Pick an England XI 1995-2008

[Penguinissimo]

It oftens seems the great shame of the world that some of the wonderful players England had during the dark days of the 90s never got to play in a proper side and fulfil their potential.

That occurred to me again today as I thought through the current England line-up and reflected on the lack of world-class or potential world-class players there, and I started musing on a composite Test XI beginning with the Atherton / Stewart era on to today.

The criteria are that:

- all players must have played at least 20 Tests (to avoid flashes in the pan; yes, Simon Jones, I'm thinking of you)
- you can pick a player on how they played at their reasonable peak (and by "reasonable" I mean form over a 12-18 month period, not during one match or one series)

Here's what I came up with:

MA Atherton
ME Trescothick
MP Vaughan (c)
KP Pietersen
GP Thorpe
AJ Stewart (w/k)
A Flintoff
AF Giles
D Gough
SJ Harmison
ARC Fraser

Reserves / honorable mentions:

AJ Strauss
MA Butcher
RC Russell
MS Panesar
MJ Hoggard
DG Cork

 

[Uppercut]

Atherton
Trescothick
Vaughan(c)
Pietersen
Thorpe
Stewart (wk)
Flintoff
Gough
Hoggard
S Jones
Fraser

I disregarded your criteria because Simon Jones has to be in there

I also went for the no spinner approach, but i'd pick Giles in the subcontinent and Panesar at Old Trafford in place of Hoggy. I'm not a fan of Harmison. Sidebottom would probably be next in line if one of the quicks was injured (I'm looking at you, Simon Jones).

 

[wpdavid]

Atherton
Trescothick
Vaughan(c)
Pietersen
Thorpe
Stewart (wk)
Flintoff
Gough
Hoggard
S Jones
Fraser

I disregarded your criteria because Simon Jones has to be in there

I also went for the no spinner approach, but i'd pick Giles in the subcontinent and Panesar at Old Trafford in place of Hoggy. I'm not a fan of Harmison. Sidebottom would probably be next in line if one of the quicks was injured (I'm looking at you, Simon Jones).

It would be interesting to compare Vaughan's record at 3 with Butcher's in that position. And Hussain's, for that matter.

beyond that, 5 RFMs must surely be one too many. I'd argue that Fraser was at his best before 1995, apart from his caribbean heroics in 1998. Giles or Panesar would have to play in that side, imo.

 

[Jamee999]

Atherton
Trescothick
Vaughan
Pietersen
Thorpe
Stewart+
Flintoff
Gough
Hoggard
Jones
Panesar

 

[zaremba]

Penguin I agree with your team although Giles is obviously the glaring weakness. Would be tempted to pick Croft on the basis of some good early-career form for England but it probably never went beyond the flash-in-the-pan stage. Possibly Panesar therefore.

An honourable mention also to Andy Caddick who at his best was a magnificent bowler.

EDIT: wpadvid is right about Fraser who wasn't the same bowler in the late 90s. Therefore Caddick would get in ahead of him. Although am tempted to go with Cork because he could take top-order wickets and also gives extra depth to the batting.

So I will go with

Athers
Tresco
Vaughan
Penisen
Thorpe
Stewart
Flintoff
Cork
Giles
Gough
Harmison

 

[pup11]

1.M.Atherton
2.M.Trescothick
3.M.Vaughan
4.N.Hussain (C)
5.K.Pietersen
6.G.Thorpe
7.A.Strewart (wk)
8.A.Flintoff
9.A.Caddick
10.D.Gough
11.M.Panesar

Honorable mentions:
Angus Fraser
Andrew Strauss
Dominic Cork
Matthew Hoggard

 

[Uppercut]

I forgot about Caddick tbh. If i was to include a spinner it would be Panesar over Giles, he turns the ball on a lot more surfaces.

 

[pskov]

Atherton
Trescothick
Vaughan*
Pietersen
Thorpe
Stewart+
Flintoff
Cork
Gough
Hoggard
Caddick

 

[Manee]

1. Michael Atherton
2. Marcus Trescothick
3. Michael Vaughan
4. Kevin Pietersen
5. Graham Thorpe
6. Alec Stewart
7. Andrew Flintoff
8. Matthew Hoggard
9. Ashley Giles
10. Darren Gough
11. Andrew Caddick

Upset to have missed out Hussain, spent a large part of my childhood watching that knock over and over on VHS.

 

[Richard]

Not sure I'd agree with 1995 TBH but I can see why you'd go for that instead of 1990 (the only other plausible date really) as Gooch would otherwise have to be the first name for the 'sheet and he enjoyed considerable success, along with the team, in the first half of the decade.

Anyway, presuming the game wasn't played in the subcontinent, I'd go for:
MA Atherton
AJ Strauss
N Hussain (c)
AJ Stewart (w)
MP Vaughan
KP Pietersen
GP Thorpe
A Flintoff
AR Caddick
D Gough
ARC Fraser

Also in a touring squad for the subcontinent or an Old Trafford \ SCG Test: RDB Croft, AF Giles, and one might well play in the team. Other reserves: DG Cork, MA Butcher, JS Foster (OR POSSIBLY RC RUSSELL).

I'd argue that Fraser was still better 1995-1998 than any other alternatives - Cork the principal one, but Hoggard and Headley (if you considered he'd played enough) the others. Harmison I'd not remotely consider, nor Trescothick (he was too reliant on getting let-offs which can never be assured). Stewart would bat four because he's better-served being higher in the order (and yes, I'm aware his record at four was worse than his record at five and six - coincidence, IMO) and the likes of Vaughan, Pietersen and Thorpe can deal with being lower down much easier. Absolutely no need whatsoever for a moderate fingerspinner in most parts of the globe, so MSP, Giles, Croft and PCR Tufnell only come into consideration once we're on the subcontinent and don't get the slightest thought elsewhere. Croft and Giles get ahead of MSP and Tufnell on account of their considerably superior batting and nowhere-near-as-inferior-as-some-like-to-think bowling. Caddick is picked on the presumption that we get the one of 1999-2001 rather than the one of 2002, and Gough and Flintoff obviously pick themselves. Hussain gets the captaincy ahead of Vaughan because even though both have plentiful merits and are almost certainly the second- and third-best captains (after Stephen Fleming) since Arjuna Ranatunga, Mark Taylor and Hansie Cronje left the game, Hussain I feel has more merit than Vaughan, just.

And I've always preferred four bowlers to five - Fraser and Caddick are both incredibly incisive in seaming and\or uneven conditions, Caddick, Gough and Flintoff are all excellent conventional-swing bowlers and Gough and Flintoff both offer plenty on a non-seaming deck. The batting depth is also considerable with Flintoff at eight and Caddick and Gough both with a little ability with the blade.

Butcher the reserve opener, Foster\Russell the reserve wicketkeeper and Cork the first-reserve seamer.

 

[aussie]

If your are going to pick a spinner it has to be Tufnell IMO. His spell @ the Oval in 97 was the best i've seen from an England spinner, displaying the perfect combo of flight & accuracy. Plus son was wayyyyy better than Giles n Panesar anyway...

 

[NUFAN]

Why would you pick your two best batsman at 6 and 7 Richard?

 

[aussie]

Harmison I'd not remotely consider, nor Trescothick (he was too reliant on getting let-offs which can never be assured.

. Allright big boy, hold off the First change average for once mate. Trescothick over Strauss all the time.

 

[Richard]

Why would you pick your two best batsman at 6 and 7 Richard?

Because Hussain is best at three and Stewart at four. Thorpe and Pietersen are both good enough to bat absolutely anywhere.

What's more for most of his career Stewart was better than Thorpe.

 

[Uppercut]

Hussain gets the captaincy ahead of Vaughan because even though both have plentiful merits and are almost certainly the best two captains since Arjuna Ranatunga, Mark Taylor and Hansie Cronje left the game, Hussain I feel has more merit than Vaughan, just.

Plenty i disagree with in your analysis, but this in particular- Stephen Fleming>>>anyone I've ever seen w.r.t captaincy.

 

[Richard]

. Allright big boy, hold off the First change average for once mate. Trescothick over Strauss all the time.

On the presumption that fielders hold catches (a not-unreasonable presumption methinks), Strauss over Trescothick every time. No-brainer.

 

[Richard]

Plenty i disagree with in your analysis, but this in particular- Stephen Fleming>>>anyone I've ever seen w.r.t captaincy.

Ooops, forgot him.

 

[NUFAN]

Because Hussain is best at three and Stewart at four. Thorpe and Pietersen are both good enough to bat absolutely anywhere.

They certainly are good enough, I think they'd be wasted in the positions you've slotted them into though.

1 Andrew Strauss
2 Marcus Trescothick
3 Michael Vaughan [c]
4 Kevin Pietersen
5 Graham Thorpe
6 Alec Stewart
7 Andrew Flintoff
8 Ashley Giles
9 Matthew Hoggard
10 Darren Gough
11 Andrew Caddick

 

[Richard]

Leaving aside the fact that Atherton >>>>>>>>> both Trescothick and Strauss, if you had them Trescothick would be one, Strauss two. It was never the other way around, not once.

As for Thorpe and Pietersen - you'd gain more out of having Hussain and Stewart at three and four than you would having Pietersen and Thorpe there. There's no reason they'd be wasted at six and seven, none at all. Hussain and Stewart would be though. Thorpe and Pietersen are both far more multidimensional batsmen than Hussain and Stewart and can adapt more easily to a variety of situations.

 

[NUFAN]

Why has everyone picked Atherton?

He averaged a relatively poor 36.44 from 1995 onwards and in 3 of the 7 years he averaged only in the 20s and one of the other years he averaged just 31.

He had two terrific years averaging 49, 1995 was the year he made that brilliant 185*.