The most rubbish team that each country has ever fielded in a Test

[Days of Grace]

Jeez, there's been some rubbish teams over the years. Makes me want to hang my head in shame when looking at this dire New Zealand team of 1993 that lost the second test to Australia at Hobart by an innings and 222 runs.

1. Greatbatch
2. Pocock
3. Jones
4. Rutherford (c)
5. Patel
6. Harris
7. Blain (wk)
8. Su'a
9. Morrison
10. Doull
11. de Groen

Danny batting at no.9 and Patel at no.5 just says it all

 

[iamdavid]

I'm sure England have had worse throughout history but this one was pretty bad -


M.Atherton
D.Maddy
N.Hussain
G.Thorpe
A.Stewart
M.Ramprakash
R.Irani
A.Caddick
A.Mullally
P.Tufnell
E.Giddins

This side from the 4th test of the series just edges out the ones from first and second test which included Aftab Habib.
This side had Darren Maddy, who I must admit I am a fan of, I really like him as a domestic player and I enjoy watching him, but he's not upto international cricket and never was.
Ramprakash in the most dire form of his career plus Ronnie Irani.
I must admit on paper its still a reasonable batting side with Atherton, Hussain, Thorpe and Stewart, but this is offset by probably the worst tail in test history, with Caddick a standout at number 8, followed by three guys who would be number 11's in club cricket.

 

[Richard]

Would have to be something from 1986-1989, probably the last. Something like:
Curtis (no decent international showings in limited chances)
Moxon (never given a decent go)
Atherton (just out of university and nothing like the batsman he would be a year later)
Smith (one of two redeeming features)
Gower (captain of a battered team and hardly in the form of his life)
Russell
Hemmings (nothing fingerspinner)
Fraser (the one other redeeming feature)
Botham (long, long past it)
Cook (another nothing fingerspinner)
Malcolm (described as "looking anything but a fast bowler" - he had no formal run-up even at that time)

Though it could easily have been another one from a few games earlier:
Gooch (hopelessly out of nick that summer)
Broad (likewise)
Barnett (never really a Test player)
Gatting (long past his best)
Gower (as above)
Smith (as above)
Emburey (long past his best, not that that was ever outstanding anyway)
Russell (as above)
Foster (pretty much read Emburey)
Jarvis (should never have been anywhere near Test-cricket)
Dilley (read Emburey again)

Although I occasionally still have the odd nightmare about the bowling-attack of Headingley and Edgbaston 1993, and the three number-eleven batsmen picked at The Oval in 1999.

 

[Chubb]

It's impossible to choose between these two;

Zimbabwe v. Sri Lanka, First Test, Harare, 2004

S. Matiskenyeri
B. Taylor
D. Ebrahim
T. Taibu *+
E. Chigumbura
A. Maregwede
M. Nkala
P. Utseya
B. Mahwire
D. Hondo
T. Panyangara

Zimbabwe v. Sri Lanka, Second Test, Bulawayo, 2004

S. Matsikenyeri
B. Taylor
M. Vermeulen
D. Ebrahim
T. Taibu *+
A Maregwede
E. Chigumbura
M. Nkala
T. Panyangara
T. Mupariwa
D. Hondo


Granted there were players in these sides who have become decent international cricketers like Taylor, Utseya and Chigumbura, but they were all like 18 at the time. Ebrahim and Hondo tried their best but just weren't good enough, Vermeulen was comeing back from the head injury that has driven him insane, and the others were either too young or simply not good enough. These two sides must rank as one of the worst test sides ever.

 

[The Sean]

Find an Australian team from 1985 to 1987. Pretty much any of them were awful.

And then imagine what it would have looked like if AB had been injured an unable to play.

 

[Matt79]

Any team with Taibu at 4 is up against it.

 

[Matt79]

Find an Australian team from 1985 to 1987. Pretty much any of them were awful.

And then imagine what it would have looked like if AB had been injured an unable to play.

Some of the WSC vintage must be pretty awful as well.

 

[Matt79]

Some of the WSC vintage must be pretty awful as well.

Try this one:
PA Hibbert
GJ Cosier
AD Ogilvie
CS Serjeant
RB Simpson*
PM Toohey
AL Mann
SJ Rixon+
WM Clark
JR Thomson
AG Hurst

Six debuts and Simmo returning for 10 years of retirement.

 

[The Sean]

Some of the WSC vintage must be pretty awful as well.

Mate, great call - I forgot about them because I always think of the WSC side as our Test team back then!

How's this for the group of champions who took the field wearing the baggy green cap in the 1st Test against England in 78/79...

GM Wood
GJ Cosier
PM Toohey
*GN Yallop
KJ Hughes
TJ Laughlin
+JA Maclean
B Yardley
RM Hogg
AG Hurst
JD Higgs

 

[Matt79]

My eyes hurt reading the last couple of posts...

 

[Matt79]

Just re-reading the score cards of those tests in 1977, jeez Simmo was a gun. To come out of retirement after a decade and perform like that.

 

[The Sean]

Just re-reading the score cards of those tests in 1977, jeez Simmo was a gun. To come out of retirement after a decade and perform like that.

Often overlooked when the talk comes around to all time Australian XIs, but he's a very strong contender IMO.

He certainly thinks so too - when asked to chose a best ever Aussie team he picked himself!

 

[Matt79]

Although this also hurts reading it - they only had to use 3 bowlers in the 1st innings!

 

[Matt79]

Often overlooked when the talk comes around to all time Australian XIs, but he's a very strong contender IMO.

He certainly thinks so too - when asked to chose a best ever Aussie team he picked himself!

He's very close to mine. Ponsford just ahead of him, although when it comes to the opener to partner Trumper, its a day by day thing with me normally.

 

[The Sean]

He's very close to mine. Ponsford just ahead of him, although when it comes to the opener to partner Trumper, its a day by day thing with me normally.

Likewise - Trumper and Morris are my current incumbents, but Hayden, Ponsford and Simpson are all very close.

Interesting stat point - Simpson's career average over 111 innings was 46.81. But in the 70 innings in which he opened he averaged 55.52. Statistically our best ever opener with the exception of Sid Barnes who sadly played only a handful of innings.

 

[Goughy]

Would have to be something from 1986-1989, probably the last. Something like:


Though it could easily have been another one from a few games earlier:
Gooch (hopelessly out of nick that summer)
Broad (likewise)
Barnett (never really a Test player)
Gatting (long past his best)
Gower (as above)
Smith (as above)
Emburey (long past his best, not that that was ever outstanding anyway)
Russell (as above)
Foster (pretty much read Emburey)
Jarvis (should never have been anywhere near Test-cricket)
Dilley (read Emburey again)

Not quite sure about some of those assessments, though undoubtably its a poor team.

How Smith can be called past his best when he was mid-20s and only debuted the year before?

Jarvis was as quick and as good as anything around during some bleak years for English seamers

Dilley had had possibly his best and most successful year in Test cricket in 1988

Hard to say Gatting was long past his best when he didnt play for 4 years after this series due to being banned. No evidence to suggest he was finished

Gooch and Broad may have been out of form, but that doesnt make them bad players. There have been far worse to play for England.

How can Foster be long past his best when he was 27 and he had had 2 good years in 87 and 88.

Also for a guy long past his best, Gower averaged 53 for the rest of his career after this series

It was a poor team but the descriptions are innaccurate.

 

[Richard]

Not quite sure about some of those assessments, though undoubtably its a poor team.

How Smith can be called past his best when he was mid-20s and only debuted the year before?

Jarvis was as quick and as good as anything around during some bleak years for English seamers

Dilley had had possibly his best and most successful year in Test cricket in 1988

Hard to say Gatting was long past his best when he didnt play for 4 years after this series due to being banned. No evidence to suggest he was finished

Gooch and Broad may have been out of form, but that doesnt make them bad players. There have been far worse to play for England.

How can Foster be long past his best when he was 27 and he had had 2 good years in 87 and 88.

Also for a guy long past his best, Gower averaged 53 for the rest of his career after this series

It was a poor team but the descriptions are innaccurate.

I've probably thrown you when I said "as above" - I meant "as I described them in my previous team". Hence, you've got the wrong end of the stick on my descriptions of Gower and Smith.

Foster was past his best at 27 because of the injuries, even if he had been good in 1987 and 1988, 1989 was the beginning of the end; Dilley likewise. As I say; neither of them were that good for very long anyway.

As regards Gatting, he was never a good Test batsman again after the summer of 1987. He averaged less than 23 in his last 38 innings, passing 50 just 5 times. This despite a courageous first-innings century at Adelaide Oval in 1994\95 (but for that it would have been just over 20).

Jarvis was an English equivalent of Fidel Edwards or Jermaine Lawson IMO. Might have had pace, but was never capable of stemming the tide of mediocrity.

As regards Gooch and Broad, even though they certainly weren't bad players most of the time, the fact was they were that summer - awful ones. Hence they contributed to the awfulness of the side. Gooch, of course, came back afterwards, better than ever - better than most people have ever been for 4 years, indeed. But for Broad, that was the end of the road. IMO, it's a shame the same didn't happen with Gatting, as he only soured his career upon comeback.

 

[Richard]

Find an Australian team from 1985 to 1987. Pretty much any of them were awful.

And then imagine what it would have looked like if AB had been injured an unable to play.

What's always interested me is that said Australian side deteriorated, bit-by-bit.

First there was the famous triple-retirement of Greg Chappell, Marsh and Lillee. Yallop's career basically ended (at 31) there, too, though he didn't take the rebel-tour route for another year and played 1 further Test.

Then Hughes (who had not even turned 31) took the rebel-tour route, along with Hogg and Alderman (28 at the time, the only one who would return). Lawson (27 in 1985\86) virtually disappeared for 4 years too, I know not why (have always presumed he was injured a lot). Finally, Wessels (at 28) went the same way.

What amazes me is that, in amongst the Steve Smiths, Woods, Hilditchs, Ritchies, Hookeses, Velettas, Gilberts, Dodemaides, O'Donnells, Brights, Bennetts, Hogans, Hollands, Sleeps, Peter Taylors, Mays, Hohnses, Phillipses, Rixons, Zoehrers and Dyers who were mostly mediocre full-stop, there were as many as there were who started dreadfully and were part of the mediocrity yet emerged the other side and became superb cricketers later on: the Boons, McDermotts, Merv Hugheses, Reids, Stephen Waughs, and late on the Healys and Taylors.

TBF, Border may of times have been a lone fighter but it's surprising how well Geoff Marsh served his country in the time. Dean Jones later on too.

Either way, it's hard to say that any one side was worst, I agree.

 

[Swervy]

What's always interested me is that said Australian side deteriorated, bit-by-bit.

First there was the famous triple-retirement of Greg Chappell, Marsh and Lillee. Yallop's career basically ended (at 31) there, too, though he didn't take the rebel-tour route for another year and played 1 further Test.

Then Hughes (who had not even turned 31) took the rebel-tour route, along with Hogg and Alderman (28 at the time, the only one who would return). Lawson (27 in 1985\86) virtually disappeared for 4 years too, I know not why (have always presumed he was injured a lot). Finally, Wessels (at 28) went the same way.

What amazes me is that, in amongst the Steve Smiths, Woods, Hilditchs, Ritchies, Hookeses, Velettas, Gilberts, Dodemaides, O'Donnells, Brights, Bennetts, Hogans, Hollands, Sleeps, Peter Taylors, Mays, Hohnses, Phillipses, Rixons, Zoehrers and Dyers who were mostly mediocre full-stop, there were as many as there were who started dreadfully and were part of the mediocrity yet emerged the other side and became superb cricketers later on: the Boons, McDermotts, Merv Hugheses, Reids, Stephen Waughs, and late on the Healys and Taylors.

TBF, Border may of times have been a lone fighter but it's surprising how well Geoff Marsh served his country in the time. Dean Jones later on too.

Either way, it's hard to say that any one side was worst, I agree.

A poor team can be made up of many very good players, see some of the England teams of the 80s. On paper, they tended to be full of very fine players, but they simply couldnt string it together. The game is about teamwork and that involves a lot of psychology, which you simply cannot qunatify with a group of players. The team dynamic changes all the time. Some teams gel, some dont. The English teams of the 80s in general were poor, which some outstanding players.

 

[stumpski]

Australia in 1912 were pretty weak, given that six of their best players refused to tour. The early South African sides (comfortably beaten by below-strength England) and 1950s New Zealanders too. How NZ would have managed then without Sutcliffe and Reid is impossible to imagine.