Pick TWO opening Bowlers for the 1946-65 World Test XI

[aussie tragic]

Please select two opening bowlers for the 1946-65 World test XI:

Neil Adcock (SA) - RF: 26 tests, 104 wkts @ 21.10 (5/0), SR 61.4, Econ 2.06, BB 6-43 --- 146 runs @ 5.40
Alec Bedser (Eng) - RMF: 51 tests, 236 wkts @ 24.89 (15/5), SR 67.4, Econ 2.21, BB 7-44 --- 714 runs @ 12.75
Alan Davidson (Aus) - LFM: 44 tests, 186 wkts @ 20.53 (14/2), SR 62.2, Econ 1.97, BB 7-93 --- 1328 runs @ 24.59
Wes Hall (WI) - RF: 33 tests, 148 wkts @ 23.81 (9/1), SR 50.4, Econ 2.83, BB 7-69 --- 592 runs @ 16.44
Ray Lindwall (Aus) - RF: 61 tests, 228 wkts @ 23.03 (12/0), SR 59.8, Econ 2.30, BB 9-70 --- 1502 runs @ 21.15
Fazal Mahmood (Pak) - RFM: 34 tests, 139 wkts @ 24.70 (13/4), SR 70.7, Econ 2.09, BB 7-42 --- 620 runs @ 14.09
Garth McKenzie (Aus) - RF: 28 tests, 121 wkts @ 28.48 (7/1), SR 68.3, Econ 2.50, BB 8-71 --- 386 runs @ 11.69
Peter Pollock (SA) - RF: 19 tests, 89 wkts @ 23.34 (8/1) SR 54.2, Econ 2.58, BB 6-38 --- 350 runs @ 17.50
Brian Statham (Eng) - RFM: 70 tests, 252 wkts @ 24.84 (9/1), SR 63.7, Econ 2.33, BB 7-39 --- 675 runs @ 11.44
Fred Trueman (Eng) - RF: 67 tests, 307 wkts @ 21.57 (17/3) SR 49.4, Econ 2.61, BB 8-31 --- 981 runs @ 13.81
Frank Tyson (Eng) - RF: 17 tests, 76 wkts @ 18.56 (4/1) SR 45.4, Econ 2.45, BB 7-27 --- 230 runs @ 10.95

Note: Keith Miller not included as he’ll be in at # 6 (if by some miracle he’s not, I’ll include him in final bowler poll along with the Runner-ups from here + the runner-up spinners)

The 1946-65 World Test XI so far:

1. Len Hutton (Eng)
2. Arthur Morris (Aus)
3. Clyde Walcott (WI)
4. Everton Weekes (WI)
5. Frank Worrell (WI)
6. Keith Miller (Aus)
7. John Waite (SA)
8. -----------------------
9. -----------------------
10. Jim Laker (Eng)
11. ---------------------

 

[Perm]

So many good choices but I'll go with Davidson and Trueman.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Trueman and Davidson.

Lindwall and Tyson are the only real threats for those two I think. Tyson, IMO, didn't play enough tests, and Lindwall just misses out and may well be the third seamer.

 

[aussie tragic]

I've picked Trueman as number one, however deciding his opening partner is a tough one between Lindwall and Hall (or have Miller open and bring Davidson's Left-arm variety at first change)

EDIT: Okay, I've gone for Trueman & Lindwall to open (Halls 46-65 figures are inflated over his career record & Davidson was not express). This means I would have a very tough choice for final bowler between Davidson and Benaud.

Proposed Attack:

1. Trueman
2. Lindwall
3. Miller
4. Davidson
5. Laker

 

[oz_fan]

Really tough to choose just two from that list.

I went with Davidson and Trueman. I considered going with Lindwall but he took under 4 wickets a match or Bedser but his strike rate was a fair bit more than most of the bowlers on that list. Pollock and Tyson would have come close had they played more tests during the time period. Wes Hall is also unlucky to miss out with a strike rate of fifty and well over 4 wickets a match.

 

[adharcric]

Trueman is easily the best of the lot. Out of the rest, Davidson was the most consistent and took wickets in bunches. He also provides variety to the attack. Trueman and Davidson.

 

[Matt79]

I've gone for Lindwall and Davidson. Trueman unlucky to miss out, although I'll be voting for Benaud for the last bowlers spot.

 

[bagapath]

am going for truman and davidson. bedser is unlucky to miss out. i prefer davidson to him because of better sr, average and the vairety he could bring in (left hand) though neither of them were express quick. since i am thinkin of going for benaud for the last bowler's spot and not lindwall, i can assume truman and miller will open the attack, with davidson at first change and benaud and laker as spinners.

 

[cameeel]

Davidson and Trueman

 

[Poker Boy]

Trueman and Statham (Tyson was probably the fastest but didn't have a long enough career)

 

[SA]

Fazal Mahmood & Alan Davidson.

 

[Slifer]

Trueman and Davidson

 

[Matt79]

am going for truman and davidson. bedser is unlucky to miss out. i prefer davidson to him because of better sr, average and the vairety he could bring in (left hand) though neither of them were express quick. since i am thinkin of going for benaud for the last bowler's spot and not lindwall, i can assume truman and miller will open the attack, with davidson at first change and benaud and laker as spinners.

You'd be better to give the new cherry to Davo than Miller - he only began achieving his potential with the ball once he got the opportunity to open the bowling, because early in his career Lindwall and Miller had, undoubtedly earned, a lock on the opening bowlers spot.

 

[PhoenixFire]

Trueman and Bedser

 

[luffy]

Trueman and Lindwall

 

[archie mac]

Trueman and Lindwall

Same, although I chose Lindwall first, after Roberts he probably had the scariest bouncer ever

 

[aussie tragic]

Lindwall making a late comeback here, while Davidson support seems to have dried up

 

[Beleg]

Davidson - Trueman

 

[steds]

Statham and errrrm Lindwall

 

[JBH001]

I figure Lindwall and Trueman - as they both have genuine pace and therefore should open the bowling together. IMO am unsure of Miller as an opening bowler as I do not think his wkts/test ratio is all that flash despite a great average.

Despite Lindwalls comparatively poor stats, from what I have heard and read he was usually rated by contemporaries and other observers as the best Aussie bowler before Lilee and McGrath, so I think he deserves inclusion. Besides the man could wield a bat too. Trueman requires little argument, so no problem there.

But I rather like Davidson's left arm swing bowling, and his batting ability - I just do not know if we are going for a 3 pace and 2 spin attack, or a 4 pace and 1 spin attack.
If the former, I may opt out of Lindwall though I prefer his genuine pace over Davidsons swing and favour Davidson if Benaud is to come in and complement the attack.

Decisions, decisions...