Wisden names All Time World XI

[GuyFromLancs]

FWIW

1. Hobbs
2. Sutcliffe
3. Bradman
4. Tendulkar
5. Hammond
6. Sobers
7. Gilchrist
8. Akram
9. Marshall
10. Warne
11. Garner

12. Botham

 

[Rheinhardt]

Sobers 8032 runs at 57.78 Kallis 13133 at 55.64. Although different times i agree, i think as the All rounder Kallis brings more benefit in the bowling

 

[GuyFromLancs]

I don't think such a team desperately needs the bolwing of Kallis TBH.

What could he possibly add to an all time XI in terms of bowling.

 

[CricAddict]

There are too many ATG threads in CW.. I remember there was a single thread created for the purpose of discussing ATG teams.. Where has that gone? Can all of these not go to that one thread?

 

[watson]

I have a personal distaste for choosing players for which there exists no video footage. If you haven't seen the player play, I have a hard time taking your views seriously. I know, it sounds harsh and disrespectful of cricket's history.

And disrespectful to human history generally plus the historians that wrote it - most of which happened prior to the invention of the movie camera.

In some ways a written account can be more accurate than film footage because there is always a specific context to film footage. For example, if in 200 years time the only video in existence of Viv Richards was from 1991 then perhaps he wouldn't get selected in ATG XIs as much because the people of the time would become biased. They would merely conclude that the likes of kyear exaggerated his accounts, and were mildly deluded because with their "own eyes" they saw a batsman who's timing and footwork were all over the shop.

 

[ankitj]

Another excuse for everyone to start posting their ATG XIs

 

[Prince EWS]

I have a personal distaste for choosing players for which there exists no video footage.

I've got no beef (lol) with that but it's not an All-Time XI in that case. It's a "best XI from players I've seen" or something like that.

 

[Black_Warrior]

Another excuse for everyone to start posting their ATG XIs

LOL whats the point of a cricket forum full of obsessed cricket fans if they don't get together and post there ATG XIs every few weeks?

 

[kyear2]

Wisden's selection of a best XI stands the test of all eras

Still a bit shocked that Akram was selected over Lillee. Otherwise as an honorary team, as as one not just based on Tests, it's pretty perfect.

Though if I had to select a team to actually take the field to play Mars tomorrow, not based on greatness or career, but who was actually better and better suited for the modern game it would look somewhat like

Len Hutton * (faced better bowling than Hobbs and better technique, anchors team)
Barry Richards (Everyone who saw him bat says he was the best, also brilliant slipper)
Don Bradman
Brian Lara (Being left handed, slip fielding and destructive ability pushes over Sachin)
Viv Richards
Garry Sobers
Adam Gilchrist (batting trumps in real world situation and kept perfectly to Warne)
Wasim Akram (Gilchrist's selection allows for Left arm variation over Imran's batting and best old ball bowler)
Malcolm Marshall
Shane Warne
Dennis Lillee (additional pace, aggressiveness and variety pips McGrath, irresistible, intimidating and feared opening with Maco)

As I said, with Lillee over Akram, the Wisden's team is historically and as a honorary team the best, the one listed is the best to actually take the field at their best, while my normal XI is for me the best combination (compromise) of the two.

 

[fredfertang]

These sides always lack imagination, mainly because the selectors assume human opposition - I prefer the Earth v Mars approach - so what happens if the bowling is, literally, lethal - well you don't want the likes of Bradman batting where life and limb depends - you need a McCabe, a Jardine or a Close. And if the batting has rigoemortis but can't be dislodged - maybe a Sylvers, an Iverson or a Mailey

 

[watson]

These sides always lack imagination, mainly because the selectors assume human opposition - I prefer the Earth v Mars approach - so what happens if the bowling is, literally, lethal - well you don't want the likes of Bradman batting where life and limb depends - you need a McCabe, a Jardine or a Close. And if the batting has rigoemortis but can't be dislodged - maybe a Sylvers, an Iverson or a Mailey

Lethal XI
01. Jack Hobbs
02. Roy Fredericks
03. George Headley
04. Stan McCabe
05. Garry Sobers
06. Trevor Bailey
07. Ray Illingworth*
08. Alan Knott+
09. Hedley Verity
10. Andy Roberts
11. Dennis Lillee

12th Bert Sutcliffe

 

[NUFAN]

I found it a little funny that Fox Sports named an XI to take on the Wisden team that was picked. The Fox team didn't bother with Gavaskar, Hutton or Sutcliffe as openers but instead went for Wally Hammond and Greenidge!

The rest of the team was good I guess (Ponting, Lara, Kallis, Miller, Gilchrist, Hadlee, Lillee, Ambrose, Muralitharan).

 

[harsh.ag]

I found it a little funny that Fox Sports named an XI to take on the Wisden team that was picked. The Fox team didn't bother with Gavaskar, Hutton or Sutcliffe as openers but instead went for Wally Hammond and Greenidge!

The rest of the team was good I guess (Ponting, Lara, Kallis, Miller, Gilchrist, Hadlee, Lillee, Ambrose, Muralitharan).

I am not surprised one bit. Keeping down with Fox standards can be tough for the sports department. I am just surprised they didn't pick Botham.

 

[archie mac]

A great effort by the experts at Wisden I thought. I had a guess at the side and only missed out on Knott and Wasim so pretty happy tbh. Big fan of WA so not going to argue his spot although there was most likely another ten fast men who they could have picked instead. Being a lefty may have helped balance the attack so perhaps that swung it for him.

Knott worries me a lot. I watched him play and based on keepers he was clearly better than Gilly or Marsh or Healy or anyone else that I have watched. But how do we know he was better than Tallon or Blackham or Strudwick or Lilley. It is hard enough to compare batsman and bowlers of different eras let alone a skill such as keeping which is simply too subjective. In fact most Aussies including Bradman who watched both Tallon and Knott had the Queenslander well in front.

I think you just go for the best combined keeper/batsman. Someone who can bat well but is not missing too many chances so not someone like Stewart. I think it should have been Gilly but would have been happy with Dujon or Flower or even Les Ames.

 

[Prince EWS]

I found it a little funny that Fox Sports named an XI to take on the Wisden team that was picked. The Fox team didn't bother with Gavaskar, Hutton or Sutcliffe as openers but instead went for Wally Hammond and Greenidge!

The rest of the team was good I guess (Ponting, Lara, Kallis, Miller, Gilchrist, Hadlee, Lillee, Ambrose, Muralitharan).

They still didn't pick Imran?

 

[smash84]

yeah, he does seem to get overlooked for a lot of these teams

 

[Agent Nationaux]

Wasim is chosen not just because he was left-handed but also because there aren't many better than him with the old ball.

 

[smash84]

But Imran is certainly quite good with the old ball himself. Definitely in the same ballpark as Wasim

 

[Agent Nationaux]

True but skill wise Akram was the greatest old ball bowler, although Waqar did reverse it more.

 

[kyear2]

Just think that being left handed, supremely talented and a master of the old ball trumps Imran's batting advantage. Remember Wasim was also handy with the bat as well.