Edit: Though if you include Mailey, their records do look a lot better when you factor in the 1926 beatdown.
Openers are Hobbs and Hutton.
Because of the various potential combinations possible for this English line up, we will select two opening bowlers next. Once again, this list is a guide, and you may suggest any (legitimate) alternatives:
Please choose two opening bowlers:
Ian Botham (will also be included in later categories)
Andrew Flintoff (will also be included in later categories)
Frank Tyson (for Nufan)
These bowlers will be available for later selection (after the middle order is selected) to complete the attack if unselected here.
Harold Larwood and Brian Statham
Fred Trueman and John Snow
Bah. Sickening choice as to who misses out.
SF Barnes & FS Trueman.
Supreme egoists but supreme bowlers too. Wonder if the demon Frederick ever met the great man and if the result was recorded for posterity?
Barnes and Trueman.
Barnes and Trueman for me as well.
Bedser to bowl first change.
Barnes and Trueman
Frank Tyson and Fred Trueman.
I genuinely consider them to be England's best two opening bowlers, so would appreciate it if Tyson is added to the list. :)
Thanks for adding Tyson Monk.
Just to explain, whenever I select these sort of teams, I picture the old players being transported to more recent conditions rather than the current players being transported back to old playing conditions. Therefore, I have big question marks on Barnes ability to bowl as a new ball bowler. I don't want this to turn into a 'did he bowl fast or was it spin' debate, but just explaining why I've gone against the recent grain and not selected SF Barnes.
Trueman and Larwood
Barnes was quick when he wanted to be, but no where near as quick as Larwood, Trueman, Snow or Tyson who would all properly appreciate a shiny new ball.
Also, by operating with the new ball his prime wicket taking delivery - the leg-spinner - has been somewhat nullified. I don't think that it is possible for a finger spinner to impart maximum revs on a new ball.