• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

All-time XI: England

bagapath

International Captain
There can't be too many pacers, if any at all, superior to Trueman, from England or elsewhere in the history of the game. Similarly, Barnes' record may never be bettered by anyone. Considering Botham is a lock for the all-rounder's position, I don't see Anderson (averaging 37/38 in Australia and SA) ever making it to the All time Eng XI. And we're not even talking about Snow, Bedser, Larwood and Loahmann yet.
 

weldone

Hall of Fame Member
No they don't, because those two dominated their eras more than the other potential picks did theirs.
Agree with Barnes, but Lohmann didn't have that kind of longevity or sample size to be considered unarguably better...(He will surely be in the discussion, but you can't say Lohmann was easily better than Trueman, for example)

Barnes should sit along with Marshall, McGrath, Hadlee and Murali in the all-time top 5 imo.
 
Last edited:

viriya

International Captain
Agree with Barnes, but Lohmann didn't have that kind of longevity or sample size to be considered unarguably better...(He will surely be in the discussion, but you can't say Lohmann was easily better than Trueman, for example)

Barnes should sit along with Marshall, McGrath, Hadlee and Murali in the all-time top 5 imo.
Fair enough.. I think the sample size argument is somewhat unfair on Lohmann though since players then didn't play a ton of tests. Even Barnes only barely passes a 20 test threshold which I consider minimal, but playing 20 tests then is way more now if you think in terms of time periods of course.
 

Furball

Evil Scotsman
I don't think there's much difference between Root's first 3 years and Pietersen's. Let's see if he makes more of it.
I don't think Pietersen ever had a spell as good as Root's post Ashes dropping form has been.

Pietersen's early years were funny in that he always consistently averaged around about 50. Once he got 3 or 4 series in where the averages doesn't quite fluctuate so wildly from innings to innings I don't ever really remember him averaging much more than 52, it always hovered around 50 then dropped consistently to the 48-49 region.
 

watson

Banned
You could do a lot worse than partner Sydney Barnes with the left-arm allrounder Frank Foster.

Which is the finest bowling pair?

David Frith, August 2014

Having watched them down from Lindwall and Miller, Ramadhin and Valentine, Tyson, Trueman and Statham, Bedi and Chandrasekhar (now that was a glorious spectacle), Lillee and Thomson, Roberts and Holding, Waqar and Wasim, Warne and anybody, choosing the finest of all is a brain-stretching task. Other pairs rise from the mists of time. The first fast bowlers to mow down opponents in tandem were Jack Gregory and Ted McDonald of Australia in the 1920s. Further back, there could be no greater test for opening batsmen than when England's mighty fast man Tom Richardson was coupled with the clever slow left-armer Bobby Peel: raw pace at one end and slow cunning at the other.

My choice, though, is an Ashes-winning pair from 1911-12: Sydney Barnes, frequently nominated as the greatest of all bowlers, and Frank Foster, the Warwickshire left-arm fast bowler. Against a strong and settled Australian batting line-up - Trumper, Bardsley, Hill, Armstrong, Kelleway, Ransford and Minnett - Barnes and Foster took 34 and 32 wickets, carrying England to a 4-1 series victory. Sixty-six wickets in a five-Test series; then another 52 (Barnes 39, Foster 13) in the Triangular Tests in England.

Which is the finest bowling pair? | The Cricket Monthly | ESPN Cricinfo

Herbert Strudwick kept to Frank Foster and put him on a par with Tate and Bedser. Foster's ability to move the ball off the pitch seems to be every bit as good.

Interestingly, Strudwick bracketed Barnes and O'Reilly as the greatest bowlers of their style.

From Dr Grace to Peter May

Maurice Tate, Alec Bedser, G. G. Macaulay, C. Kelleway and F. R. Foster stand out among fast-medium bowlers. Foster, left-arm, was a bit faster than the others and very quick off the pitch. The first time I kept wicket to him was in a trial match at Lord's. The first ball he bowled swung right across the pitch to outside the leg-stump, turned sharply and went over the top of the off-stump, leaving the batsman and me stone cold and hitting the sight-screen with a bang. James Seymour, the batsman, had half turned to play the ball to leg. I said to him: "It looks as if there will be 50 byes before lunch, but I'm not going to stand back to him." Nor did I. In the first match at Sydney in 1911 I gave Foster the signal to bowl one outside the leg-stump for me to try and stump Duff, who I thought might move his right foot in making his shot. Instead of bowling the ball I wanted, Foster sent it very wide outside the off-stump and four byes resulted. The second time I signalled, I made sure he saw what I meant. This time he bowled the ball straight to Frank Woolley at first slip. Then I realised he did not intend to give me the chance which he might have allowed had Tiger Smith, his own county's wicket-keeper, been behind the stumps.

One incident about Maurice Tate lingers in my memory. In his first Australian tour, 1924, Maurice bowled two overs, of eight balls per over, to Ponsford in the opening Test at Sydney. Ponsford tried to play at every ball, but each time he missed. He turned to me and said: "I've never played against such bowling in all my life." I said: "It doesn't look as though you have. You ought to have been out sixteen times!" Then Horseshoe Collins schemed it so that he should face Tate, and defended solidly till the Sussex bowler tired. The tactics worked, for Ponsford went on to get 110.

Sidney Barnes was the best of the medium-pace bowlers in my day, but the Australian W. J. O'Reilly followed him pretty closely. As regards slow bowlers, there were so many as good as each other. There were the left-handers Rhodes, Blythe, Verity, Woolley and Parker and numerous right-handers, with Tich Freeman, of Kent, at the top.

Wisden - From Dr Grace to Peter May
 
Last edited:

91Jmay

International Coach
First I'd heard of Frank Foster

Frank Foster | England Cricket | Cricket Players and Officials | ESPN Cricinfo

717 wickets @ 20.75
6548 runs @ 27 with a HS of 305*

That will win you a few games.

Had to retire at 25 due to an injury in WW1, real shame looks like he could have gone down as Warwickshire's greatest ever player and played a lot more for England as well.

Yet he was quite himself again in 1914, making 1,396 runs, average nearly 35, with a highest innings of 305 not out -- scored in four hours twenty minutes -- against Worcestershire at Dudley, and dismissing 117 batsmen, average just over 18
Wisden - Frank Foster

That was his last ever season. Just coming into the peak of his powers. Real shame.
 
Last edited:

the big bambino

International Captain
Always enjoy stories about FR Foster, who played an unwitting part in assisting Jardine developing bodyline. Foster is my favourite English player.
 

watson

Banned
Biasing the team on Herbert Strudwicks's Wisden article....

01. Jack Hobbs
02. Herbert Sutcliffe
03. Kumar Ranjitsinhji
04. Peter May
05. Denis Compton
06. Frank Woolley
07. Les Ames
08. Frank Foster
09. Fred Trueman
10. Tom Richardson
11. Sydney Barnes

K. S. Ranjitsinhji was the most polished batsman in my experience. His perfect leg-glide was one of his favourite strokes, even off the middle stump. He played fast bowling with the greatest of ease, placing the bowlers to all quarters of the compass.
 
Last edited:

Red

The normal awards that everyone else has
I agree on the inclusion of Ranji at #3 (I always forget him), and Foster seems a good choice considering he clearly had some batting ability, and was a left armer. Was a player I didn't know anything about.

Hobbs
Hutton
Ranji
May
Hammond
Botham
Knott
Foster
Larwood
Trueman
Barnes
 

watson

Banned
It's interesting that Strudwick did not place Sydney Barnes in the 'fast-medium' category along with Bedser and Foster. Instead he placed him in the 'medium' category along with O'Reilly.

On-the-other hand, John Arlott and others have Barnes and Bedser as similar paced bowlers;

Sydney Barnes - cricket's living legend

His usual pace was about that of Alec Bedser, with a faster ball and a slower one, in well-concealed reserve, and the ability to bowl a yorker. He himself is content that he was essentially a spin bowler, that his movement through the air was, in modern technical language, swerve - obtained by spin - rather than `swing', which derives from the 'seam-up' method. Certainly he made the ball move both ways through the air, and-with a first and second-finger application rather similar to that of Ramadhin - he bowled both the offbreak and the legbreak. Indeed, he could bowl the googly at about slow-medium pace and where, in exceptional conditions, the pitch dictated it, he could be a fine slow bowler.

http://www.espncricinfo.com/cricketer/content/story/139130.html
 
Last edited:

watson

Banned
More on Frank Foster...

R. Foster — a prince of the Golden Age

Rowland Ryder, 1976

........It is difficult to assess F. R. Foster in terms of cricketing greatness, owing to the comparative brevity of his career. It is chiefly as a bowler that he will be remembered; second as a dynamic captain, third, as a batsman.nThis at least can be said: as a bowler he went through an Australian tour with Sydney Barnes at his zenith, and wicket for wicket, proved himself his equal; as a captain, he evoked comparison with the young W. G. Grace; as an attacking batsman he was not far short of Jessop.

How did Foster bowl? This is what he wrote himself: "I took a short eight-yard run, holding the ball always in my left hand with 'seam-up' and I always delivered the ball from the very edge of the bowling crease." Foster also felt very strongly that no left-hander should ever attempt to bowl over the wicket.

This is how P. F. Warner describes Foster's action. "Bowling left-hand round the wicket with a high delivery -- he was six feet tall -- his action was the personification of ease. A few short steps, a graceful skip, an apparently medium-paced ball through the air, but doubling its speed as it touched the ground, he kept an exceptional length. He did in fact once bowl two consecutive maiden overs to Jessop!"

And a wicket-keeper's eye view -- "I remember the first time I 'kept to him" wrote Herbert Strudwick. "It was at Lord's in an England v The Rest match. Seymour (Kent) was batting. The first ball Mr. Foster bowled appeared to be well on the leg side. Seymour shaped to play it to leg and I moved that way, but, believe me, we were both surprised when the ball flashed over the off stump, and when it went for four byes I thought I was in for a good afternoon."

Foster bowled at the leg stump, and he certainly hit the wickets pretty frequently. In 1911 74 of his 116 victims were clean bowled and 10 were l.b.w. -- a left-hander bowling at the edge of the crease could hardly expect more. Foster would seem to have developed his leg theory bowling during the Australian tour; in certain respects he did what Larwood was doing in Australia twenty-one years later; if Foster's thirty-two wickets, for an average of 21.62, were obtained at a slightly higher cost than Larwood's thirty-three wickets at 19.51, perhaps, all in all, Foster had a greater team to bowl against.

In his field placing for the Tests in Australia, Foster had a mid-off, cover and deep third man; wicket-keeper, long leg, a semi-circle of four close in leg side fielders (two in front of the wicket and two behind) and a mid-on. Foster's four death trap fieldsmen, as he called them, were George Gunn, Frank Woolley, Bill Hitch and Wilfred Rhodes: they took nine catches off his bowling in the Tests.

As a right-handed batsman he was stylish, vigorous and attacking, though Wisden says that his bat was not quite straight and that he took too many risks. An unfortunate motor-cycle accident in 1915 terminated his cricket career. His book of cricketing memories was published in 1930. Frank Foster died in 1958.

He was, above all, a joyous cricketer, who played the game with splendid verve. During the wonderful summer of his achievement that lasted from May 1911 until March 1912, he was probably without equal on the cricket field.

Wisden - F. R. Foster — a prince of the Golden Age
 
Last edited:

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I don't want to sound rude, but how the **** could you put Root in an all time England team at this stage of his career?

Hammond
Barrington
Gower
May
Compton
Pietersen

all have claims to middle order spots and had stellar, lengthy careers, and that's before you factor in someone like Botham as an all rounder. I accept the kid is very talented but fmd this strikes me as premature exaltation.
 

bagapath

International Captain
First XI

Hobbs
Hutton *
May
Hammond
Compton
Botham
Knott +
Laker
Trueman
Snow
Barnes


Second XI

H. Sutcliffe
W. G. Grace *
Ranji
Dexter
Barrington
F. S. Jackson
Rhodes
Evans +
Bedser
Larwood
Statham
 

harsh.ag

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I don't get people putting WG in 2nd/3rd XIs. If you think he is eligible for Test XIs, they you put him in the first.
 

OverratedSanity

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I don't get people putting WG in 2nd/3rd XIs. If you think he is eligible for Test XIs, they you put him in the first.
Awta. You either go for him as the first pick in the 1st ATG XI or he isn't selected at all. Both are sensible opinions. Middle ground doesn't make much sense.
 

flibbertyjibber

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I don't want to sound rude, but how the **** could you put Root in an all time England team at this stage of his career?
Agree, be like putting Smith in an Aussie one which wouldn't happen. If both have another 3 years like their last 3 then they would be in but right now no chance given they haven't even reached 50 tests yet.
 

OverratedSanity

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Agree, be like putting Smith in an Aussie one which wouldn't happen. If both have another 3 years like their last 3 then they would be in but right now no chance given they haven't even reached 50 tests yet.
Yeah.

I think Williamson is already a lock for an ATG NZ XI though, given he's already arguably had a more impressive career than any NZ batsman bar Crowe and Taylor.
 

mr_mister

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I mean to those 2 comments regarding Grace, it's pretty hard to dislodge Hutton and Hobbs
 

Top