Split test cricket into roughly two halves. ATG XI 1877-1959 vs ATG XI 1960-2015

[mr_mister]

the first pool of players has a slightly bigger time duration but as we all know they had less players around then so it's fair to cut it off around the halfway mark of the 20th century IMO. Use a player's best era as a deciding factor here.


My preliminary 32 man squads....(yes these are big squads):


Classic era:

Grace
Ames
Sutcliffe
Hobbs
Hammond
Hutton
Jardine
Barrington
Compton
Verity
Barnes
Bedser
Laker
Trueman
Larwood

Spofforth
Trumper
Armstrong
Bradman
Ponsford
Harvey
McCabe
Morris
Tallon
Lindwall
Miller
O'Reilly
Grimmett
Benaud

Headley
Weekes
Worrell




Modern era:


Knott
Botham

Lillee
G. Chappell
S. Waugh
Ponting
Gilchrist
Warne
McGrath


V. Richards
Sobers
Greenidge
Marshall
Ambrose
Lara

G. Pollock
B. Richards
Procter
Donald



Gavaskar
Dev
Dravid
Tendulkar

Imran Khan
Miandad
Wasim
Waqar

Sangakkara
Muralitharan

Hadlee
Crowe

A.Flower





Well... that's gonna be very hard to narrow down to 11 on either side. I'm sure I missed a few deserving players. The modern era has a lot more all-rounders, but you only really need one per team right?

Anyway, which team looks better on paper?

 

[Red]

Hutton
Hobbs
Bradman
Hammond
McCabe
Miller
Ames
Lindwall
Larwood
O'Reilly
Trueman

Grimmett or Laker to come in for a quick on a turner.



Gavaskar
B. Richards
V. Richards
Tendulkar
Lara
Sobers
Gilchrist
Hadlee
Marshall
Warne
McGrath

Once again, Murali in for a quick if deemed necessary.

 

[Red]

Earlier early era


WG Grace
Trumper
Clem Hill
Ranji
FS Jackson
Monty Noble
Jack Blackham
Bobby Peel
SF Barnes
CTB Turner
Spofforth

 

[mr_mister]

so who do you back in your hypothetical scenario? Modern or Classic?

 

[Red]

so who do you back in your hypothetical scenario? Modern or Classic?

Could not honestly split them. Bradman maybe gives the early era an edge, but I reckon it'd be 2 all in a 5 test series. There's no significant points of difference in the two.

 

[Red]

Be tempted to replace one of the modern quicks with Wasim just for some variety. In all these ATG scenarios, one thing I'd love to see is a bowling combo of

Marshall
McGrath/Ambrose/Garner
Wasim
Warne

bowling at ATG bats.

Just covers all the bases.

 

[mr_mister]

I should have made the era cutoff maybe 3-4 years earlier so Sobers would bring more to the modern era... his 365 would then be included

 

[Fuller Pilch]

the first pool of players has a slightly bigger time duration but as we all know they had less players around then so it's fair to cut it off around the halfway mark of the 20th century IMO. Use a player's best era as a deciding factor here.


My preliminary 32 man squads....(yes these are big squads):


Classic era:

Grace
Ames
Sutcliffe
Hobbs
Hammond
Hutton
Jardine
Barrington
Compton
Verity
Barnes
Bedser
Laker
Trueman
Larwood

Spofforth
Trumper
Armstrong
Bradman
Ponsford
Harvey
McCabe
Morris
Tallon
Lindwall
Miller
O'Reilly
Grimmett
Benaud

Headley
Weekes
Worrell




Modern era:


Knott
Botham

Lillee
G. Chappell
S. Waugh
Ponting
Gilchrist
Warne
McGrath


V. Richards
Sobers
Greenidge
Marshall
Ambrose
Lara

G. Pollock
B. Richards
Procter
Donald



Gavaskar
Dev
Dravid
Tendulkar

Imran Khan
Miandad
Wasim
Waqar

Sangakkara
Muralitharan

Hadlee
Crowe

A.Flower





Well... that's gonna be very hard to narrow down to 11 on either side. I'm sure I missed a few deserving players. The modern era has a lot more all-rounders, but you only really need one per team right?

Anyway, which team looks better on paper?

I know that Sir Garfield played most of his career after 1959, but the 365* was in 1958. Just saying.

 

[Red]

I should have made the era cutoff maybe 3-4 years earlier so Sobers would bring more to the modern era... his 365 would then be included

Actually, I just forgot Sobers altogether, adding him now.

 

[Agent TBY]

Gavaskar
B. Richards
V. Richards
Tendulkar
Lara
Sobers
Gilchrist
Hadlee
Marshall
Warne
McGrath

Once again, Murali in for a quick if deemed necessary.

Sobers in for Hadlee, surely?

 

[Red]

Sobers in for Hadlee, surely?

See above.

 

[ankitj]

Classic Era:

Hobbs
Hutton
Bradman *
Hammond
Headley
Miller
Ames +
Davidson
Trueman
Barnes
O'Reilly

Modern Era:

Gavaskar
B. Richards
V. Richards
Tendulkar
Sobers
Gilchrist +
Imran *
Hadlee
Warne
Marshall
Muralitharan

EDIT: How did I miss Sobers!

 

[watson]

Earlier early era


WG Grace
Trumper
Clem Hill
Ranji
FS Jackson
Monty Noble
Jack Blackham
Bobby Peel
SF Barnes
CTB Turner
Spofforth

If you were to pick a fast bowler from the pre-WW1 era, who would it be? Albert Cotter, Ernie Jones, Tom Richardson, Bill Lockwood, or someone else?

 

[Red]

If you were to pick a fast bowler from the pre-WW1 era, who would it be? Albert Cotter, Ernie Jones, Tom Richardson, Bill Lockwood, or someone else?

Good question. I don't know enough about that era to comment. The very limited amount I know makes me think Richardson from your list.

I'm a big fan of CTB Turner. Find it interesting that he apparently terrorised batsmen but isn't recognised as a straight out fast bowler. He, along with SF Barnes, are the two I'd love to have seen from the early era.

 

[kingkallis]

How is Kallis missing from this? He surely is as good as Tendulkar at No.4 if not better.

 

[OverratedSanity]

No mention of Dale Steyn yet? What a boring thread

 

[Red]

No mention of Dale Steyn yet? What a boring thread

I wouldn't have him above Marshall, McGrath or Hadlee.

 

[Zinzan]

Earlier early era


WG Grace
Trumper
Clem Hill
Ranji
FS Jackson
Monty Noble
Jack Blackham
Bobby Peel
SF Barnes
CTB Turner
Spofforth

Nice team, but Johnny Briggs > Bobby Peel imho

 

[Zinzan]

Modern Era:

Gavaskar
B. Richards
V. Richards
Tendulkar
G. Pollock
Gilchrist +
Imran *
Hadlee
Warne
Marshall
Muralitharan

Interesting & risky option playing both spinners, but it actually works here (especially in the SC), & your batting is still deep.

Incidentally, Marshall may just > Warne in the batting line-up.

 

[Zinzan]

I wouldn't have him above Marshall, McGrath or Hadlee.

My order; Marshall>Hadlee>Steyn>McGrath,