And the rest XI (pre 1st Jan 1953):
Funnily enough, I had already penciled in the following team before I posted the Ashes team...
Average of 38 doesn't look too good though..
There can be a fair bit of debate in constantine vs amar singh. I think Amar Singh is under rated. Both could bat and overall they somewhat match. Constantine was one of the greatest fielders getting praises from everywhere including Bradman but Amar was a great fielder too, the best in the Indian team at the time. Purely from a bowling perspective, probably Amar edges Constantine. Constantine was faster in patches but Amar was more consistent and Hutton and Hammond both highly appreciated his bowling. Amar uprooted Hammond, got likes of Sutcliffe, Ames and Leyland
Walter Hammond wrote in his 1948 autobiography;
Constantine in his 13 Tests against England from 1928 to 1939 dismissed Hammond 8 times, more than any other batsman that he bowled against - thus perhaps underscoring Hammond's general distaste for fast bowling.
So yes it is a close run thing between Constantine and Amar Singh, but for the sake of team balance I prefer Learie Constantine because there should be at least one bowler in any given team who can bowl a decent bouncer and beat the batsman with sheer pace. With Singh, Cowie, and Mahmoid in the side it is probably a case of one fast-medium bowler too many.
Agreed that someone got to be there for intimidating thus Constantine getting the nod also goes to show lack of consistent genuine quicks apart from England and Australia in those eras. Martindale, Nissar come closer.
It is what made me suspect it is an ODI XI and he is picking Sir Garry as he did play an ODI or two at the fag end of his career, and so technically qualifies for such a team..
Can find no fault with this team.
