The 606v2 all time test XI - n°3

With so far Gavaskar and Hobbs leading the race for the opener spots in our composite XI, the time has come to examine the n°3 spot. I've chosen a list of a few names for you to pick from. However, if your pick isn't on the list, please state and I'll add it to the poll.

bradman

Gotta be Bradman.

Mohammed Yousuf

he batted 4 though didnt he

yeah Yousuf has batted four or five for most of his career, he only batted three in three matches, as his cricinfo stats page shows : clicky

Afraid I'm not going to add him to the poll gb, I can be a bit dictatorial like that at times

cricketfan90

mate why didnt you accept my friends request?are you angry with me for my comment yesterday?if yes then let me clarify it was meant to be a joke.

na mate i didnt realise you made a friend request i will accept it now

Has to be Bradman, although Trott seems to be just as good

didn't put Trott in there as he hasn't been playing long enough, though I believe that by the end of his career he may be worthy of such company

Why not have 3 openers instead of a specialist number 3? Then you can have Hobbs and Gavaskar opening with Hutton at 3, then Bradman at 4. Such a lineup on paper would make all opposition bowlers quake in their boots and give them many sleepless nights!

Madforchelsea

even though bradman is the obvious pick kallis deserves to be in the poll list because he is better than ponting and sanga IMO.

kallis isnt a no3

gboycottnut wrote:Why not have 3 openers instead of a specialist number 3? Then you can have Hobbs and Gavaskar opening with Hutton at 3, then Bradman at 4. Such a lineup on paper would make all opposition bowlers quake in their boots and give them many sleepless nights!

What about Tendulkar? Would you have him in at 5 or not in your side at all?

What about Michael Vaughan as the number 3 batsman?

"What about Tendulkar? Would you have him in at 5 or not in your side at all?"

At 5 or 6, but yes Tendulkar has to be included.

gboycottnut wrote:"What about Tendulkar? Would you have him in at 5 or not in your side at all?"

At 5 or 6, but yes Tendulkar has to be included.

Can't not have the little man in your side.

vaughan wasnt a great with the bat, and tednulakr is a no4

cricketfan90

mate kallis batted at no.3 for most part of his career until Amla came along.

gboycottnut wrote:What about Michael Vaughan as the number 3 batsman?

You would have Vaughan over Bradman?

Kallis has a better record at four to be fair, so was going to put him in the middle-order poll, or maybe the all-rounder one. His record at three is less good than those in the poll.

You could indeed have three openers gb (and I must say I like the way your team would shape up), however I've decided to go with the classical format of two openers, a n°3, two middle-order bats, an all-rounder, a keeper and four bowlers.

I think an all rounder poll would be a good idea.

Kallis is definitley morer of a four than a three though, but his batting record is still incredible for an all rounder.

I'll prob put him in both polls TBH scotland, I'll be doing maybe a poll a day over the next few days. Tomorrow will be the middle-order.

Are you having the all-rounder ahead of the Wicket-Keeper or vice-versa?

Difficult to do a separate poll for batting 3, 4 5 and perhaps 6, as it will depend on the balance of the team. Also, I'm not sure we all know who batted as a specialist 3 and who moved up and down the order, particularly of those batsmen we a picking on stats only. For example, I thought Bradman played mainly as a 4 or 5 and Sobers at 5 or 6 (having made his debut batting at 10) but I may be wrong.

If I am correct though, I;m going for a middle order of:
Viv Richards
Tendulkar
Bradman
Sobers

dummy_half

you can find the records on cricinfo, who have a really excellent stats page (for instance here I looked up players who had batted at three for at least 20 tests and took it from there). I believe n°3 is a specialist position, different from n°4 and n°5 which will be in the same poll. Bradman batted at 3 in 40 of his 52 test matches by the way.

Liam

will depend on who grabs the spots TBH, if say the all-rounder is Sobers and the keeper Knott then clearly Sobers comes in ahead, but if it's say Kapil Dev and Gilchrist I think you'd be justified in having Gilchrist at 6.

gboycottnut wrote:What about Michael Vaughan as the number 3 batsman?

There speaks a true Yorkshireman. Maybe Vaughan is in as a captain?

Bradman

ok Bradman unsurprisingly dominating the poll right now...

cos he is the best

How can anyone vote otherwise MFC?

Bradman's a shoe-in.
However, it is interesing to note that, of those who have scored 1000+ runs batting at 3, the man with the next highest average is the criminally underated Ken Barrington.

Hoggy

Barrington is cursed by one of two things:
1) Coming from the era before most of us were aware of cricket, and when there was little TV coverage
2) Not being a statistical freak like Bradman or having the single massive inning like Hutton or Lara that bring them forward in the public's knowledge.

From what I've heard, Barrington was THE outstanding batsman for England in what was a strong middle order through the 60s. I've heard descriptions of 'a right-handed Gower' when talking about his style and technique. Haven't seen enough footage to know first hand.

Just for a bit of a laugh, I looked at the highest averages among those who've made 1000+ runs in each batting position, which gives you a top 6 of:

H. Sutcliffe (Eng)
B. Mitchell (SA)
D. Bradman (Aus)
S. Ganguly (Ind)
AB De Villiers (SA)
S. Chanderpaul (WI)


Interesting?

No Kallis or Hussey in there? Interesting.. Both men average well over 50 aswell.

Barrington was a superb, gritty player - he had something of a Trott-like reputation for grinding out the runs at the same unchanged, relentless pace. and I seem to recall was once dropped for slow play during one of his marathon innings.

I think he is a fair candidate for an England all time XI -tho' I think probably not for a World XI if he up against Bradman for the No 3 slot...

interesting hoggy, I doubt our world XI batting line-up will look anything like that, which just goes to show: lies, d@mn lies and statistics eh?

corporal, Barrington also played a fair amount of cricket in the middle order, he has an excellent record at n°4, so I'll prob put him in the middle-order poll. I agree he should make England's all-time XI (he'd be in mine).

Corporalhumblebucket wrote:

gboycottnut wrote:What about Michael Vaughan as the number 3 batsman?

There speaks a true Yorkshireman. Maybe Vaughan is in as a captain?

Never in a million years. It has to be the one and only Geoffrey Boycott.

Liam_Main wrote:

gboycottnut wrote:What about Michael Vaughan as the number 3 batsman?

You would have Vaughan over Bradman?

Yep I would as the more Yorkshiremen that are included, the tougher the side will look on paper at least. Also don't forget the claims that Brian Close could bring in terms of guts, bravery and sheer bloodymindedness.

gboycottnut wrote:

Liam_Main wrote:

gboycottnut wrote:What about Michael Vaughan as the number 3 batsman?

You would have Vaughan over Bradman?

Yep I would as the more Yorkshiremen that are included, the tougher the side will look on paper at least. Also don't forget the claims that Brian Close could bring in terms of guts, bravery and sheer bloodymindedness.

Doubt Brian Close would even make an all-time Yorkshire XI. Let alone an all-time world one.