Cricket Web All Time World XI

[BlackCap_Fan]

Sutcliffe, all the way.

 

[age_master]

Sutcliffe

 

[C_C]

Gavaskar by a country mile and half ( Yes, we all know that he averaged 45-ish against the great WI pace battery but thats way more than any opener averaged in that same span) followed by Boycott.

Simply much much much superior to Hobbs, Sutcliffe and the whole gamut.

 

[Boofra]

I have to say thats its very amusing how Sutcliffe may end making this cricketweb All-time XI, yet in the Battle of the Cricketers thread he was outvoted by none other than Andy Flower. Work that out!

And again, i'll have to vote for Barry Richards. In todays game, the thing that separates (for example) a Brian Lara from Jacques Kallis is the ability to score quickly, to dominate great attacks. For example, Lara brought up his 50 vs Australia in 92 balls and then proceeded to score his next 176 runs off 206 balls. Kallis on the other hand doesnt have that ability. Still a great player though. Similarly, Barry Richards could dominate an attack. He once scored 300 in a a day against an attack including Dennis Lillee and Graham McKenzie, and also scored a century before lunch about 8 times. Gavaskar though, as good as he was, is more in the Kallis mould in the sense that he generally accumulated runs at probably the same sort of S/R as Kallis (40 runs per hundred balls compared to Lara's S/R of 60 runs per hundred balls).

In the words of Don Bradman, "it is not sufficient to keep the ball out of the stumps and not give a catch. There is a need to attack, take the intiative from the bowlers and set up conditions for batsmen to follow." Barry Richards certainly did that and just because he didnt play much Test cricket doesnt mean he wasnt one of the best openers of all-time.

Having said that, each to their own. I suppose Sunny could be considered the perfect foil for attacking batsmen like Bradman and Viv to bat around.

 

[ohtani's jacket]

Oh no one is dentying that Gavaskar was a great player. I am just putting his stats in perspective. There is a HUGE difference between an average of 45 and an average of 65.........HUGE

What I meant to ask is whether Gavaskar's adjusted average is still the highest of any batsman against that West Indian attack... It seems to me that any player who had success against the Windies -- Gooch, Boycott, Chappell, Viswanath, Vengsarkar, Border and Lamb -- receives a career bump of either the Packer years or series where one or more of the West Indian quartet didn't play.

My vote is for Sutcliffe.

 

[Tony Blade]

Sutcliffe.

 

[marc71178]

Sutcliffe

 

[archie mac]

I have to say thats its very amusing how Sutcliffe may end making this cricketweb All-time XI, yet in the Battle of the Cricketers thread he was outvoted by none other than Andy Flower. Work that out!

And again, i'll have to vote for Barry Richards. In todays game, the thing that separates (for example) a Brian Lara from Jacques Kallis is the ability to score quickly, to dominate great attacks. For example, Lara brought up his 50 vs Australia in 92 balls and then proceeded to score his next 176 runs off 206 balls. Kallis on the other hand doesnt have that ability. Still a great player though. Similarly, Barry Richards could dominate an attack. He once scored 300 in a a day against an attack including Dennis Lillee and Graham McKenzie, and also scored a century before lunch about 8 times. Gavaskar though, as good as he was, is more in the Kallis mould in the sense that he generally accumulated runs at probably the same sort of S/R as Kallis (40 runs per hundred balls compared to Lara's S/R of 60 runs per hundred balls).

In the words of Don Bradman, "it is not sufficient to keep the ball out of the stumps and not give a catch. There is a need to attack, take the intiative from the bowlers and set up conditions for batsmen to follow." Barry Richards certainly did that and just because he didnt play much Test cricket doesnt mean he wasnt one of the best openers of all-time.

Having said that, each to their own. I suppose Sunny could be considered the perfect foil for attacking batsmen like Bradman and Viv to bat around.

Yes barry Richards should not be over looked, a class act, and makes many 'all time World 11"

 

[Zinzan]

Yes barry Richards should not be over looked, a class act, and makes many 'all time World 11"

Agree he was a class act....but unfortunately though no fault of his own he didn't play enough at the top level to qualify for a world xi IMO.....Graeme Pollock's another story, IMO he has played enough

 

[C_C]

What I meant to ask is whether Gavaskar's adjusted average is still the highest of any batsman against that West Indian attack... It seems to me that any player who had success against the Windies -- Gooch, Boycott, Chappell, Viswanath, Vengsarkar, Border and Lamb -- receives a career bump of either the Packer years or series where one or more of the West Indian quartet didn't play.

My vote is for Sutcliffe.

Even if Gavaskar had a 25.00 average against the WI pace quartet, he still would be leagues ahead of a amatuer playing against nowhere as good bowlers on a non-professional basis ( Sutcliffe).
Unprofessional ones dont compare to professional ones unless they were exceptionally superior to their professional counterparts in terms of accomplishments ( like Bradman, Grimmett, etc.). When you are playing as an amatuer, with shady umpiring ( if anyone wishes me to believe that RSA/WI/IND got fair umpiring in OZ/ENG in the 20s,30s and 40s, they must be smoking something really good, considering how racist the west was during that span) and you are in the same ballpark as your pro counterparts, you are nowhere as comparable.

 

[archie mac]

Even if Gavaskar had a 25.00 average against the WI pace quartet, he still would be leagues ahead of a amatuer playing against nowhere as good bowlers on a non-professional basis ( Sutcliffe).
Unprofessional ones dont compare to professional ones unless they were exceptionally superior to their professional counterparts in terms of accomplishments ( like Bradman, Grimmett, etc.). When you are playing as an amatuer, with shady umpiring ( if anyone wishes me to believe that RSA/WI/IND got fair umpiring in OZ/ENG in the 20s,30s and 40s, they must be smoking something really good, considering how racist the west was during that span) and you are in the same ballpark as your pro counterparts, you are nowhere as comparable.

He was employed as a pro Which is short for?

 

[Zinzan]

Even if Gavaskar had a 25.00 average against the WI pace quartet, he still would be leagues ahead of a amatuer playing against nowhere as good bowlers on a non-professional basis ( Sutcliffe).
Unprofessional ones dont compare to professional ones unless they were exceptionally superior to their professional counterparts in terms of accomplishments ( like Bradman, Grimmett, etc.). When you are playing as an amatuer, with shady umpiring ( if anyone wishes me to believe that RSA/WI/IND got fair umpiring in OZ/ENG in the 20s,30s and 40s, they must be smoking something really good, considering how racist the west was during that span) and you are in the same ballpark as your pro counterparts, you are nowhere as comparable.

Yawn Yawn.........your usual racist carry-on.......... whats new

 

[a massive zebra]

Gavaskar

 

[C_C]

Yawn Yawn.........your usual racist carry-on.......... whats new

I am sure the English and Aussie umpires were paragons of virtue in the 20s,30s and 40s, while the rest of the country was caught up in white superiority, blue blood and various other claptraps.

 

[Zinzan]

I am sure the English and Aussie umpires were paragons of virtue in the 20s,30s and 40s, while the rest of the country was caught up in white superiority, blue blood and various other claptraps.

Yes ...and umpiring in the sub continent was always fair in the early days of test cricket wasn't it

Thats why Javed Miandad was so often given out LBW in Pakistan in all those matches aye CC

 

[archie mac]

I am sure the English and Aussie umpires were paragons of virtue in the 20s,30s and 40s, while the rest of the country was caught up in white superiority, blue blood and various other claptraps.

I hope it does not seem like I am finding fault with all of your posts C_C

But no other teams except England toured Aust in the 1920s and only SA and the Windies once in the 1930s and India once in the 1940s as Bradman, Grimmett and O'Reilly were playing I don't think poor umpiring would come into it

 

[Zinzan]

I hope it does not seem like I am finding fault with all of your posts C_C

But no other teams except England toured Aust in the 1920s and only SA and the Windies once in the 1930s and India once in the 1940s as Bradman, Grimmett and O'Reilly were playing I don't think poor umpiring would come into it

In your defense Archie...its difficult not to find faults with the same old boring racially-toned responses that have become all to predictable

 

[Jono]

Out of interest, any history buffs no when the White Australia Policy officially ended? I don't agree with CC's point, but one point of his is interesting. When the government themselves promotes bigotry, umpiring back then against non-anglo nations would have been a bit suspect one would think. I'm not saying that wouldn't go the other way when teams toured the sub-continent and/or WI.

 

[C_C]

In your defense Archie...its difficult not to find faults with the same old boring racially-toned responses that have become all to predictable

So do you deny the fact that the umpiring and the game was overwhelmingly pro-white until much after the WWII ? Or are you simply unable/unwilling to admit so as you perceive it as a slight to you ?

 

[C_C]

I hope it does not seem like I am finding fault with all of your posts C_C

But no other teams except England toured Aust in the 1920s and only SA and the Windies once in the 1930s and India once in the 1940s as Bradman, Grimmett and O'Reilly were playing I don't think poor umpiring would come into it

With those three heavyweights around, i dont think even moderately pro-IND/WI/RSA home umpiring would tilt the scales. But given the policy of the government and the perspective of the society back then,it wouldnt be that much of a leap to imagine that an extremely difficult situation for IND/WI/RSA was made virtually impossible, would it ?