Greatest Test XI- eras of dominance

[Valer]

Seen in isolation I would have to agree with Valer that Brett Lee was overated.

However, bowlers don't act in isolation. They are part of a quartet.

In my opinion, Brett worked like a charm with McGrath because his pace contrasted the slower bowling of McGrath very nicely. McGrath 'worked' the batsman out, Lee 'bounced' them out.

Lee was also a very handy batsman and a good team man. The sum of his parts was always greater than his whole. Something obviously you don't necessarily see in raw stats.

Obviously the issue with Clark is he wasn't selected before Gillespie retired.

For the other pace bowlers this simply isn't the case, they actually performed about the same or worse(!) with Lee.
With Mcgrath

Reiffel
All-round records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

Flemming
All-round records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

Lee
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo


With Gillespie

Reiffel
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo
Fleming
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo
Lee
Bowling records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

Re non bowling issues

Flemming was similar to Lee, with Reiffel being a noticably better batsman than Lee.

Other that than are you really arguing that Lee's fielding was worth 4-5 point of bowling average?

Nb: the if he'd been instructed to bowl something else argument* is as bad as if they'd been in the team for longer re: total wickets.

 

[Dan]

I don't think we're comparing apples with apples here. I might be wrong but Broad rarely exceeds 150 kph and has never been "fast". Lee was "fast" and had a couple of good series at home against India by intimidating their batsman with short-stuff - if I remember rightly. I'm a bit old and vague these days.

Not saying Broad is the same pace, obviously. More that they both were either instructed or decided themselves to try and bounce batsmen out, but have been far better bowlers when they pitched it up.

 

[watson]

Not saying Broad is the same pace, obviously. More that they both were either instructed or decided themselves to try and bounce batsmen out, but have been far better bowlers when they pitched it up.

Sure, I have no problem with agreeing that Lee and Broad were/are better bowlers when they pitched the ball up.

But Lee's bouncer was very useful to McGrath at the other end who would have benefited from having Ganguly (for example) 'softened-up'. From memory he was pretty bad at playing short-pitched bowling.

 

[uvelocity]

lee>reiffel>flemming

 

[stumpski]

Any other contenders? What about England's greatest era?

It's often claimed that the England team which played in this Test is the greatest they ever put out, and it's hard to argue - absolutely no weak link.

 

[kyear2]

The batting line up was very strong, but was Bailey that good as the third seamer, especially with two spinners behind him?

 

[NUFAN]

Windies from the 80s from mine given the 3 options in the opening post.

 

[stumpski]

The batting line up was very strong, but was Bailey that good as the third seamer, especially with two spinners behind him?

Wickets in England at that time gave a lot more assistance to spinners tbf; often one of the opening bowlers, even a great like Statham, would only finish up with 8 or 10 overs.

 

[wpdavid]

It's often claimed that the England team which played in this Test is the greatest they ever put out, and it's hard to argue - absolutely no weak link.

On paper, it's a heck of a side. I just wonder whether Trueman, Graveney and May's youth at the time count against that claim slightly. They were certainly some years off their peak, you'd think.

I wonder if there was a stronger XI in the Aus tour a couple of years later, especially with Tyson at the peak of his powers.

 

[stumpski]

Yes, fair point, but you're never likely to get a side where everyone is at their career peak - indeed most would say that's unhealthy - much better to have a few youngsters coming through.

 

[wpdavid]

Yes, fair point, but you're never likely to get a side where everyone is at their career peak - indeed most would say that's unhealthy - much better to have a few youngsters coming through.

Looking at 1954-55, there's a heck of a batting line-up with Tyson and Statham as the two quicks. Then it's down to how you rate Wardle and Appleyard against Laker and Lock. Maybe depends on which part of the country you come from.

 

[watson]

I think that the 1970/71 England team would give the 1954/55 England quite a shake.

4th Test: Australia v England at Sydney, Jan 9-14, 1971 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

With Boycott and Edrich in the top order, Snow and Underwood bowling, Knott behind the stumps, plus Illingworth as captain - it was a pretty hot side.

(Still like the 1929 side the best of all though)

 

[Burgey]

Fair enough. O'Reilly did play a test against NZ in 1948 (his last test). Shame he wasn't part of the Invincibles imo (just because it'd look good in history to have him in there)

I think he retired because he injured his knee quite badly in that test.

 

[Burgey]

Clark, Rieffel, Fleming. Even 2 spinners with Miller or Macgill.

If I was going to be very harsh I'd suggest that we also lacked a touch in the batting beyond the top 3 & (steve) Waugh.

Lee was almost three bowlers in his career. When he started up to the point when he injured his elbow against the Windies he was striking at a ridiculous rate and was swinging the ball around a lot at insane pace.

Then he struggled to get back in the side and once he did, was a bouncer/ yorker merchant who imho bowled without much in the way of nous at all.

Then once McGrath went, he had that brief golden period when he bowled like aproper test match spear head. Thetwo summers he had against India and iirc SA were fantastic, before injuries really put an end to him.

Don't have too much trouble agreeing with the idea that around the time that Australian team was at its peak around say 2002-2004, he wasn't.

 

[Valer]

Lee was almost three bowlers in his career. When he started up to the point when he injured his elbow against the Windies he was striking at a ridiculous rate and was swinging the ball around a lot at insane pace.

Then he struggled to get back in the side and once he did, was a bouncer/ yorker merchant who imho bowled without much in the way of nous at all.

Then once McGrath went, he had that brief golden period when he bowled like aproper test match spear head. Thetwo summers he had against India and iirc SA were fantastic, before injuries really put an end to him.

Don't have too much trouble agreeing with the idea that around the time that Australian team was at its peak around say 2002-2004, he wasn't.

The "Period after Mcgrath left" is *Very* overstated.

Checking the series again we have

Really bad vs SA

Good vs NZ -- outbowled by Johnson

Abysmal vs India away

good vs india at home

Good vs SL at home (2 tests)

Good vs WI away -- Still outbowled by clark (close)

Colour me unimpressed in hindsight and unimpressed for much it live.


As for the first period it was less than 10% of his career....

 

[uvelocity]

is brett lee tall or short?

 

[Burgey]

The "Period after Mcgrath left" is *Very* overstated.

Checking the series again we have

Really bad vs SA

Good vs NZ -- outbowled by Johnson

Abysmal vs India away

good vs india at home

Good vs SL at home (2 tests)

Good vs WI away -- Still outbowled by clark (close)

Colour me unimpressed in hindsight and unimpressed for much it live.


As for the first period it was less than 10% of his career....

Sorry mate, I'll try to fit it all into your parameters next time.

 

[Mike5181]

Clark, Rieffel, Fleming. Even 2 spinners with Miller or Macgill.

If I was going to be very harsh I'd suggest that we also lacked a touch in the batting beyond the top 3 & (steve) Waugh.

Damien Martyn and Adam Gilchrist? Lehmann as well.

2002-2004

Batsmen
ML Hayden: 3,595 @ 61
JL Langer: 3,146 @ 50
RT Ponting: 3,264 @ 69
DR Martyn: 2,349 @ 49
SR Waugh: 1,452 @ 52
AC Gilchrist: 2,343 @ 52
DS Lehmann: 1,570 @ 49

Bowlers
SK Warne: 137 @ 21.8
JN Gillespie: 125 @ 24.4
GD McGrath: 104 @ 19.6
MS Kasprowicz: 47 @ 23.7
B Lee: 67 @ 39.4
AJ Bichel: 45 @ 30.06
SCG MacGill: 77 @ 33.2

 

[Jager]

I think that the 1970/71 England team would give the 1954/55 England quite a shake.

4th Test: Australia v England at Sydney, Jan 9-14, 1971 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

With Boycott and Edrich in the top order, Snow and Underwood bowling, Knott behind the stumps, plus Illingworth as captain - it was a pretty hot side.

(Still like the 1929 side the best of all though)

You forgot to mention the great that is Willis as well as the superb D'Oliveira - can only assume it's because of your Willis grudge

 

[doesitmatter]

Pakistan team of 86-87 was awesome as well.. drew against the WI-ies. They may not have dominated on a consistent basis but a very good team. I don't know about WI-es of the 80's being the best ever mainly when compared to 90's Aussies just because of one man Warne. WI-ies of the 80's were poor players of good legspin..They just did not play Qadir well at all.. one of the reason why Pak-WI contest were 1-1 draws..