"Best ever" teams selected by former players or experts- whose is best?

[OverratedSanity]

I find the Procter love to be even more inexplicable than the Barry Richards love. There is a genuine shortage of great attacking openers with a great technique in the game's history (Greenidge, Trumper and Hayden being the best choices) (Sehwag doesn't count; I have doubts over how attacking Hobbs was; and Morris seems too inconsistent).

On Procter, as well as Barry Richards and many other of those South African greats, I think the fascination stems from the question of "how good they could have been" Anyone who watched them play swear they were among the greatest, but because of that unfortunate situation they weren't able to showcase it on the biggest stage. Just adds to their mythical quality.

And I disagree that great fast bowling all rounder have been common... Hadlee, Davidson, Wasim, Lindwall hardly fit the description imo. They were great bowlers who could be handy with the bat. But in Procter you had a guy who was arguably as good as them with the ball but scored no less than 48 first class hundreds. Personally find Clive Rice to be even more fascinating than Procter but it's easy to see why he was so remarkable

 

[harsh.ag]

On Procter, as well as Barry Richards and many other of those South African greats, I think the fascination stems from the question of "how good they could have been" Anyone who watched them play swear they were among the greatest, but because of that unfortunate situation they weren't able to showcase it on the biggest stage. Just adds to their mythical quality.

And I disagree that great fast bowling all rounder have been common... Hadlee, Davidson, Wasim, Lindwall hardly fit the description imo. They were great bowlers who could be handy with the bat. But in Procter you had a guy who was arguably as good as them with the ball but scored no less than 48 first class hundreds. Personally find Clive Rice to be even more fascinating than Procter but it's easy to see why he was so remarkable

Agree on Hayden. But that exactly goes to show why the fascination with Barry is slightly worthwhile, as only Greenidge and Trumper fit his description, and everybody at Hampshire was of the opinion that Barry was a better bat than Greenidge when they opened together for the county team.

FC hundreds are hardly an indication of test match success with the bat. If in his 7 tests, Procter had scored heavily with the bat as well, then maybe the hype may have been justified. But he didn't. Not even a fifty. And before someone says, they were only 7 tests - exactly!

 

[OverratedSanity]

Agree on Hayden. But that exactly goes to show why the fascination with Barry is slightly worthwhile, as only Greenidge and Trumper fit his description, and everybody at Hampshire was of the opinion that Barry was a better bat than Greenidge when they opened together for the county team.

FC hundreds are hardly an indication of test match success with the bat. If in his 7 tests, Procter had scored heavily with the bat as well, then maybe the hype may have been justified. But he didn't. Not even a fifty. And before someone says, they were only 7 tests - exactly!

You're using the 7 tests to argue both ways. If he had scored decently in his 7 tests you say the hype may have been justified but then go on to say his bowling hype ISNT justified because it was 7 tests. Atleast be consistent

And I'm sure people who rate Procter and Richards so high isn't because of their insignificant test record. Their FC stats are the only thing to go by apart from peer opinion, which was glowing. I'm not saying Procter would have scored 20+ test hundreds just because of his FC record. But they give us a clear sign that he could have been as good as Dev, Imran, Miller with the bat... And most definitely better than Wasim and Hadlee whom I maintain were no more than kind of handy.

 

[harsh.ag]

You're using the 7 tests to argue both ways. If he had scored decently in his 7 tests you say the hype may have been justified but then go on to say his bowling hype ISNT justified because it was 7 tests. Atleast be consistent

And I'm sure people who rate Procter and Richards so high isn't because of their insignificant test record. Their FC stats are the only thing to go by apart from peer opinion, which was glowing. I'm not saying Procter would have scored 20+ test hundreds just because of his FC record. But they give us a clear sign that he could have been as good as Dev, Imran, Miller with the bat... And most definitely better than Wasim and Hadlee whom I maintain were no more than kind of handy.

I am not arguing both ways. He is being discussed as an all-rounder, not a bowler, so for this discussion, if the 7 tests are to be used, they have to indicate both things. Secondly, I am not saying he wasn't a great player; he probably was. He would have probably made a better bowling all-rounder than Wasim, Davidson et al, and if asked to, I would even bet money on the same. But, since we can't be sure, and there are lots of other options available as I listed, I don't see the reason for naming him ahead of those names. It is only a fascination. In Barry's case, the options are not many, and I suspect, only Trumper is with him in the attacking-opener-good-technique genre. So, people who like attacking openers have a genuine case for naming Richards ahead of many other openers.

 

[OverratedSanity]

In Barry's category , the options are not many, and I suspect, only Trumper is with him in the attacking-opener-good-technique genre. So, people who like attacking openers have a genuine case for naming Richards ahead of many other openers.

Inherently unfair because the category you've used to classify Barry Richards as which is "attacking opener with good technique" is so specific... Which automatically eliminates plenty of contenders like Sehwag and Hayden, and for Procter you've classified him as a generic "bowling all rounder".

I could just as easily say Procter was a genuinely fast bowling attacking all rounder which would remove anyone who bowled mediumish pace like Kapil, Davidson, Botham.

 

[harsh.ag]

 

[kyear2]

Don't have a problem with rating Barry so highly, without doubt one of the top 4 openers to have played the game and if I were to select a team to play Mars tomorrow rather than select a team based on test career he would open along with Hutton. To add value he was also a superb slip fielder,

Regarding Procter, he could have been a legit test #7 and front line ATG genuine fast bowler. That's pretty rare indeed.

 

[harsh.ag]

Don't have a problem with rating Barry so highly, without doubt one of the top 4 openers to have played the game and if I were to select a team to play Mars tomorrow rather than select a team based on test career he would open along with Hutton. To add value he was also a superb slip fielder,

Regarding Procter, he could have been a legit test #7 and front line ATG genuine fast bowler. That's pretty rare indeed.

Lots of doubt there.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Lots of doubt there.

Depends on the composition of the side really... If you go for someone like Gilchrist as keeper, Procter would drop down to 8. If you go for a more pure keeper like Knott or Tallon, Procter would fit perfectly into the no. 7 slot. Either way, Procter would surely make a damn good lower order bat. I really don't see the doubt. Apart from Gilchrist I can't think of a decisively better batsman who bats that low down the order

 

[Red]

(Sehwag doesn't count;

Because?

Averaged 40+ against Australia and 50+ against SA as an opener in the modern era.

 

[Red]

No doubt about Procter either. Everyone who saw him/played against him knows how amazing he was, and his FC stats are very impressive.

 

[harsh.ag]

Because?

Averaged 40+ against Australia and 50+ against SA as an opener in the modern era.

Technique's a huge issue. I wasn't just discussing attacking openers, but those who had good techniques as well. He averages 27 in England in 6 tests, 20 in NZ in 5 tests, 25 in SA in 8 tests, 46 in Australia in 8 tests. Once his hand-eye coordination went, he imploded even in Australia, which we know easily have the flattest pitches of the above lot. So, while he is certainly a great opener, one of the all-timers, but nobody should seriously argue that he hasn't got major technical issues.

 

[Flem274*]

He might have technical issues, but anyone suggesting Barry Richards proved more than Sehwag is dreaming, and I'm not sure I'd open with Sehwag for India let alone a world eleven (putting him lower down to smash the spinners is an attractive idea to me).

 

[Flem274*]

Barry Richards in general strikes me as a classic example of a very good player's reputation being inflated for only being on the test scene for two minutes. He might well have been one of the best equipped and he was a beast of a batsman in first class, but he didn't prove it in the hardest arena.

 

[harsh.ag]

He might have technical issues, but anyone suggesting Barry Richards proved more than Sehwag is dreaming, and I'm not sure I'd open with Sehwag for India let alone a world eleven (putting him lower down to smash the spinners is an attractive idea to me).

Barry Richards in general strikes me as a classic example of a very good player's reputation being inflated for only being on the test scene for two minutes. He might well have been one of the best equipped and he was a beast of a batsman in first class, but he didn't prove it in the hardest arena.

I agree with both the things you say. This is just an offshoot of a discussion earlier where I said that whereas I can't see the reasons for rating Procter so high as to rank him ahead of so many great bowling all-rounders - Hadlee, Imran, Miller, Botham, Kapil, Davidson et al - as some do, I can see why it is slightly worthwhile to rate Barry so highly given that good attacking openers with a good technique are rare. Trumper, Greenidge and Morris are the best bets (Hayden as well maybe). Now, people at Hampshire ranked Barry ahead of Greenidge unequivocally, and Morris was quite inconsistent, so I was saying that I can see why people who want such openers in their team might rate Barry high.

 

[sambha]

1]sachin tendulkar
2]Jaques kallis
3]kumar sangakara (wk)
4]viv richards
5]brain lara
6]imran khan (c)
7]gary sobers
8]muttiah muralidaran
9]glenn mcgrath
10]Wsim Akram
11]malcomm marshall

 

[Viscount Tom]

Who's opening in that World XI?

 

[Athlai]

Who's opening in that World XI?

Sachin Tendulkar and Jaques Kallis

 

[harsh.ag]

1]sachin tendulkar
2]Jaques kallis
3]kumar sangakara (wk)
4]viv richards
5]brain lara
6]imran khan (c)
7]gary sobers
8]muttiah muralidaran
9]glenn mcgrath
10]Wsim Akram
11]malcomm marshall

This is what happens when too much Brain is expended on such endeavors.

 

[kyear2]

1]sachin tendulkar
2]Jaques kallis
3]kumar sangakara (wk)
4]viv richards
5]brain lara
6]imran khan (c)
7]gary sobers
8]muttiah muralidaran
9]glenn mcgrath
10]Wsim Akram
11]malcomm marshall

Cricket was played before 1970.