Ian Botham vs Dennis Lillee

[subshakerz]

Also, I don't think you can't discount an XI you disagree with by saying "but that was just the team HE wanted" because you can say something similar about pretty much everyone.

And especially problematic when you use other ATG XIs as a source of authority.

 

[kyear2]

Yk the thing I like the most about your posts is the total lack of self awareness. It's kinda crazy tbh.

Let's compare.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Let's compare.

Aight chief, what do you wanna compare?

 

[subshakerz]

Let's compare.

No he is right. It's like talking to a brick wall at times. You don't seem interested in actual conversation or argumentation, just regurgitation.

 

[Coronis]

You say many and choose 2.

Benaud took pains to point out that it wasn't a best XI, that it was his XI. I can procure the expect clip for you if you like.

But let's look at a vast array of teams I've managed to find.

CricketWeb
Hobbs, Hutton, Bradman, Richards, Tendulkar, Sobers, Gilchrist, Imran, Marshall, Warne, McGrath

Cricinfo
Hutton, Hobbs, Bradman, Tendulkar, Richards, Sobers, Gilchrist, Marshall, Akram, Warne, Lillee

Wisden
Grace, Hobbs, Bradman, Tendulkar, Richards, Sobers, Knott, Akram, Warne, Marshall, Barnes

Geoffrey Boycott
Hobbs, Hutton, Bradman, Headley, Richards, Sobers, Knott, Marshall, Warne, Lillee, Barnes

Christopher Martin-Jenkins
Grace, Hobbs, Bradman, Richards, Hammond, Sobers, Gilchrist, Marshall, Warne, Barnes, McGrath

Courier-Mail
Hobbs, Gavaskar, Bradman, Richards, Tendulkar, Sobers, Gilchrist, Akram, Marshall, Warne, Lillee

Kim Hughes
Hobbs, Trumper, Bradman, Richards, Hammond, Sobers, Gilchrist, Akram, Marshall, Warne, Lillee

Martin Crowe
Hobbs, Gavaskar, Bradman, Richards, Tendulkar, Sobers, Gilchrist, Akram, Warne, Marshall, Lillee

Geoff Armstrong
Grace, Hobbs, Bradman, Tendulkar, Pollock, Sobers, Gilchrist, Imran, Marshall, Warne, Barnes

Third Man Cricket
Gavaskar, Hobbs, Bradman, Tendulkar, Richards, Sobers, Gilchrist, Akram, Warne, Marshall, McGrath

Bob Willis
Hobbs, Richards, Bradman, Richards, Kallis, Sangakkara, Sobers, Imran, Warne, Marshall, McGrath

Peterhrt
Hobbs, Richards, Bradman, Tendulkar, Richards, Sobers, Gilchrist, Hadlee, Marshall, Barnes, O'Reilly

There's an additional one I'm not officially including because of the early date it was completed, '91, and so probably not fully representative, will still list it though.

E.W. Swanton
Hobbs, Gavaskar, Bradman, Sobers , Headley, Miller, Davidson, Evans, Marshall, O'Reilly, Gibbs

Didn't include Dickie's because it was limited only to players he saw, umpired to, but that would have been another vote for Barry. Nor Benaud's for reasons mentioned above.

So we can do a tally of the 12

Hobbs - 12
Hutton - 3
Gavaskar - 3
Richards - 2
Grace - 3
Trumper - 1

Bradman - 12

Tendulkar - 8
Richards - 11
Hammond - 2
Pollock - 1
Kallis - 1
Headley - 1

Sobers - 12

Gilchrist - 9
Knott - 2
Sangakkara - 1

Warne - 11
O'Reilly - 1

Marshall - 12
Barnes - 5
Lillee - 5
McGrath - 4
Akram - 6
Imran - 3
Hadlee - 1

If I were to remove any it would be 3rd man cricket, but the one I'm replacing it with I haven't been able to confirm.

But for reference, John Snow


For kicks and giggles I also decided to ask Chat AI for an all time XI, and absolutely no prompts besides it being a test team.

Creating an all-time Test cricket team is a challenging task, given the wealth of talent across different eras. However, here’s a balanced and widely respected XI that includes some of the greatest players in Test cricket history:

---

1. **Sir Jack Hobbs (England)** - Opening batter, known as "The Master," with 61,760 first-class runs and 199 centuries.
2. **Sunil Gavaskar (India)** - One of the best openers in history, the first to cross 10,000 Test runs.
3. **Sir Donald Bradman (Australia)** - The greatest batter of all time, averaging 99.94 in Tests.
4. **Sachin Tendulkar (India)** - The highest run-scorer in Test cricket (15,921 runs) and a record 100 international centuries.
5. **Sir Viv Richards (West Indies)** - Dominant middle-order batter, known for his aggressive style.
6. **Sir Garfield Sobers (West Indies)** - The greatest all-rounder in cricket history, capable of batting, bowling, and fielding at the highest level.
7. **Adam Gilchrist (Australia) (wk)** - Revolutionary wicketkeeper-batter, redefined the role with his aggressive batting.
8. **Shane Warne (Australia)** - The greatest leg-spinner of all time, with 708 Test wickets.
9. **Wasim Akram (Pakistan)** - One of the most skillful fast bowlers, with swing and pace.
10. **Malcolm Marshall (West Indies)** - Arguably the greatest fast bowler, with unmatched control and aggression.
11. **Glenn McGrath (Australia)** - Master of line and length, with 563 Test wickets.

---

### Key Notes:
- **Bradman** is a non-negotiable inclusion, given his unparalleled batting record.
- **Sobers** provides balance with his all-round abilities.
- **Warne** and **Marshall** are widely regarded as the best in their respective bowling disciplines.
- The team has a mix of eras, styles, and skills to dominate any opposition in any conditions.

This XI would be a dream team for any cricket fan!

Ummmmmm.

Jeez man

 

[BazBall21]

Yup agree. Marshall has only gained steam recently but for an entire earlier generation, of which some of the names he mentioned are part of, Marshall was not a lock.

I think WI weren't always very popular with journalists from abroad (especially English) because they were salty that their national teams couldn't match the WI pace attacks and bumpers are quite easy to get annoyed about when your side is on the receiving end. While statsguru can sometimes be misleading, Marshall's record is literally perfect.

 

[Johan]

I think WI weren't always very popular with journalists from abroad (especially English) because they were salty that their national teams couldn't match the WI pace attacks and bumpers are quite easy to get annoyed about when your side is on the receiving end. While statsguru can sometimes be misleading, Marshall's record is literally perfect.

there were some outrageous takes in the olden times, like Larwood>Trueman and Cowdrey>Barrington, the prior being an almost universal opinion, what I really think happened with Marshall is that he bowled with Holding, Garner, Roberts and then Ambrose and therefore he stood out significantly less than someone like Lillee, Barnes or Warne did from their partners, so instead of singling out Marshall he was just grouped together as the fearsome four.

 

[capt_Luffy]

there were some outrageous takes in the olden times, like Larwood>Trueman and Cowdrey>Barrington, what I really think happened with Marshall is that he bowled with Holding, Garner, Roberts and then Ambrose and therefore he stood out significantly less than someone like Lillee, Barnes or Warne did from his partners.

My father always vouched that Holding was the best WI quick Ever and that wasn't a hot take I think till the 90s

 

[subshakerz]

I think WI weren't always very popular with journalists from abroad (especially English) because they were salty that their national teams couldn't match the WI pace attacks and bumpers are quite easy to get annoyed about when your side is on the receiving end. While statsguru can sometimes be misleading, Marshall's record is literally perfect.

How does that square with Viv and Roberts very high reps in the 70s and early 80s?

 

[subshakerz]

My father always vouched that Holding was the best WI quick Ever and that wasn't a hot take I think till the 90s

Imran rated him the most gifted quick of all, including Wasim.

 

[Johan]

How does that square with Viv and Roberts very high reps in the 70s and early 80s?

there were some outrageous takes in the olden times, like Larwood>Trueman and Cowdrey>Barrington, the prior being an almost universal opinion, what I really think happened with Marshall is that he bowled with Holding, Garner, Roberts and then Ambrose and therefore he stood out significantly less than someone like Lillee, Barnes or Warne did from their partners, so instead of singling out Marshall he was just grouped together as the fearsome four.

 

[subshakerz]

there were some outrageous takes in the olden times, like Larwood>Trueman and Cowdrey>Barrington, the prior being an almost universal opinion, what I really think happened with Marshall is that he bowled with Holding, Garner, Roberts and then Ambrose and therefore he stood out significantly less than someone like Lillee, Barnes or Warne did from their partners, so instead of singling out Marshall he was just grouped together as the fearsome four.

Yes. He was seen as more technically the best but went celebrated as such.

 

[BazBall21]

My father always vouched that Holding was the best WI quick Ever and that wasn't a hot take I think till the 90s

ATG imo.

 

[capt_Luffy]

ATG imo.

Definitely. Have him over Lillee.

 

[subshakerz]

@Johan my point is if the WI were unpopular those two wouldn't be rated as high.

 

[Johan]

let me ask my parents for top 5 fast bowlers

 

[BazBall21]

How does that square with Viv and Roberts very high reps in the 70s and early 80s?

Roberts was ahead of his time, and batting is a lonelier job so they don't get the same extent of "hunting in packs" stigma that Johan alluded to, and Viv is also the most destructive batsman of all time and thus transcended the era in an unforgettably captivating way.

 

[subshakerz]

Definitely. Have him over Lillee.

Nah.

 

[BazBall21]

Definitely. Have him over Lillee.

I rate Lillee higher but I am keen on both

 

[subshakerz]

Roberts was ahead of his time, and batting is a lonelier job so they don't get the same extent of "hunting in packs" stigma that Johan alluded to, and Viv is also the most destructive batsman of all time and thus transcended the era in an unforgettably captivating way.

Always got the impression WI were mostly celebrated in the Western press except for certain cases.