Wisden names All Time World XI

[fredfertang]

Being a very sad man indeed I happen to have with me at the moment Cricket: A Weekly Record of the Game for 1893 which strongly indicates, contrary to what Cricinfo and CricketArchive suggest, that Briggs opened the bowling with Mold in the third Test and not Richardson

 

[the big bambino]

Not as sad as me as I envy you your reading material.

 

[Sharry2013]

He never had a test cap to his credit

If that is your rationale I would have thought Kortright would be a better bet

I would surely picked him the only reason I didnt pick him was that hee never had a test cap to his credit.Kortright never played a test, Aubrey smith did play a test

 

[fredfertang]

I would surely picked him the only reason I didnt pick him was that hee never had a test cap to his credit.Kortright never played a test, Aubrey smith did play a test

Technically yes, but it wasn't regarded as a Test Match at the time, and two of Smith's teammates in those two Tests in South Africa never played in another First Class match

 

[SpofforthLohman]

Was he meant to be able to predict the future then, or perhaps you want him to pick his team from beyond the grave?

Gilchraist had already made a massive mark and Bradman saw him play and Hayden had done everything by then. I idolized players like Morris but he rates below Hayden somewhat. I thought Bradman's choice of Bill Ponsford was brilliant as he would be the first Opener I picked in an all time Australian XI, the man was like Hayden.. a run machine he was awesome. Warney would be my first bowler picked, he beats all the rest of the spinners.

 

[marc71178]

Firstly, you're assuming he picked this team the day he died.

Secondly just because Gilchrist had "made a massive mark", he'd only played 14 games and scored one century - how is that enough for an all time side?

Thirdly - how does 536 runs @ under 25 equate to "having done everything"?

 

[watson]

Gilchraist had already made a massive mark and Bradman saw him play and Hayden had done everything by then. I idolized players like Morris but he rates below Hayden somewhat. I thought Bradman's choice of Bill Ponsford was brilliant as he would be the first Opener I picked in an all time Australian XI, the man was like Hayden.. a run machine he was awesome. Warney would be my first bowler picked, he beats all the rest of the spinners.

Prior to his Ashes tour of 1934 Bill Ponsford was averaging 40.86. Not bad, but hardly inspiring. Then in the English summer of 1934 he went on a run scoring extravaganza whereby he scored 569 runs at an average of 94.83. As a consequence his career average finished at a more healthy 48.22.

However, by 1934 the English attack no longer featured Harold Larwood, and Bill Voce had been temporarily dropped. If these two bowlers had played then it is highly unlikely that Ponsford would have achieved an average of near 50. In all probability he would have been mediocre all over again such was his slow and ponderous footwork against properly fast bowling.

In short, Ponsford may have been one of Australia's greatest ever Sheffield Shield batsman, but there is not much evidence that he is ATG material in the Test match arena (IMO).

 

[the big bambino]

The English selectors often went spin heavy with games in OT but adopted the tactic for Leeds that year as well. That suited Ponsford. They corrected for the Oval and the fast attack there should have had him 6 times before they finally did. So he got the benefit of bad selecting and then bad fielding. However he was never going to face Larwood and Voce in tests in 34 as both declared themselves unavailable for England.

 

[Sharry2013]

Technically yes, but it wasn't regarded as a Test Match at the time, and two of Smith's teammates in those two Tests in South Africa never played in another First Class match

The First ever test was also not officially given the status of a test match earlier. I just believe Aubrey would be very good in any team in plays. What team would you pick if you ever pick one of your own?

 

[SpofforthLohman]

Prior to his Ashes tour of 1934 Bill Ponsford was averaging 40.86. Not bad, but hardly inspiring. Then in the English summer of 1934 he went on a run scoring extravaganza whereby he scored 569 runs at an average of 94.83. As a consequence his career average finished at a more healthy 48.22.

However, by 1934 the English attack no longer featured Harold Larwood, and Bill Voce had been temporarily dropped. If these two bowlers had played then it is highly unlikely that Ponsford would have achieved an average of near 50. In all probability he would have been mediocre all over again such was his slow and ponderous footwork against properly fast bowling.

In short, Ponsford may have been one of Australia's greatest ever Sheffield Shield batsman, but there is not much evidence that he is ATG material in the Test match arena (IMO).

Ponsford is the first Australian run machine.. Shield cricket was nothing to sneer at either. England had had 3 run machines before we had one. Ponsford played on diabolical wickets, his average worth at least 60 today.

 

[fredfertang]

Ponsford is the first Australian run machine.. Shield cricket was nothing to sneer at either. England had had 3 run machines before we had one. Ponsford played on diabolical wickets, his average worth at least 60 today.

Where do you get that idea from?

 

[the big bambino]

Yes strange comment.

 

[OverratedSanity]

For bowlers I'm guessing

 

[SpofforthLohman]

Where do you get that idea from?

when it rained in Australia they played on wet wickets and from everything I have read , a wet Australian wicket was unplayable, just as the averages suggest. I admit that wickets had generally improved but wet wickets were ridiculous to play serious cricket on. Only opener we have had that rates with Ponsford is Hayden as far as I am concerned. I think the Don got it right when he picked Ponsford.

 

[fredfertang]

The laws were changed twice in favour of the bowler during Ponsford's time - the occasional sticky wasn't enough to make the game an even one

 

[watson]

when it rained in Australia they played on wet wickets and from everything I have read , a wet Australian wicket was unplayable, just as the averages suggest. I admit that wickets had generally improved but wet wickets were ridiculous to play serious cricket on. Only opener we have had that rates with Ponsford is Hayden as far as I am concerned. I think the Don got it right when he picked Ponsford.

Victor Trumper seems to get a decent rap by his contempories from what I can tell. Old timers rave about Arthur Morris, and Simpson, Lawry, Taylor, and Slater are all under-rated. Actually, anyone of those batsman would at least be on a par with Ponsford, or more likely his superior IMO.

As for Hayden; it would be an interesting exercise to find-out how many centuries he scored under pressure, and against a top-notch attack.

 

[the big bambino]

I'd try Trumper at 6 and like the idea of Slats, Simmo and the beak.