• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Pick Two Openers for the 1920-39 World Test XI

Pick two openers for the 1920-39 World Test XI


  • Total voters
    34
  • Poll closed .

aussie tragic

International Captain
Okay, it’s now time for the pre-war players to shine…..

Please select TWO openers for the 1920-39 World Test XI:

Bill Brown (Aus): 16 tests, 1324 runs @ 49.03 (4/7), HS 206*, 8 catches
Herbie Collins (Aus): 19 tests, 1352 runs @ 45.06, (4/6), HS 203, 13 catches
Jack Fingleton (Aus): 18 tests, 1189 runs @ 42.46 (5/3), HS 136, 13 catches
Jack Hobbs (Eng): 33 tests, 2945 runs @ 56.63 (10/12), HS 211, 8 catches
Bruce Mitchell (SA): 32 tests, 2399 runs @ 45.26, (8/15), HS 164*, 44 catches --- 24 wkts @ 49.95
Bill Ponsford (Aus): 29 tests, 2122 runs @ 48.22 (7/6), HS 266, 21 catches
Herb Sutcliffe (Eng): 54 tests, 4555 runs @ 60.73, (16/23), HS 194, 23 catches
Bill Woodfull (Aus): 35 tests, 2300 runs @ 46.00, (7/13), HS 161, 7 catches

The 1929-39 World Test XI so far:

1. --------------
2. --------------
3. Don Bradman {37 tests, 5093 runs @ 97.94 (21/8), HS 334, 21 catches}
4. --------------
 
Last edited:

Matt79

Global Moderator
Hobbs and Sutcliffe comfortably - the only reservation I have about voting for Hobbs is whether I'd prefer him in the pre-WW1 team...
 

The Sean

Cricketer Of The Year
Hobbs and Sutcliffe comfortably - the only reservation I have about voting for Hobbs is whether I'd prefer him in the pre-WW1 team...
Nah mate, put him in this one so we can get both Grace AND Trumper in the other team! ;)
 

The Sean

Cricketer Of The Year
Even 4 and 5 are obvious to me: Hammond and Headley. 6 is open for debate though.
Good call.

The quality of the very best in this era is at least equal to Post WWII, but the depth of talent certainly isn't! Which makes sense, really.
 

Matt79

Global Moderator
Nah mate, put him in this one so we can get both Grace AND Trumper in the other team! ;)
Yeah, but they'll be in regardless of where we have to slot them in - and including Hobbs here means I can't through Bill Woodfull a vote. Still done is done - if I could recast my vote (having consulted Stats Spider and its excellent runs per year and average by year charts! :) ) I'd vote Sutcliffe and Woodfull, with the proviso that I'd be voting for Hobbs in the pre-WWI team...
 

aussie tragic

International Captain
Hobbs and Sutcliffe comfortably - the only reservation I have about voting for Hobbs is whether I'd prefer him in the pre-WW1 team...
Hobbs played more tests in this era (33 tests) than in pre-1914 (28 tests), but yet again we've split the career of one of the games greats in half (same as Imran, Hadlee & Sobers)

btw, if Hobbs did miss out here :-O , he would be in the pre-1914 selection as well ;)
 

Matt79

Global Moderator
True, but I'd say the pitches he played on were slightly worse before the war, and the depth of player being pushed out between the wars is slightly higher than if he were included pre-war. I'm pretty certain I've read a few quotes saying that he wasn't the same batsman after the war (although obviously gained enough in experience etc to comfortably maintain an extraordinary average and be regarded as the best going around)
 

The Sean

Cricketer Of The Year
Yeah, but they'll be in regardless of where we have to slot them in - and including Hobbs here means I can't through Bill Woodfull a vote. Still done is done - if I could recast my vote (having consulted Stats Spider and its excellent runs per year and average by year charts! :) ) I'd vote Sutcliffe and Woodfull, with the proviso that I'd be voting for Hobbs in the pre-WWI team...
Fair enough - Trumper could always slot into the middle order anyway (and surprisingly had a much better average there than in his usual position of opener).

Still, just can't split Hobbs and Sutcliffe up.
 

The Sean

Cricketer Of The Year
True, but I'd say the pitches he played on were slightly worse before the war, and the depth of player being pushed out between the wars is slightly higher than if he were included pre-war. I'm pretty certain I've read a few quotes saying that he wasn't the same batsman after the war (although obviously gained enough in experience etc to comfortably maintain an extraordinary average and be regarded as the best going around)
Hobbs himself believes he was twice the player before WWI as after, which I suppose can also be put down to age, and the fact that he became a much more careful and efficient player after the war, rather than the dazzling strokeplayer he often was before.

And the fact that his average before the war matches his post-war average, despite vastly inferior pitches and batting conditions, is quite remarkable. It was said by more than one person who saw him in action words to the effect that "There was only one greater batsman than the post-war Jack Hobbs, and that was the pre-war Jack Hobbs."
 

Perm

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Walkover, Hobbs and Sutcliffe. Still some very fine openers in the list though.
 

Matt79

Global Moderator
Sean and Matt, please one of you change your avatar, I am becoming confused:wacko:
I'm retaining it til the ODIs kick off then I'm reverting to the People's Champ... Feel a bit for Langer tla, he's not received nearly the farfare (in avatar and sig terms) he would have if he hadn't coordinated with McGrath and Warne... I'm sure he's bleedin' inside but typically refusing to show the pain
 

Top