All time England-Australia XI

Jack7

Club Cricketer
Joined
Jul 2, 2021
1. Bradman (c)
2. Sutcliffe
3. Barrington
4. Steven Smith
5. Root
6. Bell
7. Knott (wk)
8.
Botham (vc)
9. Lohmann
10. Sydney Barnes
11. Trueman
12th man. Collingwood

I based them on strength in a particular batting position. These have the highest batting averages for their respective positions minimum of 30 innings in particular position for the top 6. I might need to go into further detail when time. I couldn't really look past the 4 man bowling attack, especially bearing in mind the drop off during Botham's second half career - at his peak he was a monster. So yeah, if this thread has been done before link me - a quick search I found nothing. Yes Bradman is 1. It's a bit disgusting to bat him lower than 1 in an all time team imho.
 
Last edited:

NILAYSHAH60

Dreamcatcher
Sportsbookie
Fantasy Cricket Team
India
NZ....
PlanetCricket Award Winner
The Boys
Joined
Aug 4, 2012
Location
Thane, India
Profile Flag
India
I believe Larwood should walk into greatest Test XI of all time without any second consideration. As long as I heard about him the pace that he had in his time was just unreal!!!
 

Jack7

Club Cricketer
Joined
Jul 2, 2021
I believe Larwood should walk into greatest Test XI of all time without any second consideration. As long as I heard about him the pace that he had in his time was just unreal!!!
Depends if you allow him to bowl around the wicket without no leg side restrictions or not I guess. In body line he took [email protected]. Extremely good, but obviously Sydney Barnes and Lohmann had ridiculously low career averages in the games they played. Sydney Barnes's average dipped a bit from dominating SA though. Larwood would have to bowl to people wearing helmets now too (unless they decided not to wear one). Still a contender I agree considering body line performance. The others were too good to ignore for me though.
 

Neptune

Panel of Selectors
PlanetCricket Award Winner
Avengers
Joined
Mar 23, 2020
Okay, I agree with a good part of this team but some of the decisions you have made here are a little hard to understand.

First of all why is Bradman opening?
Yes Bradman is 1. It's a bit disgusting to bat him lower than 1 in an all time team imho.
Why would it be disgusting to bat him at 3, where he was simply incomparable and unquestionably the best player to ever play the game? Also the only weakness I can find in him ( if you can call it that) is that he wasn't very successful in very poorly made/ very bowling friendly pitches. For this reason alone, I think hiding him from the new ball at 4 might even be a better option than making him open.

I based them on strength in a particular batting position. These have the highest batting averages for their respective positions minimum of 30 innings in particular position for the top 6.
I get what you are doing here but Ian Bell just does not fit in an All Time Australia + England test team tbh. It also leads to the exclusion of players like Jack Hobbs who I would definitely have in my team.

Your bowling lineup is very strong but I wouldn't have Ian Botham there personally, he was very very good in the start of his career but I find it hard to ignore the drop in his performances in the latter half of his career, especially if we are making an all time test team. Also batting him at 8 might be a little low.

The bowling attack is really strong, but there is an obvious weakness - no specialist spinner. Jim Laker, Headley Verity, Clarie Grimmett, Bill O'Reilly and Shane Warne all are really good spinners so am curious why you didn't go for any of them.

My team would probably look like this
1. Jack Hobbs
2. Herbert Sutcliffe
3. Donald Bradman
4. Ken Barrington
5. Steve Smith
6. Keith Miller
7. Adam Gilchrist (although Alan Knott is a very solid choice too)
8. George Lohmann
9. Sydney Barnes
10. Fred Trueman
11. Bill O'Reilly

Also, sorry if someone of this seems aggressive/confrontational. The tone of the message might make it seem so but I'm just trying to understand your point of view
 

Jack7

Club Cricketer
Joined
Jul 2, 2021
Okay, I agree with a good part of this team but some of the decisions you have made here are a little hard to understand.

First of all why is Bradman opening?

Why would it be disgusting to bat him at 3, where he was simply incomparable and unquestionably the best player to ever play the game? Also the only weakness I can find in him ( if you can call it that) is that he wasn't very successful in very poorly made/ very bowling friendly pitches. For this reason alone, I think hiding him from the new ball at 4 might even be a better option than making him open.


I get what you are doing here but Ian Bell just does not fit in an All Time Australia + England test team tbh. It also leads to the exclusion of players like Jack Hobbs who I would definitely have in my team.

Your bowling lineup is very strong but I wouldn't have Ian Botham there personally, he was very very good in the start of his career but I find it hard to ignore the drop in his performances in the latter half of his career, especially if we are making an all time test team. Also batting him at 8 might be a little low.

The bowling attack is really strong, but there is an obvious weakness - no specialist spinner. Jim Laker, Headley Verity, Clarie Grimmett, Bill O'Reilly and Shane Warne all are really good spinners so am curious why you didn't go for any of them.

My team would probably look like this
1. Jack Hobbs
2. Herbert Sutcliffe
3. Donald Bradman
4. Ken Barrington
5. Steve Smith
6. Keith Miller
7. Adam Gilchrist (although Alan Knott is a very solid choice too)
8. George Lohmann
9. Sydney Barnes
10. Fred Trueman
11. Bill O'Reilly

Also, sorry if someone of this seems aggressive/confrontational. The tone of the message might make it seem so but I'm just trying to understand your point of view
No spinner was more that it will be played in Eng or Aus. Obviously on a turner I'd be thinking about dropping a seamer for a spinner. I want to open with the best player in an all time team, Bradman is clearly that. No other reason. Your team looks good. Gilchrist is an alternative to Knott I agree with that. Our teams are pretty similar still. I understand wanting Hobbs or Hutton at 1 with Bradman at 3, that's an alternative. I just think the best player should bat 1 in an all time XI. In an all time XI he can just bat for himself and not worry about the team as he has strong players all around him so I wanted him 1st that's all.
 

Aislabie

Test Cricket is Best Cricket
Moderator
Ireland
PlanetCricket Award Winner
Joined
Sep 3, 2010
Location
Derbyshire
I want to open with the best player in an all time team, Bradman is clearly that
If you were picking a one-day team then sure, but batting a non-opener at the top of the order is a risky business in Tests. Not everyone is a Sehwag.

Anyhow, my team...

1. :eng: :bat: Len Hutton
2. :aus: :bat: Matthew Hayden
3. :aus: :bat: Don Bradman
4. :aus: :bat: Ricky Ponting
5. :aus: :bat: Steve Smith
6. :aus: :ar: Keith Miller
7. :aus: :wk: Adam Gilchrist
8. :eng: :bwl: Hedley Verity
9. :eng: :bwl: George Lohmann
10. :eng: :bwl: Sydney Barnes
11. :aus: :bwl: Glenn McGrath

I'd definitely consider swapping out Lohmann for Allan Davidson though, or even somebody like Jimmy Anderson. Not that Lohmann isn't a legend, but his skills would be least transferrable to modern-style pitches and the like
 

Bevab

Staff Member
Moderator
PlanetCricket Award Winner
Joined
Jun 13, 2009
Location
India
Online Cricket Games Owned
  1. Don Bradman Cricket 14 - Steam PC
If you were picking a one-day team then sure, but batting a non-opener at the top of the order is a risky business in Tests. Not everyone is a Sehwag.

Anyhow, my team...

1. :eng: :bat: Len Hutton
2. :aus: :bat: Matthew Hayden
3. :aus: :bat: Don Bradman
4. :aus: :bat: Ricky Ponting
5. :aus: :bat: Steve Smith
6. :aus: :ar: Keith Miller
7. :aus: :wk: Adam Gilchrist
8. :eng: :bwl: Hedley Verity
9. :eng: :bwl: George Lohmann
10. :eng: :bwl: Sydney Barnes
11. :aus: :bwl: Glenn McGrath

I'd definitely consider swapping out Lohmann for Allan Davidson though, or even somebody like Jimmy Anderson. Not that Lohmann isn't a legend, but his skills would be least transferrable to modern-style pitches and the like
The lack of Jack Hobbs is disturbing to me.
 

Aislabie

Test Cricket is Best Cricket
Moderator
Ireland
PlanetCricket Award Winner
Joined
Sep 3, 2010
Location
Derbyshire
Herbert Sutcliffe is the most underrated opener of ALL TIMES!!!!
If anything, both Hobbs and Sutcliffe are somewhat overrated. Although both were still obviously excellent for an absurdly long time, they were excellent in a very weak bowling era and consequently most established English batsmen in this period had statistically improbable averages.

This isn't to say that they weren't all good players - they were of course the best in the world - but if one Test team can call on a top four batsmen all with Test averages over 55 then that certainly suggests that the opposition have been consistently weak.

I really must stress again, I'm not trying to revise history and say that Hobbs, Sutcliffe and Hammond weren't all great players, far better than 99% of other Test cricketers let alone plebs like me - just that they weren't any greater than most people already give them credit for.
 

Jack7

Club Cricketer
Joined
Jul 2, 2021
If anything, both Hobbs and Sutcliffe are somewhat overrated. Although both were still obviously excellent for an absurdly long time, they were excellent in a very weak bowling era and consequently most established English batsmen in this period had statistically improbable averages.

This isn't to say that they weren't all good players - they were of course the best in the world - but if one Test team can call on a top four batsmen all with Test averages over 55 then that certainly suggests that the opposition have been consistently weak.

I really must stress again, I'm not trying to revise history and say that Hobbs, Sutcliffe and Hammond weren't all great players, far better than 99% of other Test cricketers let alone plebs like me - just that they weren't any greater than most people already give them credit for.
Ok. But Sutcliffe had a monster average for an opening. He never averaged below 60 ever in test cricket from his very first innings. I feel he is criminally underrated, but that's just my opinion.
 
Last edited:

blockerdave

ICC Chairman
Joined
Aug 19, 2013
Location
London
Profile Flag
England
1. Bradman (c)
2. Sutcliffe
3. Barrington
4. Steven Smith
5. Root
6. Bell
7. Knott (wk)
8. Botham (vc)
9. Lohmann
10. Sydney Barnes
11. Trueman
12th man. Collingwood

I based them on strength in a particular batting position. These have the highest batting averages for their respective positions minimum of 30 innings in particular position for the top 6. I might need to go into further detail when time. I couldn't really look past the 4 man bowling attack, especially bearing in mind the drop off during Botham's second half career - at his peak he was a monster. So yeah, if this thread has been done before link me - a quick search I found nothing. Yes Bradman is 1. It's a bit disgusting to bat him lower than 1 in an all time team imho.

that team is absurd
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top