicker than their bowling stocks at think time?

Still could have added Such or Tudor for semi talented test bowlers

The next best bat I could think of was Fairbrother

I think the bowling is probably weaker than it appears on paper though. Usually didn't do well as a unit and Caddick was allergic to setting up matches with first innings wickets.

 

[BazBall21]

A has a strong test top 6. Team B has a substantially weaker bowling advantage.

 

[mr_mister]

I think the bowling is probably weaker than it appears on paper though. Usually didn't do well as a unit and Caddick was allergic to setting up matches with first innings wickets.

We'd have to then say team A's bowling has an even higher chance of falling apart as a unit, with way less chance of someone randomly standing up and running through a side.

Malcolm did it once of course against SA and very memorably, but Gough, Tufnell and Caddick gave less spectacular but still match winning performances multiple times each

 

[Starfighter]

We'd have to then say team A's bowling has an even higher chance of falling apart as a unit, with way less chance of someone randomly standing up and running through a side.

Nah I meant in general as your comment seemed to be so framed.

Also unless you're considering batting (which tbf you probably should as it's an English XI), I'd play Such instead of Croft. I think on the basis of FC record and personal impression (limited to highlights obvs) he was quite clearly the better bowler and might've played more if he could bat. Interesting to think how he might have gone had they not persisted with Tufnell a bit more, who didn't really fulfil his talent.

 

[sledger]

Team A.

 

[kevinw]

Team A is better but it's like comparing whether you'd like to lose an arm or your hand. Team B has such a pitiful batting line up that even the average bowling attack of Team A would duff them up.

 

[jcas0167]

Ok, Hick was my favorite English player so I went B. But I actually like their chances generally with that bowling attack. Fletcher also said if he had been coach he would have always picked both Hick and Ramprakash. With consistent selection those two could flourish. Also, Jack Russell an ATG keeper. Realistically, he would bat 7 and Fairbrother would be at 6.

 

[OverratedSanity]

This is pretty lopsided. B doesnt have a single batsman as good as any of Gooch, Atherton, Smith, Thorpe, Stewart.

 

[mr_mister]

This is pretty lopsided. B doesnt have a single batsman as good as any of Gooch, Atherton, Smith, Thorpe, Stewart.

It's less noticeable because they still averaged late 20s and weren't ATGs, but there is a huge gap in the bowling quality too IMO(sans maybe the underutilized Headley and the capable of rare brilliance Malcom)

Croft, Mullally and Defreitas were some of the bowlers someone like Hick could actually demolish. Caddick, Gough and Fraser troubled quality batsman often enough for it to be significant here I think

 

[mr_mister]

I might try and run it on International cricket captain later

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Is it fair to say England's batting stocks fall off quicker than their bowling stocks at this time?

Still could have added Such or Tudor for semi talented test bowlers

The next best bat I could think of was Fairbrother

Also fair to say that despite the lack of depth there was a large amount who played the majority of the decade in Stewart, Atherton, Thorpe and Hussain. Smith was handled badly and Hick and Ramprakash were total failures.

 

[GIMH]

A