Who is the worst player of all time that would be selected in every XI in history?

[Athlai]

Walsh is an interesting one, weakest of the WI pacers but still gets in every other team. Is he better or worse than Martyn?

 

[Shady Slim]

In a strange way this can be an argument for Murali > Warne lol

i think it's the other way no? in that you'd pick warne for probably every team that doesn't have him in it (he's guaranteed to be better than SL's second turner as well as every other non murali spinner), but ymmv on whether you'd pick murali for warne's australia (i personally wouldn't for home tests though maybe for in india? but then you'd roll both anyway lol)

 

[Red_Ink_Squid]

It really boils down to this:


Is it better to have been the best worst player in the history of the game who will make most XIs or to have been the worst best player in the history of the game who wont make most XIs. Frankly, I think the best worst player in the game to make most XIs is still better but YMMV.

I'm making a list of people who don't understand this.

1. Athlai

 

[Athlai]

I'm making a list of people who don't understand this.

1. Athlai

I understand, what I don't understand is why it'd have to boil down to that haha

 

[Daemon]

Nah they mean someone so **** they can't get picked. Like Bangers players from the Habibul era or a kiwi spinner

But even those guys made an XI. So technically you're looking at either the worst ever Test player who didn't even deserve his spot in the XI, or someone who hasn't debuted yet but is **** enough to not make any XI in history.

 

[Athlai]

But even those guys made an XI. So technically you're looking at either the worst ever Test player who didn't even deserve his spot in the XI, or someone who hasn't debuted yet but is **** enough to not make any XI in history.

Real food for thought

 

[StephenZA]

But even those guys made an XI. So technically you're looking at either the worst ever Test player who didn't even deserve his spot in the XI, or someone who hasn't debuted yet but is **** enough to not make any XI in history.

Lets have a look through some recent SA teams....

 

[ZK$]

Zak Crawley is the answer.

 

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

Best player who fails to make at least some XIs - would be a pacer who is not better than WI quartet and also adds little to the batting.

Walsh for my money.

Hutton or Gavasker?
Both are a league below Hobbs and comparable to Sutcliffe,so not gonna make the English Team with Hobbs and Sutcliffe.

 

[ataraxia]

Hutton / Gavaskar at #3 >> Mead and anyone who says otherwise is joking themselves imo

 

[Lillian Thomson]

I think the bar is being set too low. The “worst” player is still going to have to be one of the all time greats to make every XI in history. For the likes of Martyn there’s always going to be a roadblock or several. Even the pre-greatness WI middle order of Kanhai, Kallicharran, Sobers and Lloyd wouldn’t take him.

 

[ankitj]

I'm making a list of people who don't understand this.

1. Athlai
2. ankitj

.

 

[Athlai]

I think the bar is being set too low. The “worst” player is still going to have to be one of the all time greats to make every XI in history. For the likes of Martyn there’s always going to be a roadblock or several. Even the pre-greatness WI middle order of Kanhai, Kallicharran, Sobers and Lloyd wouldn’t take him.

Kallicharan vs Martyn is much of a muchness

 

[TheJediBrah]

It's gotta be Murali.

Wouldn't get close to an Aus side but you could say the same about Warne not getting into an Indian side

But even those guys made an XI. So technically you're looking at either the worst ever Test player who didn't even deserve his spot in the XI

There was a bunch of these in England Test sides back 100+ years ago I just can't remember their names.

 

[Daemon]

I think the bar is being set too low. The “worst” player is still going to have to be one of the all time greats to make every XI in history. For the likes of Martyn there’s always going to be a roadblock or several. Even the pre-greatness WI middle order of Kanhai, Kallicharran, Sobers and Lloyd wouldn’t take him.

I think it's Gilchrist.

Makes every side ever comfortably. Obviously an incredible batsman but many sides have better. Fantastic keeper but again some sides have someone better. He adds less to a side than someone like a Viv/Miller/McGrath/Warne/Imran/Hadlee etc.

 

[TheJediBrah]

I think it's Gilchrist.

Makes every side ever comfortably. Obviously an incredible batsman but many sides have better. Fantastic keeper but again some sides have someone better. He adds less to a side than someone like a Viv/Miller/McGrath/Warne/Imran/Hadlee etc.

Gilchrist has an argument to be better than all those players

 

[Prince EWS]

I think it's Gilchrist.

Makes every side ever comfortably. Obviously an incredible batsman but many sides have better. Fantastic keeper but again some sides have someone better. He adds less to a side than someone like a Viv/Miller/McGrath/Warne/Imran/Hadlee etc.

I think even if we say someone has to be better than Hassett or Jardine instead of just Martyn, the worst specialist middle bat who'd make every team is still going to be a worse player than Gilchrist.

 

[ankitj]

i think it's the other way no? in that you'd pick warne for probably every team that doesn't have him in it (he's guaranteed to be better than SL's second turner as well as every other non murali spinner), but ymmv on whether you'd pick murali for warne's australia (i personally wouldn't for home tests though maybe for in india? but then you'd roll both anyway lol)

I was on wrong train of thoughts. Ignore.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Kallicharan vs Martyn is much of a muchness

And as such that means Martyn is not “absolutely essential” to the XI and doesn’t fit the criteria.

 

[Athlai]

Walsh vs Martyn tho