Quote:
Originally Posted by Trumpers_Ghost
I suppose I'll have a go too, rather than chuckling at amusing selections.
Perenially winning Sons of Oz XI
Langer (best record v Eng of the possibles)
Hayden (on par v Eng with Slater and Taylor, overall record & Langer partnership gives nod)
Ponting
Jones (toss up with M.Waugh but think jones was a better bat)
Border
S.Waugh
Gilchrist
Warne
Aldermann
MacGill
McGrath
12th man: Mcdermott (can easily slot in for Macgill, both owned England reasonably equally)
Worried about the rabbit plague in the tail however
Soap Dodgers XI
Gooch
Broad
Vaughn
Gower
Thorpe
Botham
Flintoff
Russell
Gough
Fraser
Tufnell
12th Man: Caddick
While without the depth of the Australians outside the XI, the team looks alright.
In direct comparisons
Top order-------- Aust ++
middle order----Aust ++
fielding -------Aust +
pace bowling----- Eng
spin bowling -----Aust +++
Tail end batting ------Eng
winning mentality------Aust +
cheers
|
Dude, you can't slam Richard for putting in Ramps and then put in Tufnell, Broad and to a lesser degree Russell (he was a quality gloveman but poor with the bat IMHO).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Top_Cat
His numbers are a fairly misleading. Either he scored in dead rubbers where the Aussies were notorious for taking their foot off the gas or in 1998 away and 2001 at home, he basically hung around while the batsmen at the other end got out.
I know it can be said you can only take the chances you're given but to that, you have to then ask yourself why England refused to pick him before the final Test of his first two Ashes series'. From the chatter at the time, the English selectors didn't rate him either. And upon getting picked for full Ashes series' in 1998 and 2001, he, again, hung around. When the team needed a player to take the game by the scruff of the neck, he......hung around putting the pressure on the guys at the other end to actually do the job. They'd get out trying to do it, he'd sit on his bat at the other end in the midst of the inevitable collapse. Not exactly a team player.
You could plot a graph of 'points when momentum shifted to the opposition' against 'Ramps at the crease' and almost see r = 1 for the correlation. This is why he should be nowhere near any Ashes side. Certainly not one that wants to actually win games.
|
In that case you should completely disregard every run scored when a series was won since naturally people take their foot of the gas but the bowlers like Warne and McGrath still tried their best to get wickets.
I personaly wouldn't put Ramps in my Ashes XI, just sticking up for him since his record aginst Australia- dead rubber or not, is still impressive. Not everyone average 42 against that Aussie bowling line up so he can't have sucked.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trumpers_Ghost
I'll have a go at the alltime craziness too
Aus
Trumper
Morris
Bradman
G.Chappell (or maybe Ponting or Mcabe, hard to split)
Border or S.Waugh (fencesitting again)
Gilchrist
Miller
Warne
Davidson (think he'd offer more balance to an attack than Lindwill who was similar to Lillee)
Lillee
McGrath (thought about Spofforth, went for what I know)
Eng
Hobbs
Sutcliff
Hutton
Hammond
Barrington
Compton
Botham
Knott
Laker
Trueman
Tyson
I know far less about old school English cricket than Australian, so I may have made some bad calls; possibly Barnes in for one of the middle order to strengthen the bowling.
|
For Eng, given the sheer depth of No. 1-5, I'd drop Compton (which hurts since I'm an Arsenal fan! Lol) and put in a 4th seamer (Willis for me).
Statistically, George Lohmann with 77 wickets @ 13..01, SR of under 43 in 15 matches would be the choice- though I'm extremely skepticaly about the depth of players in the late 19th/early 20th century.