Cricinfo Ashes XI

[Themer]

Also Boycott > Gooch.

 

[War]

Also Boycott > Gooch.

Its hard to spit them IMO. I'd usually say they are even.

 

[Themer]

I know what you mean. Boycott always gets caught between my teeth.

 

[sifter132]

I never said Hobbs was not good enough in general. I specifically said he isn't good enough to be the 1st XI/best ever Ashes XI. Clear difference.

When picking these XIs as i always say. People need to decide if they are picking wall of fame XIs or XIs for serious hypotetical match-ups. If its a wall of fame XI, then Barnes, Trumper, Hobbs would always be picked given the impact they had on the game.

But if we are considering a serious hypotetical match-ups, then picking such players becomes a serious problem. Reasons being because all pre-war batsmen for me except of Bradman, Hammond, Headley (McCabe to a level) are questionable. Given that they played in a era of where quality fast-bowling/90 mph bowling was non existant & pitches where flat. Compared to post war batsmen (1945-1999 mainly) who had to deal with those type of bowling & less flat pitches in general.

Just curious mate, why does Hammond get a pass, but not Hobbs? Who did Hammond face that Hobbs didn't? I'm not a massive historian, but AFAIK the attacks in the 30s weren't particularly fearsome or fast. Even England only pulled out Larwood for a couple of series. I thought Jack Gregory, Ted McDonald and Tibby Cotter would have been more testing than what Hammond faced in the 30s. Although Hammond got to face Bill O'Reilly I guess.

 

[War]

Just curious mate, why does Hammond get a pass, but not Hobbs? Who did Hammond face that Hobbs didn't? I'm not a massive historian, but AFAIK the attacks in the 30s weren't particularly fearsome or fast. Even England only pulled out Larwood for a couple of series. I thought Jack Gregory, Ted McDonald and Tibby Cotter would have been more testing than what Hammond faced in the 30s. Although Hammond got to face Bill O'Reilly I guess.

Between 1900-1939 th only quality/good/decent (90 mphish) new-ball attacks where in tests:

- Larwood/Voce/Bowes
- Gregory/McDonald
- Richardson/Luckwood

While you had individual sppedsters like Cotter, JJ Kotze, Charles Kortwright (unfortunately didn't play any tests).

Thats very poor for over 39 years of cricket. Especially when you consider the amount of quality 90 mph new-ball bowling pairs cricket ha seen since 1945.

Of the pre-war era quicks, only Larwood can be really be compared to to the great post war fast bowlers like Marshall, Lillee, Imran, Trueman, Hadlee, Donald, Ambrose etc etc etc. The rest of them where good fast bowlers, but no one would really call them great.

Thats why when looking @ Hammond record & his ability to potentially adapt to facing 90 mph pace in thse hypotetical world XI, ENG XI, Ashes XI match-ups, although he didn't face any such bowling in tests cricket. One can look @ his record in country cricket vs Larwood in Gloucetershire vs Nottinghamshite matches in the 1920s & 1930s. Check cricinfo you will find he has a superb record againts Larwood in an era when county cricket was just as competitive as test cricket.

 

[KeithParker]

where's steve waugh