Worst playing XI from a Test

[wpdavid]

Yet you look at it and in Gooch, Gower, Smith, Russell and Gower there's some good players.

Sorry Marc, you're not going to fool me by listing Gower twice! And don't forget that Gooch had suffered a terrible series at the hands of Alderman so his confidence was shot to pieces by then.

The bowlings a bit weak though, as is David "New Botham mark 12" Capel at 6!

Absolutely. I think this was the test where Dexter introduced Igglesdsen to the rest of the team as "our 9th choice opening bowler", or something equally encouraging. From memory, Dilley, Foster & Jarvis had all signed up with Gatting. As had Defreitas, although he later withdrew. Fraser must have been injured. Malcolm may have been injured, but after his disasterous debut in the previous test no-one minded too much.

It may well be the weakest England side ever. As I mentioned earlier, the side that played in Pakistan during 1977/78 was pretty weak and only drew because all 3 tests were played on dreadfully flat wickets against a Pakistan side which was also weakened by Packer. That would be the other contender that springs to mind, especially in the 3rd test when they were further handicapped by Boycott captaining the side after Brearley went home. I'll dig out the lineup some time.

 

[wpdavid]

Here's the XI from Karachi in 1977 - Boycott, Rose, Randall, Roope, Gatting (on debut), Miller, Taylor, Edmonds, Cope, J. Lever, Willis.

If you want to see how bad the batting is, look at how they fared in NZ early in 1978. However, Botham was back by that series, so this is the side I'm proposing a contender for our weakest ever. Not all poor players by any means, but you dread to think how they'd have fared against anyone that was any good.

 

[SJS]

England used to bring second string and third string sides to the sub continent till the beginning of the seventies. I think the team that played the second test of the 62-63 series in India (at Brabourne Stadium Bombay) must be one of the weakest. It read in batting order (with there total career tests in brackets) :-

Bat Order...Name...Tests before tour...Tests after tour

1............Bolus............... 2.......................0
2...... MJK Smith (C)...... 22......................23
3..........Jim Parks...........11.......................30
4...........Knight................12......................12
5...........Titmus...............16......................32
6...........Wilson...............0........................1
7....... Binks (k) ...............0........................0
8..........Price..................0.........................9
9......... Larter..................4........................3
10........Jones..................0.......................14
11. Mike Stewart.............6.........................0

As can be seen six of them were rookies and hardly played for England beyond this series.

Note: Wilson is listed at number 11 since he did not bat due to illness. He would have opened if he had been fit.

 

[wpdavid]

England used to bring second string and third string sides to the sub continent till the beginning of the seventies. I think the team that played the second test of the 62-63 series in India (at Brabourne Stadium Bombay) must be one of the weakest. It read in batting order (with there total career tests in brackets) :-

Bat Order...Name...Tests before tour...Tests after tour

1............Bolus............... 2.......................0
2...... MJK Smith (C)...... 22......................23
3..........Jim Parks...........11.......................30
4...........Knight................12......................12
5...........Titmus...............16......................32
6...........Wilson...............0........................1
7....... Binks (k) ...............0........................0
8..........Price..................0.........................9
9......... Larter..................4........................3
10........Jones..................0.......................14
11. Mike Stewart.............6.........................0

As can be seen six of them were rookies and hardly played for England beyond this series.

Note: Wilson is listed at number 11 since he did not bat due to illness. He would have opened if he had been fit.

Good call. I'd forgotten about our attitude towards those tours.

 

[Autobahn]

England used to bring second string and third string sides to the sub continent till the beginning of the seventies. I think the team that played the second test of the 62-63 series in India (at Brabourne Stadium Bombay) must be one of the weakest. It read in batting order (with there total career tests in brackets) :-

Bat Order...Name...Tests before tour...Tests after tour

1............Bolus............... 2.......................0
2...... MJK Smith (C)...... 22......................23
3..........Jim Parks...........11.......................30
4...........Knight................12......................12
5...........Titmus...............16......................32
6...........Wilson...............0........................1
7....... Binks (k) ...............0........................0
8..........Price..................0.........................9
9......... Larter..................4........................3
10........Jones..................0.......................14
11. Mike Stewart.............6.........................0

As can be seen six of them were rookies and hardly played for England beyond this series.

Note: Wilson is listed at number 11 since he did not bat due to illness. He would have opened if he had been fit.

Wasn't that tour in the 63-64 season? Plus i think price was too constantly injured to have a long test career and i'm pretty sure it was Stewart injured not Wilson?

Plus i don't buy that england always sent second or third string sides to india, the side in 1961-62 was a very strong side.

 

[SJS]

Wasn't that tour in the 63-64 season? Plus i think price was too constantly injured to have a long test career and i'm pretty sure it was Stewart injured not Wilson?

Plus i don't buy that england always sent second or third string sides to india, the side in 1961-62 was a very strong side.

You are correct it was 63-64.

I meant Stewart thats why it says "is listed at number 11" . Another typing error

Yes England DID send weaker teams. Here's a list of missing players

1933-34

- Hammond
- Sutcliffe
- Ames
- Gubby Allen
- Maurice Leyland

all of them played in the 1933 series at home against West Indies and again played in England's next series against Australia just months after returning from India. The Australian series included, besides the above :-

- Hendren
- Bill Bowes
- Geary

There was also Woolley but we can discount that due to his advancing age.

1951-52 :- This was even worse. The team did not include seven of the superstars of England side.

- Hutton
- May
- Compton
- Laker
- Bedser
- Evans
- Bailey

They took just one major England batsman in Graveney and one bowler in Statham. Those named above had all played against South Africa a few months earlier.

1961-62 :- A few months before leaving for India, England had finished the Ashes series at home. Four of the top players from this series did not go to India in the winter. These were the two best batsmen and the two leading bowlers.

- May
- Cowdrey
- Trueman
- Statham

If you leave out your two best batsmen and your main fast bowlers, how can you claim to have the best side?

1963-64 :- Those missing from the original line up included the following who had played the just concluded series against Windies.

- Cowdrey
- Trueman
- Statham
- Lock

Cowdrey joined later in the tour. on recieving an SOS.

1972-73 :- The following were missing from those who played in the just concluded Ashes series at home.

- Edrich
- Boycott
- Luckhurst
- Illingworth
- D'Olieviera
- John Snow

1976-77 :_- Although Close and Edrich were missing, the mainstay of the batting was there and the only bowler missing was the great Snow. It showed in the results as England won 3-0. There best result in India ever.

I dont think I need to say more.

PS:- Just because I make a couple of silly transcribing errors doesnt mean my facts are incorrect

 

[Autobahn]

You are correct it was 63-64.

I meant Stewart thats why it says "is listed at number 11" . Another typing error

Yes England DID send weaker teams. Here's a list of missing players

1933-34

- Hammond
- Sutcliffe
- Ames
- Gubby Allen
- Maurice Leyland

all of them played in the 1933 series at home against West Indies and again played in England's next series against Australia just months after returning from India. The Australian series included, besides the above :-

- Hendren
- Bill Bowes
- Geary

There was also Woolley but we can discount that due to his advancing age.

1951-52 :- This was even worse. The team did not include seven of the superstars of England side.

- Hutton
- May
- Compton
- Laker
- Bedser
- Evans
- Bailey

They took just one major England batsman in Graveney and one bowler in Statham. Those named above had all played against South Africa a few months earlier.

1961-62 :- A few months before leaving for India, England had finished the Ashes series at home. Four of the top players from this series did not go to India in the winter. These were the two best batsmen and the two leading bowlers.

- May
- Cowdrey
- Trueman
- Statham

If you leave out your two best batsmen and your main fast bowlers, how can you claim to have the best side?

1963-64 :- Those missing from the original line up included the following who had played the just concluded series against Windies.

- Cowdrey
- Trueman
- Statham
- Lock

Cowdrey joined later in the tour. on recieving an SOS.

1972-73 :- The following were missing from those who played in the just concluded Ashes series at home.

- Edrich
- Boycott
- Luckhurst
- Illingworth
- D'Olieviera
- John Snow

1976-77 :_- Although Close and Edrich were missing, the mainstay of the batting was there and the only bowler missing was the great Snow. It showed in the results as England won 3-0. There best result in India ever.

I dont think I need to say more.

PS:- Just because I make a couple of silly transcribing errors doesnt mean my facts are incorrect

I never said you where wrong, i simply said that i didn't buy the fact that it was always second or third string sides being sent. With the exception of 1933-34 and 1951-52 where they where obviously very weak teams, the other lot couldn't be described as second or third string, they may not have been the best teams but they certainly weren't what you would describe as being the "Worst Ever XIs".

 

[marc71178]

Sorry Marc, you're not going to fool me by listing Gower twice! And don't forget that Gooch had suffered a terrible series at the hands of Alderman so his confidence was shot to pieces by then.

Ooops - I meant Atherton for one of the Gowers!

 

[wpdavid]

Yes England DID send weaker teams. Here's a list of missing players


1972-73 :- The following were missing from those who played in the just concluded Ashes series at home.

- Edrich
- Boycott
- Luckhurst
- Illingworth
- D'Olieviera
- John Snow

1976-77 :_- Although Close and Edrich were missing, the mainstay of the batting was there and the only bowler missing was the great Snow. It showed in the results as England won 3-0. There best result in India ever.

I dont think I need to say more.

PS:- Just because I make a couple of silly transcribing errors doesnt mean my facts are incorrect

Indeed, but here's a couple of minor corrections if I may ...

In 1972/73, I believe that Luckhurst was actually not selected. He had been dropped during the Ashes series and not taken to India as a result of his struggles against Lillee, Massie & co.
Clearly a daft decision by the selectors, but nothing new there.

In 1976/77, you couldn't say that Edrich & Close had been left behind for anything other than cricketing reasons. They had been retired/dropped during the WI series, and never played tests again. Same for Snow. Although he played against WI in 1976, he didin't play in 1977, so you have to conclude that the selectors had called time on him. All 3 of these were well past their best by then, as you know. The only player missing was Boycott, but that was part of his 3 year "sabbatical".

Regrettably, it was just seen as a right of senior players to opt out of a tour that they didn't fancy. To your list, you could add Botham in 1984/85 and Gough, Caddick & Stewart in 2001/02

EDIT
If I may make another couple of observations ...
In 1951/52, Graveney & Statham had only played 1 and 3 tests respectively before that tour, which reinforces the point about senior players not going.
However, in the 1960's, although you are right that May (1961) & Statham (1963) did play in the home series immediately before the India tours, they never played for England again, so it wasn't just an India thing in those cases. OTOH you can add Dexter to the list of absentees in 1963/64, as he was a regular either side of that tour.

 

[Autobahn]

Indeed, but here's a couple of minor corrections if I may ...

In 1972/73, I believe that Luckhurst was actually not selected. He had been dropped during the Ashes series and not taken to India as a result of his struggles against Lillee, Massie & co.
Clearly a daft decision by the selectors, but nothing new there.

In 1976/77, you couldn't say that Edrich & Close had been left behind for anything other than cricketing reasons. They had been retired/dropped during the WI series, and never played tests again. Same for Snow. Although he played against WI in 1976, he didin't play in 1977, so you have to conclude that the selectors had called time on him. All 3 of these were well past their best by then, as you know. The only player missing was Boycott, but that was part of his 3 year "sabbatical".

Regrettably, it was just seen as a right of senior players to opt out of a tour that they didn't fancy. To your list, you could add Botham in 1984/85 and Gough, Caddick & Stewart in 2001/02

EDIT
If I may make another couple of observations ...
In 1951/52, Graveney & Statham had only played 1 and 3 tests respectively before that tour, which reinforces the point about senior players not going.
However, in the 1960's, although you are right that May (1961) & Statham (1963) did play in the home series immediately before the India tours, they never played for England again, so it wasn't just an India thing in those cases. OTOH you can add Dexter to the list of absentees in 1963/64, as he was a regular either side of that tour.

Plus D'Olieviera was 40 and illingworth was injured so that's not really an india thing.

 

[Pothas]

This team that lined up agaisnt Bangladesh in 2003 has got to be one of Englands worst bowling atacks:
ME Trescothick
*MP Vaughan
MA Butcher
N Hussain
GP Thorpe
R Clarke
+CMW Read
AF Giles
RL Johnson
MJ Saggers
MJ Hoggard

 

[James90]

Hoggart was already relatively proven by them though. More so than Harmison in his second test at Adelaide. Richard Dawson isn't a screw in Ashley Giles' hip either.

 

[Pothas]

yes but it has Saggers

 

[wpdavid]

I still maintain that the weakest England attack I've seen was against Pakistan at Lord's in 1982 - Botham was beginning to put on weight, and was accompanied by Jackman, pringle, Ian Greig & Hemmings. Another weak attack was the 2nd test in SL during the 2003 tour - IIRC Flintoff before he was good, Kirtley, Giles & Batty.

 

[average2poor]

To the guy that put Jeetan Patel in their worst ever team, are you serious? have you seen him play? great prospect. And its not just because i'm from New Zealand. I can name many New Zealand players that are/were much worse than him

 

[Perm]

From current first-class players:

1. Sanjay Bangar
2. Akash Chopra
3. Michael Papps
4. Donovan Pagon
5. James Marshall
6. Andrew Symonds
7. Thami Tsolekele
8. Justin Ontong
9. Jeetan Patel
10. Dwight Washington
11. VRV Singh

Notable mentions to Gayan Wijekoon, Parthiv Patel and every one-test fast bowler.

Papps and Patel are pretty good players, even if their records don't really reflect that.

 

[_Ed_]

Patel's record isn't bad, 18 ODI wickets @ 24 is fairly handy.

 

[Perm]

I meant first class record, which is what Jamee was referring to. It's around 40 IIRC.

 

[_Ed_]

Fair enough, but doesn't Symonds have a fairly handy FC record? Batting average in the 40s IIRC.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

4. Donovan Pagon
10. Dwight Washington

I see your Pagon and Washington and I raise you Suruj Ragoonath and Adam Sanford.