• 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 World XIs: Discussion Thread

capt_Luffy

capt_Luffy

Hall of Fame Member
trundler said:
Hanif averages more than Simpson and Lawry over an equivalent career length. His stats suffer from debuting really young and playing in the rough 50s, but he makes the team of the 50s anyway as Hutton was the only better opener around during that period.
Click to expand...
Hanif, Ponsford and Morris are at a similar level for me, slightly behind Lawry and Cook. His English record is a bit too poor except one Great ton though, that's what really holds him back I feel
 
Coronis

Coronis

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Prince EWS said:
On Procter, I understand people rating his bowling highly even though I wouldn't in these exercises, and if anything maybe he should have been picked as a bowler earlier based on when Barry Richards went.

But unlike his bowling and Barry's batting, we don't really have any evidence in Tests, WSC or unofficial Tests that his batting was going to translate. It's not just a small sample size, there's just no evidence he was a middle order batsman at all above domestic cricket. He was obviously a serious bowler but his batting could definitely have ended up in the Davidson category a level up - we have no evidence otherwise.
Click to expand...
Hmm at least based on his contemporaries, I generally put his range anywhere from Hadlee-Botham<

But as you say, impossible to know for sure.
 
ataraxia

ataraxia

International Coach
Prince EWS said:
Yeah but those don't really elevate him above being a number 8.

In the small sample size we have of his bowling in Tests (and unofficial Tests), he was awesome. I don't like to work on such small samples but I see the argument.

But in the small sample size we have of his batting at that level, he was much worse than Vernon Philander. He was obviously a pretty serious lower middle order batsman in domestic cricket, but so was Richard Hadlee and err, Ronnie Irani.

It's just such an unproven skill. You can't be batting him above eight in a team like this IMO.
Click to expand...
I mean I'm not saying "you're wrong, the team bats deep enough" (because I'm Mr. Batdeep), but Procter has a terrific FC batting record that would have led to him being picked as a batsman in tests for either England or South Africa (I assume he played more County Championship than Currie Cup). So I'm fine with Procter batting #6 at test-level if required, even if he was crap in the aforesaid small sample size. But in much the same way that Beau Webster would be an #8 and specialist gully at ATG-level, so should Procter.
 
Coronis

Coronis

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
ataraxia said:
I mean I'm not saying "you're wrong, the team bats deep enough" (because I'm Mr. Batdeep), but Procter has a terrific FC batting record that would have led to him being picked as a batsman in tests for either England or South Africa (I assume he played more County Championship than Currie Cup). So I'm fine with Procter batting #6 at test-level if required, even if he was crap in the aforesaid small sample size. But in much the same way that Beau Webster would be an #8 and specialist gully at ATG-level, so should Procter.
Click to expand...
Just for some clarification.

4 AR’s and Procter for their respective English sides (county+other matches)

Kapil (Northamptonshire, Worcestershire) 40 matches 64 innings 2312 @ 42.81 4 tons 14 fifties
Hadlee (Nottinghamshire) 148 matches 196 innings 5854 @ 38.76 11 tons 29 50’s
Imran (Worcestershire, Sussex) 173 matches 279 innings 8847 @ 38.30 17 tons 51 50’s
Procter (Gloucestershire) 259 matches 437 innings 14441 @ 36.19 32 tons 70 fifties
Botham (Somerset, Worcestershire, Durham) 251 matches 379 innings 11904 @ 34.31 22 tons 60 fifties
 
Line and Length

Line and Length

International Coach
Larwood (ranked =49th in the CW bowlers poll) and Spofforth (unranked) ahead of Adcock (32nd) and Bedser (33rd) seems strange. Willis, Philander, Bishop, Akhtar, Hall and Snow are also ranked higher than Larwood.
 
capt_Luffy

capt_Luffy

Hall of Fame Member
Line and Length said:
Larwood (ranked =49th in the CW bowlers poll) and Spofforth (unranked) ahead of Adcock (32nd) and Bedser (33rd) seems strange. Willis, Philander, Bishop, Akhtar, Hall and Snow are also ranked higher than Larwood.
Click to expand...
Think that was because in those polls most were only considering Test performances (hence Barry and Procter as well being unranked) while here the goal is to make the strongest possible XI each time. Spofforth on a similar boat to Grace and Ranji, though his Test record is terrific as well, albeit limited
 
Last edited:
capt_Luffy

capt_Luffy

Hall of Fame Member
Thala_0710 said:
Ask and ye shall receive.
Not sure about the settled once and for all part though
Click to expand...
From yk where:

Andy Flower is remembered primarily for his batting genius, but in Tests he was also Zimbabwe’s main wicketkeeper for most of his career (1992–2002), and he did a solid, if unspectacular, job behind the stumps.

Here’s a detailed breakdown of his wicketkeeping in Tests:

1. Role and Context

Flower wasn’t a specialist wicketkeeper in the Adam Gilchrist or Ian Healy mould — he was essentially a world-class batsman who also took on the gloves to balance the team.

Zimbabwe in the 1990s had a thin player pool, so Flower’s keeping allowed them to play an extra bowler or batter.


2. Performance Stats

Tests: 55 matches as wicketkeeper, 151 catches, 9 stumpings.

Dismissals per innings: roughly 1.46, which is respectable for the era but below elite keepers like Healy, Boucher, or Stewart.


3. Style & Strengths

Very tidy and safe on straightforward chances — rarely guilty of glaring errors.

Kept well to both seamers like Heath Streak and spinners like Paul Strang or Ray Price.

Good footwork and anticipation, especially to spin, which is tricky in subcontinental and Zimbabwean conditions.


4. Limitations

Not as agile or athletically spectacular as the best full-time keepers.

His primary focus was batting (average 51.54 in Tests), so keeping was more functional than flashy.

Long keeping stints sometimes affected his stamina for batting, though he still produced huge innings.


5. Reputation

Generally rated as a “competent” to “good” Test wicketkeeper — never a liability, but not elite.

His batting overshadowed his glovework, so he’s rarely listed in “great wicketkeepers” lists, even though he was crucial to Zimbabwe’s balance.


If you want a one-line verdict:

> As a Test wicketkeeper, Andy Flower was safe and reliable rather than spectacular — a top-order run machine who could also handle the gloves well enough to strengthen Zimbabwe’s fragile team structure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top