1986 Australian 2nd XI > West Indies 2nd XI

[ttm]

Through Covid I have watched hours of old 80s and 90s games on youtube. One thing I noticed is whenever a West Indies front-line player was out injured or resting their replacement was useless. Think Richard Gabriel, Roger Harper, Tony Gray, Carlisle Best etc. During Australia's domination in the late 90s and 2000s the replacement players were sufficient to contribute, eg Hodge for Ponting and Bichel for Lee.

So back to the original subject - Australia was at its worst in 1986 (probably the worst test side apart from Sri Lanka) while for the Windies this was the middle of their golden age. What if we compare the best 2nd XI from both countries, discounting any players who were chosen in the test line up during the 1st test of that year who was not replacing an injured player. For Australia that would be the 3rd test vs India and for the Windies the 1st test vs England. Please assist me in choosing the team as Im no expert on West Indies fringe players from 1986 but here is my first go at picking the 2nd XIs. In a 5 match test series Im predicting a 2-1 series win to Australia from these teams

Australia
Mark Taylor
Keppler Wessels (if not allowed then Kerr)
Dean Jones
Graeme Wood
Kim Hughes
David Hookes
Simon O'Donnell
Tim Zoehrer
Geoff Lawson
Merv Hughes
Craig McDermott

West Indies
Richard Gabriel
Phil Simmons
Gus Logie
Everton Mattis
Carl Hooper
Roger Harper
David Williams
Winston Davis
Clydde Butts
Anthony Gray
Courtney Walsh

 

[Starfighter]

I think the greater part of WI's prospective 2nd XI was banned for touring Safferland. I mean, so was ours, but you've included Hughes for example.

 

[Line and Length]

Two players spring to mind.

Eldine Baptiste played 9 Tests up until 1984 and was recalled for a Test in the 89/90 series against England. He was a handy bat averaging 23.3 including an undefeated 87* against England in 1984. In the 10 Tests he played in he took 16 wickets @ 35.2.

Franklyn Stephenson never played Test cricket. He went on a rebel tour of South Africa in '82/'83 subsequently was overlooked (banned). He played for Tasmania, Barbados and Gloucestershire. His first class career included 12 centuries and 23 50s but it was his fearsome fast bowling that earned him 448 wickets at an average of 19.9 and the recognition that he is among the finest cricketers never to play Test cricket.

As you already have Roger Harper (and too a lesser extent Carl Hooper) providing spin. either Baptise or Stephenson could replace Clyde Butts whose 10 Test wickets came at a costly 59.5

 

[Line and Length]

I think the greater part of WI's prospective 2nd XI was banned for touring Safferland. I mean, so was ours, but you've included Hughes for example.

Correct. Stephenson, who I mentioned above, was among them. The ban was originally for life but was lifted in 1989.

 

[NotMcKenzie]

I've admittedly watched fewer videos of that period, but I'm not entirely sure I agree with the judgement on the replacement WI players, and the selection criterion seems to produce some odd results. McDermott, Lawson, O'Donnell, Wood and Wessels were all 'First XI' picks in the 1985 Ashes which means I suspect they lost form/were injured/were actually terrible/were out for some other reason at the start of 1986. Furthermore, McDermott may have been dropped and Dave Gilbert (average: 52.68) kept in at least one test, but that also shows how terrible some of our 'First XIs' were in that period.

 

[Starfighter]

OP's first post in twelve years.

 

[Flem274*]

was looking at harper the other day. appears to be a really useful cricketer tbh. the trio can rotate around him, can bat competently and was a much better #8 than marshall who was the only main quick to be noted for his batting.

plus the guy spent his time in two of the trickier fc comps (west indies and county) and looks to be a dominant force there.

 

[ttm]

I think the greater part of WI's prospective 2nd XI was banned for touring Safferland. I mean, so was ours, but you've included Hughes for example.

Good point. I will remove Hughes and include Tony Dodemaide. Then its fair as no rebel players

Australia
Mark Taylor
Robby Kerr
Dean Jones
Graeme Wood
David Hookes
Simon O'Donnell
Tony Dodemaide
Tim Zoehrer
Geoff Lawson
Merv Hughes
Craig McDermott

West Indies
Richard Gabriel
Phil Simmons
Gus Logie
Everton Mattis
Carl Hooper
Roger Harper
David Williams
Winston Davis
Clydde Butts
Anthony Gray
Courtney Walsh

 

[ttm]

I've admittedly watched fewer videos of that period, but I'm not entirely sure I agree with the judgement on the replacement WI players, and the selection criterion seems to produce some odd results. McDermott, Lawson, O'Donnell, Wood and Wessels were all 'First XI' picks in the 1985 Ashes which means I suspect they lost form/were injured/were actually terrible/were out for some other reason at the start of 1986. Furthermore, McDermott may have been dropped and Dave Gilbert (average: 52.68) kept in at least one test, but that also shows how terrible some of our 'First XIs' were in that period.

Totally agree but you have to pick one test so i went with the 1st from 1986. The same happens in the Windies side. Carlisle Best is in the 1st XI so Harper/Hooper/Simmons go to the 2nd.

 

[ttm]

was looking at harper the other day. appears to be a really useful cricketer tbh. the trio can rotate around him, can bat competently and was a much better #8 than marshall who was the only main quick to be noted for his batting.

plus the guy spent his time in two of the trickier fc comps (west indies and county) and looks to be a dominant force there.

Harper's test batting average of 18 suggests his batting was not up to international standard although his bowling (ave 28) is actually better than I remember. All I remember is Bevan hitting him for 4 at the SCG.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Harper's test batting average of 18 suggests his batting was not up to international standard although his bowling (ave 28) is actually better than I remember. All I remember is Bevan hitting him for 4 at the SCG.

His fielding makes up for it though. His runout of Mike Gatting was as good as Warnie's ball of the century.

 

[NotMcKenzie]

Totally agree but you have to pick one test so i went with the 1st from 1986.

Why, though?

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Did any of that Australian team tour NZ in early 1986? Also you didn't pick a spinner. Was Greg Mathews the no 1. If so one of Ray Bright, Peter Sleep, Bob Holland, or Murray Bennett should be there.

 

[ttm]

Why, though?

How else do you compare 2nd XIs? You must start with the 1st XI so you know which players cant be chosen. I chose that time because its when Australian cricket reached a new low after losing to NZ on home soil.

 

[ttm]

Did any of that Australian team tour NZ in early 1986? Also you didn't pick a spinner. Was Greg Mathews the no 1. If so one of Ray Bright, Peter Sleep, Bob Holland, or Murray Bennett should be there.

Yeah Im no expert here on who should play in the team. My main point is the Aus 2nd XI would beat the West Indies 2nd XI even though the West Indies 1st team was clearly well superior

 

[NotMcKenzie]

Did any of that Australian team tour NZ in early 1986?

Tim Zoehrer and Craig McDermott did.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Did Zoehrer keep in the tests? Or was it Wayne Phillips? As a kid I still remember John Bracewell cleaning up Border with a huge off break as he bowled us to victory.

 

[NotMcKenzie]

Did Zoehrer keep in the tests? Or was it Wayne Phillips? As a kid I still remember John Bracewell cleaning up Border with a huge off break as he bowled us to victory.

Phillips kept in the Australian series and Zoehrer made his debut and kept in the New Zealand series (both 85/86).

 

[NotMcKenzie]

How else do you compare 2nd XIs? You must start with the 1st XI so you know which players cant be chosen. I chose that time because its when Australian cricket reached a new low after losing to NZ on home soil.

Because the 2nd XI has no basis in reality anyway, so picking a single test and saying players not playing in it must have been 2nd XI level makes no sense. Some Australians clearly were first XI on the basis of who played more generally over that period and even if worse people (see: Dave Gilbert) were sometimes picked ahead. By picking a different test, suddenly a whole bunch of players will change from one to the other.

Including Mark Taylor (Test Debut: 1989) is a good example, too. 1985/86 was his first FC season. I'm not sure he would have been considered a prospect at the time.

 

[a massive zebra]

The opening post and the premise of this thread is nonsense. A true Australian second XI would never have beaten a true West Indies second XI at this time. Looking at the sides in the opening post, the Australian team might have beaten the West Indies side, but purely because it included several Australian first team players and a stack of West Indians who wouldn't have made their second XI.

For instance, if West Indies frontline bowling lineup in 1986 was Marshall, Holding, Garner, Patterson (as per the 1985-86 series vs England), some of the bowlers they could have called upon in their second eleven were:

Courtney Walsh
Wayne Daniel
Sylvester Clarke
Roger Harper
Franklyn Stephenson
Winston Davis
Winston Benjamin
Tony Gray

Most of these guys would have had a great chance of making the Australian first XI, leave alone second.

Regarding the Australian side, Mark Taylor was not an established player even in state cricket in 1986. Dean Jones and Merv Hughes were regular first team players. Craig McDermott took 30 wickets in the 1985 Ashes and would have been a regular first team player in 1986 if not for injury. Kim Hughes probably would have also been a first team player in 1986 if not for the rebel tour.

Admittedly the West Indies didn't have a huge amount of batting depth in 1986, but Australia had plenty of established batsmen who barely maintained Test averages of 30 (Geoff Marsh, Graeme Wood, David Hookes etc), so I doubt their second XI batting lineup held much of an upper hand over West Indies second XI at this time.