• 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.

Australian ATG Team- Open Voting

Eds

International Debutant
Victor Trumper & Arthur Morris.

I'd also have considered Archie Jackson were he available for selection.
 

Red

The normal awards that everyone else has
Yeah; I suppose it depends what we actually want from this thread. I've noticed an increasing trend of people on here, for some reason, wanting to create an "official" CW list of all-time teams that we all have to abide by as some sort of undeniable status. If that's going to be the sole purpose of this thread then sure, you can probably lock four or five players from each country right now, but I'd like to actually discuss people's ideas and their rationale.
I'd also say that streamlining the thread into a preocess of automatically removing all the interesting selections or non-selections wont help it much. I understand it's probably going down that road anyway, but we are supposed to discussing it at least
The lists I post are suggestions. Feel free to suggest other players, and anything legit will be added to the list. I know people get sick of these threads, and that's fair enough, but imo the point is to discuss the merits of players, which I find pretty interested. I enjoy learning about players from eras gone.
 

fredfertang

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
The lists I post are suggestions. Feel free to suggest other players, and anything legit will be added to the list. I know people get sick of these threads, and that's fair enough, but imo the point is to discuss the merits of players, which I find pretty interested. I enjoy learning about players from eras gone.
Given a completely free hand I'd have said Archie Jackson to go in first with VT - but I'd still have played Barnes in the middle order, and it will surprise no one to know Stan McCabe is a must for me, so given the inevitable number three my batting line-up would be

Trumper
Jackson
Bradman
Barnes
McCabe

**** me to watch that lot I'd even renounce my British passport, buy some moleskin trousers and an Akubra, and learn all the words to Advance Australia Fair - there may be a few with better averages than VT,AJ and SM, but they would be amazing to watch, and the other two would bail the side out if they had a collective off day
 

doesitmatter

U19 Cricketer
The lists I post are suggestions. Feel free to suggest other players, and anything legit will be added to the list. I know people get sick of these threads, and that's fair enough, but imo the point is to discuss the merits of players, which I find pretty interested. I enjoy learning about players from eras gone.
2 good/great openers were 1) Bill Brown and Fingleton..
 

watson

Banned
The lists I post are suggestions. Feel free to suggest other players, and anything legit will be added to the list. I know people get sick of these threads, and that's fair enough, but imo the point is to discuss the merits of players, which I find pretty interested. I enjoy learning about players from eras gone.
Arthur Morris's equal by people who saw them both in action - Warren Bardsley.
 

adub

International Captain
Simpson and Taylor..big fan of Mark Taylor..awesome in every sense..Opening,Captaincy, Slip Fielding and Classy Guy....
Yes. That's why I plumped for Taylor. Under rated opener - he had an immense record for tons in the first test of a series (especially early on), but obviously his long lean patch has him overlooked by most. Add to that his incredible hands at first slip and his brilliant captaincy I think he brings so much to the table that he'd have the (c) in my ATG side.

But, obviously Simmo brings arguably equal to the side. I'd be happy with either, but I don't think you could have both. For me Tubby's leadership swings it.

I reckon theoretically Trumper would gel with Taylor much like Slater did (only better).
 

Camo999

State 12th Man
Trumper & Morris for me

Would also like to mention Boon who I'd actually rate ahead of Taylor, Slater, Langer.
 

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Yes. That's why I plumped for Taylor. Under rated opener - he had an immense record for tons in the first test of a series (especially early on), but obviously his long lean patch has him overlooked by most. Add to that his incredible hands at first slip and his brilliant captaincy I think he brings so much to the table that he'd have the (c) in my ATG side.

But, obviously Simmo brings arguably equal to the side. I'd be happy with either, but I don't think you could have both. For me Tubby's leadership swings it.

I reckon theoretically Trumper would gel with Taylor much like Slater did (only better).
I loved Taylor as a player and captain - I think he was the best tactician we've had certainly since Ian Chappell (though both had great attacks to work with).

I considered putting him in the side but remembered he calls John Howard a friend, and therefore he lacks judgment and any moral compass. Not fit for inclusion.
 

NUFAN

Y no Afghanistan flag
Excluding those 18 or so months where Tubby was a walking wicket, he really did bring a calmness and assurance to our batting lineup. I used to like watching his technique during the bowlers run up, just think it was such an easy, classic technique which enabled him to judge the line of the ball perfectly.

On pure batting alone he doesn't make my All Time XI, but when you factor in superb slips catching and captaincy I can the reasoning behind his selection.
 

Red

The normal awards that everyone else has
Captaincy is an interesting point to consider. What are the vitals of captaincy, besides winning the toss?

- field placement
- timing of declarations
- ability with leading people

Having two or three great bowlers in your line up helps immensely!
 

adub

International Captain
I considered putting him in the side but remembered he calls John Howard a friend, and therefore he lacks judgment and any moral compass. Not fit for inclusion.
I can't fault that, but I'm prepared to overlook most failings this side of the boundary fence for what they can achieve in the middle.
 

benchmark00

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Captaincy is an interesting point to consider. What are the vitals of captaincy, besides winning the toss?

- field placement
- timing of declarations
- ability with leading people

Having two or three great bowlers in your line up helps immensely!
The ability to hold interesting press conferences.
 

adub

International Captain
Captaincy is an interesting point to consider. What are the vitals of captaincy, besides winning the toss?

- field placement
- timing of declarations
- ability with leading people

Having two or three great bowlers in your line up helps immensely!
Tubby was brilliant at using his second and third stringers. It wasn't just 'chuck it to Warney or Pidge'. I used to love the way when nothing was doing he'd chuck it to Blewitt or even Ponting and bang broken partnership. Clarke looks like he's developing the same happy knack. I think Taylor was able to squeeze every last drop out of his team in a way few others have. Maybe didn't have the win at all costs drive of Tugga, but had a wonderful feel for the game and how to use what he had to find a way to take wickets.
 

doesitmatter

U19 Cricketer
Mark Taylor win in Westindies inflicting their first home series loss was with following bowlers..Warne, McGrath(new to the international scene), Reiffel and Julian..so it was not like he had great bowlers he could call on other than Warne..
 

doesitmatter

U19 Cricketer
Yes. That's why I plumped for Taylor. Under rated opener - he had an immense record for tons in the first test of a series (especially early on), but obviously his long lean patch has him overlooked by most. Add to that his incredible hands at first slip and his brilliant captaincy I think he brings so much to the table that he'd have the (c) in my ATG side.

But, obviously Simmo brings arguably equal to the side. I'd be happy with either, but I don't think you could have both. For me Tubby's leadership swings it.

I reckon theoretically Trumper would gel with Taylor much like Slater did (only better).
Considered 3 players to partner Taylor (he is always going to be there in my team :))..1) Morris 2) Lawry 3) Bob Simpson..Went with Simpson because of left-right hand combination opening the batting..Completely agree Trumper would have been the right choice..
 

watson

Banned
Here are the centuries scored by Arthur Morris;

206 V Eng – Adelaide 1951 (Bedser, Warr, Wright, Tattersall)
196 V Eng – The Oval 1948 (Bedser, Watkins, Young, Hollies)
182 V Eng – Leeds 1948 (Bedser, Pollard, Cranston, Laker, Yardley)
157 V SA – Port Elizabeth 1950 (McCarthy, Melle, Tayfield, Mann)
155 V Eng – MCG 1947 (Voce, Bedser, Wright, Yardley)
153 V Eng – Brisbane 1954 (Bedser, Statham, Tyson, Bailey, Edrich)
124 V Eng – Adelaide 1947 (Bedser, Edrich, Wright, Yardley)
122 V Eng – Adelaide 1947 (Bedser, Edrich, Wright, Yardley)
111 V SA – Jo’burg 1950 (McCarthy, Melle, Tayfield, Mann)
111 V WI – Port of Spain 1955 (Butler, King, Ramadhin, Valentine, Sobers)
105 V Eng – Lords 1948 (Bedser, Coxon, Wright, Laker, Yardley)
100 V India – MCG 1948 (Phadkar, Amarnath, Hazare, Mankad)

What I learn from this list is that Arthur Morris flourished against ordinary attacks from 1947-48 when English cricket was still recovering from the war. Indeed, 7/12 of his centuries were scored against ageing/inexperienced attacks. No wonder Alec Bedser took his wicket so many times, he was the only bowler of note for much of Morris's career. In my estimation the only century to write home about is the one made against England in 1954. Bedser, Tyson, Statham, Bailey, and Edrich does seem like a good attack.

If it wasn't for the relatively weak attacks of 1947/48 Arthur Morris would be averaging in the mid-30s. In my opinion this average is a true indication of his ability as an opening batsman. I get the feeling that we have all been duped by Bradman's hyper-inflated rhetoric.

Ergo, in comparison, the 'quality' of runs made by Bill Lawry is significantly better. Centuries made against Hall, Griffith, Trueman, Statham, Pollock, Goddard, Snow and Underwood, and so forth, are all gold tier.
 
Last edited:

kyear2

Cricketer Of The Year
Here are the centuries scored by Arthur Morris;

206 V Eng – Adelaide 1951 (Bedser, Warr, Wright, Tattersall)
196 V Eng – The Oval 1948 (Bedser, Watkins, Young, Hollies)
182 V Eng – Leeds 1948 (Bedser, Pollard, Cranston, Laker, Yardley)
157 V SA – Port Elizabeth 1950 (McCarthy, Melle, Tayfield, Mann)
155 V Eng – MCG 1947 (Voce, Bedser, Wright, Yardley)
153 V Eng – Brisbane 1954 (Bedser, Statham, Tyson, Bailey, Edrich)
124 V Eng – Adelaide 1947 (Bedser, Edrich, Wright, Yardley)
122 V Eng – Adelaide 1947 (Bedser, Edrich, Wright, Yardley)
111 V SA – Jo’burg 1950 (McCarthy, Melle, Tayfield, Mann)
111 V WI – Port of Spain 1955 (Butler, King, Ramadhin, Valentine, Sobers)
105 V Eng – Lords 1948 (Bedser, Coxon, Wright, Laker, Yardley)
100 V India – MCG 1948 (Phadkar, Amarnath, Hazare, Mankad)

What I learn from this list is that Arthur Morris flourished against ordinary attacks from 1947-48 when English cricket was still recovering from the war. Indeed, 7/12 of his centuries were scored against ageing/inexperienced attacks. No wonder Alec Bedser took his wicket so many times, he was the only bowler of note for much of Morris's career. In my estimation the only century to write home about is the one made against England in 1954. Bedser, Tyson, Statham, Bailey, and Edrich does seem like a good attack.

If it wasn't for the relatively weak attacks of 1947/48 Arthur Morris would be averaging in the mid-30s. In my opinion this average is a true indication of his ability as an opening batsman. I get the feeling that we have all been duped by Bradman's hyper-inflated rhetoric.

Ergo, in comparison, the 'quality' of runs made by Bill Lawry is significantly better. Centuries made against Hall, Griffith, Trueman, Statham, Pollock, Goddard, Snow and Underwood, and so forth, are all gold tier.
Great work Watson. Interesting reaearch and gives us a totally new perspective on the comparrison between the two players. Are your opnions on Hayden similar?
 

NUFAN

Y no Afghanistan flag
Here are the centuries scored by Arthur Morris;

206 V Eng – Adelaide 1951 (Bedser, Warr, Wright, Tattersall)
196 V Eng – The Oval 1948 (Bedser, Watkins, Young, Hollies)
182 V Eng – Leeds 1948 (Bedser, Pollard, Cranston, Laker, Yardley)
157 V SA – Port Elizabeth 1950 (McCarthy, Melle, Tayfield, Mann)
155 V Eng – MCG 1947 (Voce, Bedser, Wright, Yardley)
153 V Eng – Brisbane 1954 (Bedser, Statham, Tyson, Bailey, Edrich)
124 V Eng – Adelaide 1947 (Bedser, Edrich, Wright, Yardley)
122 V Eng – Adelaide 1947 (Bedser, Edrich, Wright, Yardley)
111 V SA – Jo’burg 1950 (McCarthy, Melle, Tayfield, Mann)
111 V WI – Port of Spain 1955 (Butler, King, Ramadhin, Valentine, Sobers)
105 V Eng – Lords 1948 (Bedser, Coxon, Wright, Laker, Yardley)
100 V India – MCG 1948 (Phadkar, Amarnath, Hazare, Mankad)

What I learn from this list is that Arthur Morris flourished against ordinary attacks from 1947-48 when English cricket was still recovering from the war. Indeed, 7/12 of his centuries were scored against ageing/inexperienced attacks. No wonder Alec Bedser took his wicket so many times, he was the only bowler of note for much of Morris's career. In my estimation the only century to write home about is the one made against England in 1954. Bedser, Tyson, Statham, Bailey, and Edrich does seem like a good attack.

If it wasn't for the relatively weak attacks of 1947/48 Arthur Morris would be averaging in the mid-30s. In my opinion this average is a true indication of his ability as an opening batsman. I get the feeling that we have all been duped by Bradman's hyper-inflated rhetoric.

Ergo, in comparison, the 'quality' of runs made by Bill Lawry is significantly better. Centuries made against Hall, Griffith, Trueman, Statham, Pollock, Goddard, Snow and Underwood, and so forth, are all gold tier.
Pretty sure some bowlers confidence and average would have been dented bowling to the likes of Bradman, Morris etc. Look at some of the players first class records. Its no surprise people don't rate them any more. I refuse to believe that Morris 206 wasn't a superb knock.
 

Top