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

[srbhkshk]

Easy (but probably not correct) answer is some batsman averaging roughly ~47. I am gonna go with maybe Kevin Pietersen.

Better answer is probably some all rounder but it's hard to say how the great west indian and Australian teams would think about playing one who isn't absolutely top tier in either department.

By cw comparison threads though, the answer must be Kallis.

 

[honestbharani]

Read it thrice. And I give up. I am too old to understand this I guess.

Sad you did not insert the Lethal Weapon meme here.

 

[honestbharani]

Easy (but probably not correct) answer is some batsman averaging roughly ~47. I am gonna go with maybe Kevin Pietersen.

Better answer is probably some all rounder but it's hard to say how the great west indian and Australian teams would think about playing one who isn't absolutely top tier in either department.

By cw comparison threads though, the answer must be Kallis.

By CW reality though, the answer is The Answer.

 

[trundler]

Easy (but probably not correct) answer is some batsman averaging roughly ~47. I am gonna go with maybe Kevin Pietersen.

Better answer is probably some all rounder but it's hard to say how the great west indian and Australian teams would think about playing one who isn't absolutely top tier in either department.

By cw comparison threads though, the answer must be Kallis.

I reckon this is it probably. Almost all great middle orders are either carrying a 35 average guy or someone that's past it. Though this ignores that Pietersen wasn't as good as random 90s shield batsmen.

 

[Starfighter]

Ambrose never played with Holding and Garner.

I thought it was an overall XI.

In that case of the XI presented, McGrath or Hadlee could replace Walsh.

 

[Shady Slim]

feels wrong to bring his name up in a thread about a worst but it’s got to be watto

 

[Bahnz]

Maybe Viv Richards? Most people seem to think that Viv swaggers into every XI ever, but his average is nothing special in terms of ATG's, and he spent most of the 1980's averaging mid-40's while getting to dodge the best attack of the era.

 

[Pothas]

I don't think there is an all rounder below the
great ones that every single side would feel the need for. Basically if you already have a great all rounder you probably don't need another one.

For example even England in 2005 don't really need Watson.

 

[trundler]

Would one of Stokes/Shakib make it to every side depending on the balance of the bowling attack?

 

[Athlai]

Seems like getting a batsman only marginally better than Martyn is the aim

 

[Athlai]

Would one of Stokes/Shakib make it to every side depending on the balance of the bowling attack?

Shakib wouldn't make India imo

 

[trundler]

Shakib wouldn't make India imo

He wouldn't based on balance but would Stokes? Would either get into a stacked middle order at the expense of a better batsman? I'm wondering if a guy that's a good #6 and a good support bowler could make every side once you take the balance of the bowling attack out of it.

 

[Pothas]

Would one of Stokes/Shakib make it to every side depending on the balance of the bowling attack?

Stokes is possible on his own I guess. A SA team with Kallis doesn't need his bowling nor does a West Indies side but maybe he would make it on batting alone? Does he make it into Keith Miller Australia as well?

 

[trundler]

Stokes is possible on his own I guess. A SA team with Kallis doesn't need his bowling nor does a West Indies side but maybe he would make it on batting alone? Does he make it into Keith Miller Australia as well?

Those Australian sides played a lot of all rounders (and no rounders) so I think he'd slot into a role he took on earlier in his career. Definitely better than Ian Johnson though he was a spin bowling no rounder.

 

[Pothas]

He wouldn't based on balance but would Stokes? Would either get into a stacked middle order at the expense of a better batsman? I'm wondering if a guy that's a good #6 and a good support bowler could make every side once you take the balance of the bowling attack out of it.

Sobers might ruin this though. Might well be a West Indies side in his era that neither Stokes or Shakib make just on batting.

 

[trundler]

Sobers might ruin this though. Might well be a West Indies side in his era that neither Stokes or Shakib make just on batting.

Yeah 3 Ws overlapped with Sobers though their peaks didn't but I doubt they'd have dropped one of those guys on form. Stokes wouldn't replace Martyn either but I'd probably take him ahead of Ganguly.

 

[Athlai]

Batting is approx
Ross Taylor Inzamam ul Haq

 

[trundler]

Batting is approx
Ross Taylor Inzamam ul Haq

I feel like these guys are clearly better though it depends on where you rate them. I probably rate Inzi higher than you do. We can go lower surely.

 

[trundler]

I propose Richie Richardson.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Would one of Stokes/Shakib make it to every side depending on the balance of the bowling attack?

No