With a bit of conjecture and debate going on about the make up and balance of the Australian cricket team in it’s various formats, inevitably a lot of effort goes into those not-so-obvious selections of the allrounder type player.
To select one of Maxwell, Marsh or Faulkner, to name a few players currently in the mix, should require a great deal of thought as to which would serve their teams’ needs the best.
Having said that, most of the time, I believe truth is found in ludicrous hypotheticals as clarity somehow swims through the murky waters and into the light. So, join me as we explore the fantastical cricket match featuring the allrounders’ best XI and the traditional best XI.
Firstly, the Allrounders XI. Fairly simple, with two selection criteria… A) they have to warrant selection for their primary role, and B) that they have a “significant” second discipline (obviously subjective, but hey, let’s work with it). Without further ado, here is my Allrounders XI.
1 – Opener: Eddie Barlow (18,212 runs at 39.16 and 571 wickets at 24.14)*
2 – Opener: W.G Grace (54,896 runs at 39.55 and 2864 wickets at 17.99)*
3 – First drop: Walter Hammond (7,249 runs at 58.45 and 83 wickets at 37.80)
4 – Second drop: Jacques Kallis (13,289 runs at 55.37 and 292 wickets at 32.65)
5 – Middle order: Garfield Sobers (8032 runs at 57.78 and 235 wickets at 34.03)
6 – Middle order: Doug Walters (5357 runs at 48.26 and 49 wickets at 29.08)
7 – Wicket keeper: Adam Gilchrist (379 catches/37 stumpings and 5,570 runs at 47.6)
8 – Spinner: Richie Benaud (248 wickets at 27.03 and 2201 runs at 24.45) Captain
9 – Change bowler: Imran Khan (362 wickets at 22.81 and 3807 runs at 37.69)
10 – Opening bowler: Keith Miller (170 wickets at 22.97 and 2958 runs at 36.97)
11 – Opening bowler: Richard Hadlee (431 wickets at 22.29 and 3124 runs at 27.16)
*Denotes first class figures in lieu of short Test career
12th man: Jonty Rhodes, fieldsman extraordinaire.
Notable omissions: Kumar Sangakkara, Clyde Walcott and Andy Flower all average better runs than Gilchrist, but are lesser glovemen in my opinion – feel free to disagree – Jeff Dujon was the opposite.
Several more South Africans would probably have made the cut, Mike Procter and Clive Rice the most likely, if not for apartheid and now AB de Villiers, if he wanted to, could probably become the greatest allrounder ever (seriously, check out his bio, he is fantastic at everything).
It was a tough choice on the spinner position as none really stood out in the way Jacques Kallis does for his batting for instance. In a hypothetical match, if the pitch was turning I would imagine Benaud and Sobers to have to step up.
Also Ian Botham and Kapil Dev should feel quite hard done by to not making the side as should Vinoo Mankad – batted every position and achieved the 2000/200 double.
Taking on the traditional XI, a good old fashioned six batsmen, one wicketkeeper and four bowlers affair, whereby the same criteria applies for A) they must warrant selection for their primary role, and alternatively B) should never be selected for their secondary skill.
1 – Opener: Sunil Gavaskar (10,122 runs at 51.12 and 1 wicket at 206)
2 – Opener: Herbert Sutcliffe (4,555 runs at 60.73 and no wickets)
3 – First drop: Don Bradman (6996 runs at 99.94 and 2 wickets at 36) Captain
4 – Second drop: Brian Lara (11,953 runs at 52.88 and no wickets)
5 – Middle order: Rahul Dravid (13,288 runs at 52.31 and 1 wicket at 39)
6 – Middle order: Inzaman Ul-haq (8,830 runs at 49.6 and no wickets)
7 – Gloveman: Alan Knott (269 dismissals and 4389 runs at 32.75)
8 – Spinner: Muttiah Muralithuran (800 wickets at 22.72 and 1,256 runs at 11.67)
9 – Change bowler: Waqar Younis (373 wickets at 23.56 and 1010 runs at 10.20)
10 – Opening bowler: Courtney Walsh (519 wickets at 24.44 and 936 runs at 7.54)
11 – Opening bowler: Glenn Mcgrath (563 wickets at 21.64 and 641 runs at 7.36)
12th man – Irrelavent as he can neither bat nor bowl, and shouldn’t have been selected for his fielding.
Notable omissions: Len Hutton, apparently a Test bowling average of 77.33 is simply too good for an opener. Likewise, Sachin Tendulkar with his 46 Test wickets really hurt his chances of making this fictional XI .
Joel Garner was also hard to leave out, but horses for courses, his 12.44 average is getting a little up there and the cumulative ducks from Walsh and McGrath were too hard to ignore.
This team on paper is incredibly strong, however I think any injury would really hamstring this side. Similarly, simply waiting off the good bowlers would mean an absolute feast of runs against the part-timers.
So, those are the teams. I tried to pick a balanced team for each XI (as much as was possible), and obviously some players have been left out and some players are a bit out of position, so feel free to swap players in and out at your own leisure.
My thoughts after putting these team lists together are that any one of these players from either team would walk into any current side.
Also, I perceived a comparative lack of leadership in the traditional XI compared to the Allrounders (comparative being a key word) and the lack of a “true” spin bowling allrounder in the likes of world’s best (Benaud just edging out mankind on bowling stats). So, who do you think would win?
Baz
Guest
If he was a better bowler than just a good bowler the phantom from New Zealand would hold down the no.11 position.
Matthew H
Guest
Pick a decent team of all-rounders first. Geez - no Botham, no Warne.
davSA
Guest
Bland was Rhodesian as was Mike Proctor . In years gone by as far as sport was concerned Rhodesians were eligible for selection to SA teams.
davSA
Guest
Thanks Andrew , I always enjoy the what if.. selection articles. Someone you like is always going to be left out but I'm glad you found place for Eddie Barlow.(Billy Bunter was his nickname), he was such a fierce competitor . Very much an in your face type of guy although with his specs a rotound features you would never have expected it. . Interetingly A few days ago Sachin Tendulkar stated a that Hansie Cronje was the toughest bowler he faced although his name never comes up in these fantasy selections , almost as if no one wants to be reminded of him. I also see no place for Tony Greig by anyone ..He has to be right up there.
Andrew Kennard
Roar Pro
Just looked up Aubrey Faulkner - seemed like a quality cricketer. Never heard of him before, but he'll make the next fictional XI probably.
Andrew Kennard
Roar Pro
Yep, feel free to change up the lists, I tried to make them balanced (in my opinion) and in the spirit of the self inflicted exercise - according to the comments I have failed miserably - but the original thought was just to imagine how it would play out.
Andrew Kennard
Roar Pro
Bradmans XI is pretty attacking, I like it. Very easy to see them taking 20 wickets, and with those batsmen they could easily put up good scores you would think even without Hammond
Andrew Kennard
Roar Pro
Yeah, just put him there because of formatting and convention really. I'm pretty sure the Allrounders XI would be pretty blasé about changing the batting lineup.
sheek
Roar Guru
How about this - Bradman's XI vs best of the rest XI. Bradman picked his best XI around 2000 on the proviso it only be published after his death. The team was quite controversial, especially because it seemed to have a long tail. This was it. B.Richards - RSA A.Morris - Aus D.Bradman (c) - Aus S.Tendulkar - Ind G.Sobers - WIN D.Tallon(wk) - Aus R.Lindwall - Aus S.Warne - Aus D.Lillee - Aus R.O'Reilly - Aus A.Bedser - Eng W.Hammond (12th man) - Eng The genius in Bradman's selection, I'm guessing, is that he knew he was worth two 50 average test batsmen all by himself. So he could pick an extra bowler knowing that Sobers would be required perhaps more for his batting than bowling. Anyway, it's still a very 'out there' selection. I'm going to swap Hammond & Bedser making it a more traditional looking XI. Hammond would come in at four, with everyone else below dropping a place. The bowling is still formidable with Lillee, Lindwall, Sobers, O'Reilly, Warne & Hammond. So, what about the best of the rest? S.Gavaskar - Ind J.Hobbs - Eng G.Headley - WIN G.Pollock - RSA WG. Grace(c) - Eng Imran Khan - Pak A.Gilchrist(wk) - Aus R.Hadlee - NZL D.Steyn - RSA M.Muralitharan - SLA S. Barnes - Eng M.Marshall (12th man) - WIN This team is also formidable, batting down to 8. The top five bowlers are Hadlee, Steyn, Imran, Barnes & Muralitharan, with occasional support from Grace. There is so much depth for a 3rd XI - L.Hutton(Eng), H.Sutcliffe(Eng), R.Dravid(Ind), K.Sangakkara(SLA), J.Kallis(RSA), V.Richards(WIN), I.Botham (Aus), A.Knott(wk-Eng), Wasim Akram(Pak), C.Ambrose(WIN), C.Grimmett(Aus), A.Kumble(12th man - Ind). And we could go on.....
Andrew Kennard
Roar Pro
Would be a cracker of a match, A real grind when the traditional XI was batting, I see Kallis and Sobers as being the 5th and 6th bowlers in the team, so I thinks it's safe to say there wouldn't be many 'easy' runs. With the Allrounders batting, a real struggle to see off the main bowlers to get into the very, very part timers for an absolute glut of runs. The Glenn McGrath factor might sway the game slightly to the traditional XI by virtue of him being able to bowl virtually all day without a rest. But, Kallis scored runs against the Aussies, so who knows.
Andrew Kennard
Roar Pro
too good at batting I reckoned
Andrew Kennard
Roar Pro
Yep, feel free to sub players into the hypothetical teams to your liking. In a way I thought the omissions were more important than the players that made the teams. I think when we look back at the great teams we tend to realise the incredible contributions from admittedly brilliant players. Players like the Waugh brothers and Viv Richards were fantastic batsmen but I think too good at bowling to make the traditional list, where as Glenn McGrath I think obviously belongs as the quintessential tail ender. The Proctor/Hadlee decision was probably the one I spent longest over. Apartheid was/is such a shame. That's all I have to say about that. There were too many options for 12th man, I simply couldn't choose.
Pope Paul VII
Guest
Richie would bat 11 based on batting averages. Certainly behind Miller and Imran. I'm backing the allrounders.
jameswm
Roar Guru
When I saw the title, I thought the specialists for sure, because they have the bowlers to take 20 wickets. Then I saw the all rounders bowlers - Hadlee, Imran Khan, Keith Miller - and not even Wasim Akram who should surely be there. OK, McGrath, Waqar and Murali are better, but not by a lot. And you have Kallis and Sobers to back them up. Then batting - Keith Miller at 10 who batted 6 in one of our best teams ever. Paddles was a good bat too.
jameswm
Roar Guru
Richards can bowl, Warnie can bat, etc.
joe
Guest
The All Rounders would win easily
Liam
Guest
See, I really thought that the traditional XI would collectively average more than the allrounders, and would therefore come out on top via their batting strength, but the allrounders average 36.34 more runs per innings. You also have the fact that, without Bradman, the figures wouldn't even be so close, so that makes things interesting. However, you're still relying a great deal on Hadlee, Miller, Sobers and Khan for your bowling (the first class figures of Grace and Barlow are inflated by the lesser difficulty level) as the rest arguably lack penetration in terms of wicket taking ability (at least comparatively!). And you have four genuine threats in Walsh, McGrath, Murali and Younis, of a similar calibre to the above four, just with a vastly superior spin option in Murali (Benaud, while good, was not the wicket taker Murali is, and while we hear stories of how able Sobers was to change what he bowled to suit the conditions, we have little evidence of him doing it at a national scale, and again first class statistics/achievements are inflated by the lower difficulty). I think the tradtional XI would win, but largely due to their greater capacity to survive quality bowling versus the vast majority of their opposite numbers, and the fact that you have to bowl to a middle order consisting of Bradman, Lara and Dravid. You'd never get them out.
DingoGray
Roar Guru
No Warnie? However great article. Good job Sir.
sheek
Roar Guru
Andrew, As to who would win, firstly I would take you to task with some of your selections. No Aubrey Faulkner or Mike Procter? And I would probably pick Barlow's opening partner Trevor Goddard. Not as good a batsman but a much better bowler. And a leftie as well. Read up on Faulkner. His all-round stats are quite breath-taking. As for 12th man for the traditional XI, have you never heard of Colin Bland? Test batting average of 49. Not bad huh? Bland was the world's greatest fielder before Rhodes came along. Might even still be the best. There are better options than Courtney Walsh, good as he was. Just as an aside Barry Richards is the best opener i've seen in 50 years. It's a shame he only played four tests. but whether he should be in for either Gavankar or Sutcliffe is debatable. BTW, I'm not a Saffie even though I've mentioned a number of Saffes plus Bland, who was Rhodesian/Zimbabwean. Anyway, interesting article, but I would closely look over some of your selections.
Jake
Guest
John Are you serious mate? It's pretty obvious isn't it?!?