October 25, 2010

Tendulkar only current player in ESPNcricinfo all-time World XI

ESPNcricinfo staff
Four Australians and three West Indians make it to the side. Warne, Gilchrist and Akram other recent players to feature

Sachin Tendulkar is the only current player in ESPNcricinfo's all-time Test World XI, which is dominated by Australians and West Indians, reflecting their pre-eminence in Test cricket over the years.

Shane Warne, Adam Gilchrist and Wasim Akram were the other players from the last two decades to make it to the XI, which featured seven players who made their debuts after 1970.

Four Australians, three West Indians, two Englishmen, an Indian and a Pakistani make up the XI.

Three players were unanimous choices, figuring in the first XIs of each of the 12 members of the jury (each juror was asked to pick a first XI and a second) - Don Bradman, Garry Sobers and Shane Warne, each of whom got the maximum points possible in the exercise, 60. Tendulkar followed with 51 points.

Perhaps the biggest surprise the XI threw up was the gap between Warne and Muttiah Muralitharan, the two leading wicket-takers in cricket history. Murali made it to ESPNcricinfo's World Second XI, tallying 34 points fewer than Warne.

The closest battles were for one of the opening spots and for No. 5. Sunil Gavaskar lost out to Jack Hobbs by one point and George Headley by two to Viv Richards.

Len Hutton (47 points) partners Hobbs at the top. They are followed by Bradman, Tendulkar, Richards and Sobers. While there was no competition to Sobers for the allrounder's spot, Imran Khan (19) narrowly edged out Keith Miller to make it to the Second XI.

Adam Gilchrist beat Alan Knott to the wicketkeeper's spot by eight points. The next closest contender was Kumar Sangakkara, who got nine points.

The bowling positions were all decided by handsome margins. Three of cricket's most highly rated fast bowlers - Dennis Lillee, leading with 48 points, Wasim Akram and Malcolm Marshall (in addition to Sobers, who could bowl left-arm fast, spin and chinamen) - accompany Warne.

Four players figured in either the first or second XIs of each of the 12 jury members - Bradman, Sobers, Warne and Viv Richards. Five players were in 11 - Tendulkar, Akram, Hutton, Gilchrist and Marshall.

The jury comprised one former captain from each of the top Test-playing teams - Ian Chappell, Clive Lloyd, Tony Greig, Duleep Mendis, Ali Bacher, Intikhab Alam, John Wright, Ajit Wadekar - and four cricket historians and writers.

The World XI is the final installment in ESPNcricinfo's all-time XI series, in which all-time sides have been picked for the leading Test teams. The shortlists that the members of the jury picked their World XIs from consisted of the players who made it to the country XIs.

ESPNcricinfo readers were invited to pick their XIs in parallel, and six of the jury's choices made it to the readers' XI: Bradman, Tendulkar, Sobers, Gilchrist, Warne and Akram. Virender Sehwag and Gavaskar were the overwhelming favourites for the opening slots, while Brian Lara edged out Richards for a place in the middle order. The readers went with a two-spin, two-quicks bowling combination - their XI has Warne and Murali bowling in tandem. And Glenn McGrath and Akram comfortably beat competition from all the West Indian bowlers in the shortlist.

"It was only natural that our all-time XI series for the top Test-playing countries should culminate in an all-time World XI," Sambit Bal, editor of ESPNcricinfo, said. "It's the apt finale to what has been hugely successful exercise. Not only have these features been widely read, our readers have participated in huge numbers in picking their own XIs."

"We have taken great care in choosing the jury for the world XI. All the cricketers on the panel have been captains, and are thus well-versed in the business of selecting teams. Also, they have either played alongside, or watched first-hand, a significant number of the nominees."

The World XI: Jack Hobbs, Len Hutton, Don Bradman, Sachin Tendulkar, Viv Richards, Garry Sobers, Adam Gilchrist, Malcolm Marshall, Shane Warne, Wasim Akram, Dennis Lillee

The Second XI: Sunil Gavaskar, Barry Richards, George Headley, Brian Lara, Wally Hammond, Imran Khan, Alan Knott, Bill O'Reilly, Fred Trueman, Muttiah Muralitharan, SF Barnes

Readers' XI: Sunil Gavaskar, Virender Sehwag, Don Bradman, Sachin Tendulkar, Brian Lara, Garry Sobers, Adam Gilchrist, Shane Warne, Wasim Akram, Muttiah Muralitharan, Glenn McGrath

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • bappcric on October 28, 2010, 23:53 GMT

    Tendulkar's selection seems to have caused lot of heartburn to Lara fans. So here are the facts.

    Between 1990 and 2010, the great bowlers' FEARSOME years were as follows - McGrath (1995-2005), Warne(1993- 2006) , Donald ( 1992-2001 ), Waqar(upto 1998), Akram(upto 2000).

    Lara Against Pakistan - upto 2005 ( avg 30, SRT 42 ), after 2005 ( avg 85, SRT 40 ). Against Australia - 1995 to 2005 ( avg 50, SRT 60 ) Against South Africa - 1992 -2001 ( avg 35, SRT 38 ), after 2001 ( avg 70, SRT 38)

    So when the great bowlers were at their peak, SRT had a better record than Lara.

    Hopefully we all will be happy now. But thanks Lara anyway for the great memories. Truthfully, it is silly to be fighting over averages. But that is the point of All-time XI's - isnt it.

  • EverybodylovesSachin on October 28, 2010, 22:53 GMT

    Thanks ESPNCricinfo..for allowing us to post so many comments..You guys did your job so we did..It was fun and lot of people shard their views.. Our comments will be gone maybe today or tomorrow but this exercise by you and by us will be remembered.. I respect everyone's comment and also respect all the Cricket players..That what we love the game of Cricket...and players of Cricket on the field and off the field........Thanks

  • 114_in_final_Six_overs on October 28, 2010, 22:22 GMT

    LOL Hema, I agree with you. This is not 'Mr. Fancy Pants' eleven, this list is for serious cricketers and Imran without pre-ICC days was pretty much free to do what ever he wanted. He himself has admitted using various devices such as soda top etc. Plus in home matches all he had to do is to hit pads to get a wicket thats why his bowling average is better than the rest. Batting average improved because when ever he saw a weaker team he promoted himself up the batting order and when facing WI promoted Miandad to go and face the music.

  • Simmy567 on October 28, 2010, 22:09 GMT

    Imran Khan???? As a captain as well as an allrounder. Should have been an easy pick, because he probably could get in the team purely as a bowler.

  • Hema_Adhikari on October 28, 2010, 21:54 GMT

    Cricket-hopper, that may be so given the clout we indians have (relishing it), however they discarded Waqar Younis and Imran Khan purely on their volition :)

  • Hema_Adhikari on October 28, 2010, 21:52 GMT

    Imran in world eleven is a joke, he simply was not good enough. He did not even get one vote which shows how test captains rank him. And they know their stuff, they have played at the highest level.

    Sachin drives his opponents nuts even off the field :)

  • josepfh77 on October 28, 2010, 21:09 GMT

    idont understand why there is only one westindian pace bowler in both XI.where is ambrose,holding,or garner.one or two more of them should be in one of these XI.westindies had some of the most devastating pace bowlers in history.i completly disagree with some of the pace bowlers pick in these two world XI.is barns, trueman, lillee are not better than ambrose,garner or holding.and glenn mcgrath should be in there too..

  • EverybodylovesSachin on October 28, 2010, 21:05 GMT

    Sachin, Bradman and......................Rest....Let me think about Sobers...maybe I will include him also..to make West Indian fans happy...others NO WAY...............

  • cricketchopper on October 28, 2010, 20:46 GMT

    The voting system was that all 12 jury members were directed to select Sachin and even then one member did not select him. Rest of the team was left on the choice of jury members.

  • BillyCC on October 28, 2010, 20:40 GMT

    Does anyone know how the voting system worked? Is there an article on Cricinfo explaining this? For example, was it similar to how the fans had to do it ie. pick a team configuration, and then vote and then tally up points?

  • bappcric on October 28, 2010, 23:53 GMT

    Tendulkar's selection seems to have caused lot of heartburn to Lara fans. So here are the facts.

    Between 1990 and 2010, the great bowlers' FEARSOME years were as follows - McGrath (1995-2005), Warne(1993- 2006) , Donald ( 1992-2001 ), Waqar(upto 1998), Akram(upto 2000).

    Lara Against Pakistan - upto 2005 ( avg 30, SRT 42 ), after 2005 ( avg 85, SRT 40 ). Against Australia - 1995 to 2005 ( avg 50, SRT 60 ) Against South Africa - 1992 -2001 ( avg 35, SRT 38 ), after 2001 ( avg 70, SRT 38)

    So when the great bowlers were at their peak, SRT had a better record than Lara.

    Hopefully we all will be happy now. But thanks Lara anyway for the great memories. Truthfully, it is silly to be fighting over averages. But that is the point of All-time XI's - isnt it.

  • EverybodylovesSachin on October 28, 2010, 22:53 GMT

    Thanks ESPNCricinfo..for allowing us to post so many comments..You guys did your job so we did..It was fun and lot of people shard their views.. Our comments will be gone maybe today or tomorrow but this exercise by you and by us will be remembered.. I respect everyone's comment and also respect all the Cricket players..That what we love the game of Cricket...and players of Cricket on the field and off the field........Thanks

  • 114_in_final_Six_overs on October 28, 2010, 22:22 GMT

    LOL Hema, I agree with you. This is not 'Mr. Fancy Pants' eleven, this list is for serious cricketers and Imran without pre-ICC days was pretty much free to do what ever he wanted. He himself has admitted using various devices such as soda top etc. Plus in home matches all he had to do is to hit pads to get a wicket thats why his bowling average is better than the rest. Batting average improved because when ever he saw a weaker team he promoted himself up the batting order and when facing WI promoted Miandad to go and face the music.

  • Simmy567 on October 28, 2010, 22:09 GMT

    Imran Khan???? As a captain as well as an allrounder. Should have been an easy pick, because he probably could get in the team purely as a bowler.

  • Hema_Adhikari on October 28, 2010, 21:54 GMT

    Cricket-hopper, that may be so given the clout we indians have (relishing it), however they discarded Waqar Younis and Imran Khan purely on their volition :)

  • Hema_Adhikari on October 28, 2010, 21:52 GMT

    Imran in world eleven is a joke, he simply was not good enough. He did not even get one vote which shows how test captains rank him. And they know their stuff, they have played at the highest level.

    Sachin drives his opponents nuts even off the field :)

  • josepfh77 on October 28, 2010, 21:09 GMT

    idont understand why there is only one westindian pace bowler in both XI.where is ambrose,holding,or garner.one or two more of them should be in one of these XI.westindies had some of the most devastating pace bowlers in history.i completly disagree with some of the pace bowlers pick in these two world XI.is barns, trueman, lillee are not better than ambrose,garner or holding.and glenn mcgrath should be in there too..

  • EverybodylovesSachin on October 28, 2010, 21:05 GMT

    Sachin, Bradman and......................Rest....Let me think about Sobers...maybe I will include him also..to make West Indian fans happy...others NO WAY...............

  • cricketchopper on October 28, 2010, 20:46 GMT

    The voting system was that all 12 jury members were directed to select Sachin and even then one member did not select him. Rest of the team was left on the choice of jury members.

  • BillyCC on October 28, 2010, 20:40 GMT

    Does anyone know how the voting system worked? Is there an article on Cricinfo explaining this? For example, was it similar to how the fans had to do it ie. pick a team configuration, and then vote and then tally up points?

  • EverybodylovesSachin on October 28, 2010, 20:29 GMT

    caribman87 --I DO NOT AGREE WITH YOU...Sachin has everything. the names you mention has something more or less not everything.... I do not honestly consider Lara or Viv are the greats..Bradman and Sobers YES...

  • hatrick26 on October 28, 2010, 19:57 GMT

    ..contd. Lara's poor record in India is not a co-incidence. I believe that he has a weakness in slow wickets (not spin bowling). He plays spin very good as evidenced by his handling Murali but when the ball does not come to bat, he simply cannot grind it out, adapt and play, which fellow greats could do. So by all this swashbuckling innings logic, Sehwag should be better than Lara because he scores much faster than Lara & could even score 500, if he stays at the grease. Someone putting Lara behind Don is objective and an opinion but the facts up dont hold up if you just want to hold on to 153* as a hat to hang on. Its like India was holding onto 175* from Kapil (truly great innings) but those fans were holding onto that for dear life and he didnt play anything great before and after.

  • amitava0112 on October 28, 2010, 19:51 GMT

    greatest destroyer & match winner after Viv..17)Steve Waugh:remarkable career ..probs with short pitch stuff but like AB..savour of Aus batting on many occasions..took on Ambrose at his best. 18)Javed Miandad-Pak man of crisis..pocesses lot of strokes & can win games v all attacks singlehandedly 19)Martin Crowe-Best Kiwi Batsman & handled very good attacks during his time.20)Aravinda D Silva: probably SLs best batsman..plently of strokes grt v quality attacks..wins imp games..1996 World cup final ..century & MOM...other players who deserves mention are: Neil Harvey,Matt Hayden,Sangakarra,Mahela Jayavardane (a quality player),Trumper,Barrington,Inzamam(pak matchwinner & grt v pace), Zaheer Abbas, Greendge, Laxman(shd be at at 21 for his rec v Aus best team of his era),Mohinder Amarnath (grt rec v WI & Aus),Vishwanath,Ian Chappell(did well v WI pace),G Gooch(grt rec v WI best team of his era has won matches v them),Lloyd,Gilchrist(at his best in big games-a destroyer of attacks),Majid.

  • hatrick26 on October 28, 2010, 19:38 GMT

    It is just a myth perpertated by - I dunno who - that Lara has these match winning scores. Except for the truly great 153*, I dont any see anything other than these huge scores that dont go anywhere. 277 -draw, 375 -draw, 400* -painful draw (when he could have declared end of 2nd day instead of batting 3rd day). I just see this huge scores where he perhaps hoggs the strike and hardly anyone else scores ( may be he had to protect which is fine with me). Dont get me wrong, all these might have been super innings, swash buckling, whatever you might want to call it but it did not win/save any matches in times of crisis and in fact even prevented one from winning (400*) when WI was trailing 0-3 in the series. Do you really think an Oz team would put up with this nonsense of batting for record well into the 3rd day when they were the one trailing? He has scored 2 100s batting 4th - one in loss and the other one was great(153*)...cont.d

  • amitava0112 on October 28, 2010, 19:34 GMT

    ..in most series during this period..Borders high point 521 runs(av 74) v WI attack in WI..Viv,Greg,Sachin did not have to handle so much pressure..had he been a more talented player he would hv ranked at least 5-6 steps higher.13) Brian Lara:another player who played under intense stress in a weaker WI team..won matches on his own v Aus..a talented strokeplayer..ranked lower than Border as AB played better quality attacks during his time..also Lara is not a grt player of fast short deliveries as Donald,Shoaib wud testify.14)Ponting:grt player of fast bowling..wins imp games in crunch situations but less effective v spin. 15) Dravid:a quality performer..saved & won games for India..golden period 2001-06 16)Sehwag: True less quality bowling attacks now..but what an amazing player & amazing consistency for such an attacking player..can be suseptible to short pitch bowling but a destroyer of pace & spin..309(v pak:Shoaib),195(v Aus v Lee),317(v SA v Steyn Ntini,Morkel), 293(v SL Murli)...

  • bks123 on October 28, 2010, 19:29 GMT

    @cricketchopper..Abt the mumbai match you only gave one criteria...all players r in their top form...now in that case you need to mention ball tampering will be allowed or not...If not and if india bats first the score will be 500/0 in 1st day itself...sehwag will score 300 in 1st day and gavaskar will score 185...15 will be extra...then guess what!!!!if sehwag gets out in the 2nd day..dravid will come and then no fall of wickets...india will declare at 1000/1 after two and half days and kumble and co. will bowl pak out thrice in 2.5 days...

  • amitava0112 on October 28, 2010, 19:18 GMT

    5)Greame Pollock..regarded as greatest LH bat by many..strong player & can win games on his own with big knocks..sadly a short career.a supreme player vs all attacks as we have heard. 6)Gavaskar:most tough to dismiss..solid technique.a saver rather than winner of games..grt record v pace attacks all over the world.7)Hutton-another historically solid opener v all attacks on covered pitches 8)Hammond..regarded as best batsman from England 9) G Headley-regarded as black bradman-short career like pollock 10) Greg Chappell:elegance personified..solid records vs all attacks..win series v WI attack in 1975 with his batting..2nd best to Viv in WSC ckt. 11)Barry Richards :cud hv been one of best all time grt openers..had he played more tests but supreme success in WSC ckt 12)Allan Border:like Sunny saviour of matches but won some games too (v WI pace in triseries'84 127no).was Aus best batter 1979-89..battled under intense pressure during worse times of Aus ckt vs grt bowlers & was top scorer..

  • amitava0112 on October 28, 2010, 19:00 GMT

    crickethopper has made a good effort to analyse best batsmen..My order of best batsmen as under: 1) Bradman-no debates here..grt avg,played all types of bowlers on uncovered wkts & hardly affected by law of avgs 2)Sobers-long career-also had to do bowling.played well vs all attacks in all conditions.some solid performances vs Lillee at his fastest in Aus.3)Sachin-no joke to sustain a long career of 22 yrs & still counting with so much cricket these days..amazing consistency & records 30000 intl runs & almst 100 intl tons.great technique..has been amazing last 2 yrs winning crunch games..something which he failed during a major part of his career(only critisism about him). 4)Viv Richards-almst equal to Sachin..a destroyer of fast bowling on fast tracks & grt vs spin as well..won imp matches..WC79-138no,ODI 84 ,184no v eng..best batsman durng WSC ckt 78-79..but had to handle much less pressure than Sachin,Sunny,Border,Lara etc since he was part of a grt WI side with such a hostile attack

  • bks123 on October 28, 2010, 18:43 GMT

    @cricketchopper and others...Enough of these discussions and long lists...Time to work...No more time waste...No more list...Save some time to enjoy the coming series IND vs SA. BTW, I was thinking if this WXI list were made just after the SA series then sachin may have got 58 votes (including I. chappel's 3 points :D..:P) or may be 55 excluding Ian's vote...And guys are you following SA vs PAK T20...I feel sorry, but its a pain to watch PAK batsmen even in T20 now a days, forget abt test...No disrespect...they are wasting the efforts of their good quality bowling attack..I guess they need to field lahore badshah team in T20...

  • 114_in_final_Six_overs on October 28, 2010, 18:18 GMT

    Sachin Tendulkar and Bradman are only two certainties. Rest of the spot is up for grabs. Imran would be lucky to get into ASIA 11 where Kapil and Vaas would do much better in properly 'supervised and televised' (with at least 24 cameras) match.

  • harshthakor on October 28, 2010, 17:55 GMT

    Personally,I feel Tendulkar deserves his place but in test match cricket with his remarkable flair Brian Lara could replace him or Viv Richards,with his remarkable ability to compile mammoth scores at such a breathtaking scoring rate and brillianace in a crisis.At his peak Viv was better than Sachin or Lara in 1976-1981,particularly in the 1977-78 Packer supertests.No batsman changed the complexion of a match to such an extent.Statistically,in combined Cricket Sachin is the greatest batsman,being the most complete.Still in test Cricket he was not the best of match-winners or the best batsman in a crisis,or the most talented.Gary Sobers perhaps won all those accolades. With his mastery on wet pitches,I rate Jack Hobbs ,the closest to Bradman.Wasim Akram,the greatest left arm bowler ever,would nor have been as effective in the team as Imran Khan,Richard Hadlee or Glen Mcgrath.

  • harshthakor on October 28, 2010, 17:45 GMT

    I want to remind critiques of Tendulkar that he has played his greatest innings against Allan Donald,Wasim Akram ,Glen Mcgrath and Shane Warne.No great batsman has ever been as consistent in both form sof the game and he poseses every ingredient-great temperament and technique,outstanding consistency ,ability to save and win matches,ability to perform outstandingly in any conditions against any type of bowling,and perform in a crisis.Allan Donald,Wasim Akram ,Shane Warne claim that Sachin is the best batsman they have ever bowled too.

    Upto 2009,Brian Lara was ahead on test rating,with his brilliant record in a crisis and his brilliant mammoth scores.Lara played for one of the weakest teams abd virtually bie the entire pressure.However Sachin in the first half of his career faced more pressure than any great batsman ever ,performing outstandingly on the bouncy Perth track in 1992.Sachin's brilliant performances last 2years decided the issue in his favour.

  • realcriclov on October 28, 2010, 17:25 GMT

    from realcriclov Interesting choices and readers' comments.much acrimony has been generated possibly because only first two teams(crosscountry) have been selelcted out of a pool of 88 (countrywise) playersSince all-time greats are beyond national consideration a fresh list of 88 players should be drawn up .To remove temporal and conditional bias a crosscountry team should be drawn up from each generation of test players as follows :upto 1910,1911-1930,1931-1950,1951-1970.1971-1980,1981-1990,1991-2000,2001-2010Therafter all players should be ranked in their respective categories viz openers,middle order ,all rounders wcs ,pace bowlers and spinners. based on career stats 70%+qual aspects 30%.Therafter to make it more interesting match the ranks in reverse order -the top batsmen in each category with the lowest ranked bowlers in each category balanced by the best allrounder and the lowest ranked wc r .we couldhave 8 balances teams ack.most greats will be represented, .howz that ?

  • cricketchopper on October 28, 2010, 16:53 GMT

    10) Ricky Ponting, Scored like Bradman during 2000-20005.

    SPECIAL MENTIONS: Ian Chappel, Kim Hughes, Asif Iqbal. All these had talent not less then Bradman but they lacked temperament and love for records and runs.

    TEAM PLAYERS: Border, Miandad,

    Batsman with most strokes in cricket history: Zaheer Abbas Most stylish batsman of cricket history: Majid Khan

  • cricketchopper on October 28, 2010, 16:45 GMT

    8)Sachin Tendulkar. The real gentleman of game of cricket. His personal character filled with humbleness and living at low profile makes him justly beloved of half of the world. Career wise he has been most consistant. No joke to keep interest in the game during 22 years. In 1996 world cup against Australia he played the best innings of his life. Nowadys it has become very difficult to send him back to pavellion. 9)Martin Crow. Most accomplished batsman I every seen. Due to short span of his peak period he could not increase his average and run. His injury shortened his Career otherwise he would be Second best after Bradman.

  • cricketchopper on October 28, 2010, 16:27 GMT

    5) Sunil Gavask - the most diffiulct batsman send back to pavellion. Played against Half of the greatest bowlers of history with equal confidence like Holding,Garner,Roberts,Croft,Marshal,Lillee,Thomson,Ashley Mallett, Imran,Qadir,Hadlee,Snow,Willis, Bothom. 6) Barry Richards, In Kery Peker he outclassed most of the great batsmen against best bowlers of the world. 7)Greig Chappel. Played against quality bowling with confidence grace and good scording on dangerous wickets. Was equally capable to score against spinners.

  • Truecricketbuff on October 28, 2010, 16:21 GMT

    Great. So, all these judges most ex captains and all of whom have watched cricket for around 60 yrs are wrong...and a bunch of kids in here, with not a clue of even what the stats bases are actually showing, and who have probably watched cricket for max.20 yrs are right....Great!

  • anikbrad on October 28, 2010, 16:20 GMT


  • cricketchopper on October 28, 2010, 16:16 GMT

    Now, I tell you all who are the greatest batsmen of all times: 1) Bradman, he played against some quality bowlers but not against a bunch of quality bowlers in similar inngs, but he played on bouncy and uncovered wickets with average of 100 which no one can do even todays bating wickets against todays medicore bowlers.2)Brian Lara, he played few best innings of history. He was capable to play quality stroke consecutively. When he was in-form, it seemed as if a ghost is playing and no bowlers can sent him back. He was capable to win matches. During last 35 years I never saw a batsman like him. 3)Vivian Richards - He was the best against lethal fast bowlers on bouncy wickets. His average is not high because he tended get board (according to Imran, stated by Ian Chappel in Legends of cricket). He never played for records. 4) Gary Sobers. He was aggressive, confident and scoring machine during an era when batting averages were low. I have not seen him but have heard his greatness. ......

  • Gulshan_Grover on October 28, 2010, 16:09 GMT

    "Sachin Tendulkar is the only reason, Wasim and Waqar had to retire from International cricket. Remember the match between India vs. Pakistan in World Cup 2003, Sachin blasted and destroyed both of the bowlers and after that match they both got kicked out from their team. So think before speak any non-sense." You can add Abdul Qadir to the list as well. Waqar was finished by Jadeja in 1996 banglore world cup match and Sehwag took care of Saqlain in Multan.

    Career Jeopardy: Qadir by Sachin Akram by Sachin Waqar by Jadeja Saqlain by Sehwag Asif, Amir, Butt by Indian Bookies :)

  • Truecricketbuff on October 28, 2010, 16:03 GMT

    The only 2 certainties in any World XI are Tendulkar and Bradman.......the rest can be debated.

  • Truecricketbuff on October 28, 2010, 16:00 GMT

    Tendulkar.......Bradman......................................................................The rest.

  • cricketchopper on October 28, 2010, 15:59 GMT

    My Question to Sachin Lovers - These are ESPN All time Xis of India and Pakistan. Honestly analyse who is going to win a test match being played in Mumbai. INDIAN XI: Sehwag, Gavaskar,Dravid,Tendulkar,Vijay,Vino,Dhoni, Kapil,Kumble,Srinath,Persanna. PAKISTAN XI: Hanif,Saeed,Zaheer,Miandad,Inzi, Imran, Rashid Latif, Waseem,Qadir,Fazal Mehmood,Waqar.


  • on October 28, 2010, 14:36 GMT

    All selections are subject to criticism and the elevens selected are no exception. Ok let me grant the teams selected by the jury are the best. I have now come up witha team that in my opinion would make the World XI grovel( unlike tony Greig my team has the wherwithal to back my words with action) My team Geoff Boycott Gordon Greenidge R Dravid G R Vishvanath Clive Lloyd (c) J Kallis I Botham Rodney Marsh (w/k) M Holding A Qadir E A S Prasanna 12 th man J Rhodes Reserves Derek Underwood Jeff Thompson Curtley Ambrose ( who will get Tendulya out more often than not)

    I am sure some computer geek can simulate match and pitch conditions but my team can play on any surface anywhere. On uncovered pitches , drying wickets underwood will come in place of Prasanna and the match would be over in a jiffy. Murali might have taken 800 wkts and Warne 700 but Prasanna and Qadir are in my opinion craftier and deadlier. Let the games begin

  • Cricket_Raj on October 28, 2010, 14:00 GMT

    @Meety...Saching played more innings after Akram ret. In case he also played more when he is was around. Compare both stats and then ask me a question. You can also compare many things on Cricinfo website...before asking just check the stats and verify. Also Lara took a break from ccricket when all the bowlers are at their prime and then came back and scored heavly. Testimony to any batsman is to ask the bowlers who they have faced and 90% will rate Tendulkar above Lara and that will end all the comparisions..I only remember Murli rating Lara above SRT. The rest rate Tendulkar above all other players. I think there are couple of ex-players who rate Lara above SRT and u know who. You know why they rate himabove SRT coz they cannt resist SRT

  • caribman87 on October 28, 2010, 13:53 GMT


  • SuperSharky on October 28, 2010, 11:07 GMT

    To JigneshPatel_007 :Posted by JigneshPatel_007 on (October 27 2010, 14:46 PM GMT) Graeme Hick and Mark Ramprakash would feel proud to hear you compare them to the Great Barry Richards.

  • TheOnlyEmperor on October 28, 2010, 9:06 GMT

    @ CRICINFO : Why has this article been moved out of the cricinfo homepage? Just because it has 1006 comments? I think cricinfo must allow the comments to pour into this article, by keeping it on the front page, at least until the next test match starts and we have an article celebrating Sachin's 50 centuries! Is there a special celebration planned? Couldn't we have a special Sachin link with ALL of Sachin's Test and ODI records in one place! I guarantee that it would be the most visited section of this website and a good revenue spinner for cricinfo. ;)

  • Nayeem_Kohir on October 28, 2010, 8:43 GMT

    The greatest batsmen in test cricket 1. Don Bradman 2. Brian Lara 3. Wally Hammond 4. Vivian Richard 5. Jack Hobbs 6. Virender Sehwag 7. Javed Miandad 8. Greg Chappel 9. George Headley 10. Adam Gilchrist 11. Sunil Gavaskar 12. Sachin Tendulkar.

    The greatest batsmen in one-day cricket 1.Vivian Richards 2. Yuvraj Singh 3. Michael Bevan 4. Adam Gilchrist 5. Brian Lara 6. Javed Miandad 7.Inzimam-ul-Haq 8. Sanath Jaysurya 9. Dhoni. 10. Zaheer Abbas 11. Arvinda Desilva 12. Sachin Tendulkar

  • kirksland on October 28, 2010, 6:21 GMT

    Finally just a composite of how I would have selected the teams. Len Hutton, Sunil Gavaskar, Don Bradman, Brian Lara, Sachin Tendulkar, Garry Sobers, Adam Gilchrist, Imran Khan, Malcolm Marshall, Shane Warne, Glenn Mcgrath.

    Barry Richards, Jack Hobbs, Viv Richards, Wally Hammond, Greg Chappell, Jacques Kallis, Allan Knott, Richard Hadlee, Curtly Ambrose, Dennis Lille, Muttiah Muralitharan.

    Herbert Sutcliffe, Virender Sehwag, Ricky Ponting, George Headley, Graeme Pollock, Les Ames, Keith Miller, Wasim Akram, Michael Holding, Bill O'Reilly, Allan Donald.

    Gordon Greenidge, Arthur Morris, Rahul Dravid, Denis Compton, Clyde Walcott, Javed Miandad, Ian Botham, Joel Garner, Fred Trueman, Jim Laker, Waqar Younis.

    It would be great to find a way to get these teams to compete againts each other and see what the outcome would be.

  • harshthakor on October 28, 2010, 4:04 GMT

    Remember Lara,Hadlee,Mcgrath,Barry Richards are just mised out.Lara ,was more destructive than Tendulkar,having a greater stike rate and greater prowess.Barry Richards,with his devastating strokeplay would have been the greatest opener and a great match-winner had he played official cricket as in Packer Cricket he played like a champion,overshadowing Viv Richards.Mcgrath had devastating control and statistics but remember did not have Lillee or Marshall's agression and nersatality.Mcgrath did not equal Lillee's 5 wickets per test or Marshall's phenomenal strike rtae of 46.7 balls per wicket.Lillee tok 7 ,10 wicket halls,incontrast to Mcgrath's 3.Infact to me if it was stats then Hadlee was the greatest pace bowler.

    Tendulkar brilliantly played Wasim Akram,Allan Donald and Shane Warne who rate him the best batsman they have bolwed to and on the fastest wicket at Perth scored his best century,in 1992.In a pure test 11 Lara may nose out Viv and Sachin.

  • hatrick26 on October 28, 2010, 3:24 GMT

    @SFGoldenGate...I understand your point about including minnows but I can do cherry picking numbers like that same way with Lara. If you could count the same # of innings when both of them played- 233 inn@141 Tests for Sachin,he scored about 11,400 runs at higher avg. than Lara ( 232 innings 11,950 runs) but for a batsman that good, he is pretty easy to dismiss as evidenced by just 6 not outs. A comparable batsman at 1 drop - Ponting has more than 20 NO. Dont you think that counts some-where? Lara is one of the few batsmen who has that less NOs for a guy who played that many tests ( only Gooch/Atherton had similar NOs numbers). You could argue me as cherry picking but thats what you did. Personally, I am okay with Lara in First XI but not at the expense of SRT but his country man Sir Viv (strictly from #s wise(tests)- Viv's are ordinary compared to his World XI team mates). But I always felt that Lara has weakness on slow pitches (not spin bowling)where ball do not come to the bat.

  • Meety on October 28, 2010, 2:58 GMT

    @ SFGoldenGate - true. Problem is the SRT fanatics won't listen. IMHO Lara & Tendulkar belong on the same shelf - it would be splitting hairs as to who was better. I think Lara was more talented, but I think SRT learned how to score runs when he wasn't in form - see SRTs 200+ against Oz @ the SCG about 8 years ago. He was out of form - McGrath was all over him, (McGrath didn't play in this Test), SRT didn't play a scoring shot between mid on & cover point. He decided it was too risky to play cover drives & shelved one of the best scoring shots in the game & still got a double ton. That is real will power. Lara on the other hand never bowed to form or time & played primarily the same way his entire career. I think Punter could learn from SRT - he is playing like he thinks Lara (re: Hook shot), he should shelve the hook/pull.

  • Meety on October 28, 2010, 2:47 GMT

    @Cricket_Raj - mate your comments about Lara lifting his average after Akram had retired is a massive double edged sword. Lara played 4 yrs after Akram? - How many years have Tendulkar played after him? Not very clever hey.

  • Meety on October 28, 2010, 2:37 GMT

    @TheOnlyEmperor - the more I read from you the more I think you must be 13years old and have a man crush on SRT. In 1948 the Don was 40 years old & Test matches had not been played for most of the previous 8yrs. The Don was basically in retirement but only played because it would be a great boost to a UK still recovering from WWII. Then you go onto say that various sides don't count that he did play against - you are clearly so biased your opinion is not worth considering & you do genuine SRT fans a major disservice. The fact is Oz v Eng was the pinnacle of cricket at the time. If you look at how competitive South Africa are in so many sports, and have for a long time, could it be that South Africa used to get hammered in Tests because Eng & Oz were so much better. Remember that prior to India playing Test cricket they had 50 yrs of near first class exposure, so they weren't completly useless.

  • Meety on October 28, 2010, 2:24 GMT

    @JigneshPatel - you are just commenting on half the story re: Umpiring Technology. I wonder if that is a guilty conscious - LOL! If the technology can decide when you are out, it also can decide when you are not out - particularly with bat/pads for LBW. All up the technology is neutral but could in fact favour the batsmen as the onus is on benefit of the doubt. The batsmen can use it when they believe they are not out. @Adeel-Shehzad - what rot re" Gilchrest. To say over a long test career a player averaged 47 from luck is really stupid. You show a lack of respect mate. Dhoni is not even a better wicket keeper than Gilly was, this is acknowledged by a lot of Indian experts too. There is no question that Gilly was NOT the greatest w/k ever, the sum of his parts got him selected. It could be argued his batting is not required when you have a top 3 like Hobbs/Hutton/Bradman.

  • whatever007 on October 28, 2010, 1:03 GMT

    IVA Richards was my childhood hero, but the fact of the matter is Brian Lara is better...anyway you look, describe or compare it, he is a better batsman. Tendulkar, for all his greatness has never won SERIES by the shear force of his blade. Lara has done that on numerous occasions. There is no doubt the Sachin is a truely wonderful player and one of the best of all time, but to say he is better than Lara is nothing but Indian cricket fan passion.

  • mak102480 on October 28, 2010, 0:33 GMT

    @SFGoldenGate: When did I ever say I was insecure about Sachin? I was just pointing out some facts and objective arguments - I thought that was what this comments section is for. Of course, everybody is entitled to their opinion but cannot be with blanket statements like "no imran, no world XI", "world XI incomplete without greenidge", "SRT doesn't belong", etc...tell me WHY? That's what I was doing - telling them WHY? As I said in one of my posts, even the all-time TENTH XI is going to be filled with great, great talent so you can't really go wrong with any of these picks. I love cricket and I follow it with a passion - and as a matter of fact, Lara is one of my top 3 fav batsman (along with Sachin and Viv - and Sehwag, and Gilchrist to round out the top 5 - not best, just favorite). I am of the new generation but I love cricket history and I know my cricket history.

  • Jaggadaaku on October 28, 2010, 0:12 GMT

    @ BillyCC, Well, other batsmen also can repeat this if they would become "Sachin Tendulkar". But that is not possible because no one can place their foot in Sachin's boots. Did any of those first 11 batsmen of "Meety's" team, made 200+ in single inning at the age of 38 years old. If anyone made 200+ @ age of 38, I am sure they also can repeat like Sachin did if those batsmen had the opportunities. But at the age of 38, they did not make any double century in single innings. So, the bottom line is - Sachin is the greatest player in Cricket, and the greatest player always remains the greatest despite anyone commented bad about him. My previous comment was the reply of Meety's comment, which was very offensive. I know every batsmen are great in their own techniques, skills and ways. We cannot compare them to each other. But Meety said Sachin is the 12th men in his team.

  • Jaggadaaku on October 27, 2010, 23:38 GMT

    @ Samantha Rab, You are right Wasim and Waqar did not quit, but they been kicked out from the squad after that match. You said about Fernando, Who is Fernando? Fernando, the bowler has been appear and disappear all the time in Srilankan team. He did not even make his place permanently in any format of srilankan international team yet. Your Fernando started his career in the year of 2000 and he is not officially retired yet, however; he has played only 34 tests and 139 ODIs in this 10 years of his entire career. You also live in the fantasy world where bridges to no where like Ian Chapple and CricketChopper. Read my comment again, I didn't say Wasim and Waquar quit. They have been kicked out.

  • Bhatin on October 27, 2010, 22:31 GMT

    For all those making idiotic comments about Don Bradman, read this :- "Had Bradman played in modern era, he would not have been as successful as he was. There are so many better bowlers around. He would have played ok but not as well as he was. Thats what many people feel.What do you think Harold ??". The question was put to none other than Harold Larwood.. I believe everyone knows whom he was. Larwood replied, "Thank God, I lost my eyes before I have to read something as stupid as this about Don..!!" Remember these comments are coming from Harold Larwood, the main weapon in Bodyline series for Douglas Jardine. Facing bodyline tactics Bradman managed avg of 56 in that series which modern players do no manage over entire career. And for all who say Bradman played only against England, Bradman had a full series in South Africa and where he was virtually unbeatable. South African players after seeing bradman leaving from a dinner commented, "Oh.. We had seen Don's back finally..!!!"

  • on October 27, 2010, 22:12 GMT

    My Eleven; Sunil Gavaskar Virendra Sehawag George Hadley Brian Lara Ricky Ponting Alan Knott Ian Botham Imran Khan Kapil Dev Curtley Ambrose Murlidharn

  • SFGoldenGate on October 27, 2010, 21:39 GMT

    @ Mohan Lal, No Man. I am not insecured about Lara. The point I am trying to make is that people are just telling the same thing again and again that SRT is the greatest. What I meant is that true greats does not required to be proven every moment. Sachin is great even if you do not write a single line about him. Someone explained that Sachin scored 20 hundreds in winning cause compared to Lara's 8. Here is one catch, among the 20 hundreds 8 of them came against minnows like Bangladesh and Zimbabwe. Sachin scored 820 tuns @ 136 against BD in 7 tests and 918 runs @ 76 against Zim in 9 matches. On the other hand Lara played only 2 test against BD (173 @ 86, 1 hundred) and 2 tests against Zim (222 @ 55, 1 hundred). Dont you think Sachin's average was boosted by this. And almost 1700 more runs came against the minnows. Anyway, even when Lara retired he had the most runs playing less test at that time compared to Sachin. I think both of them deserved to be in the first 11.

  • EverybodylovesSachin on October 27, 2010, 20:52 GMT

    Breaking NEWS----ESPN FANS EMOTIONAL XI thrash ESPN FANS REALISTIC AND LOGICAL XI -by huge margin--Key emotion factor was Sachin..-- ESPN FANS EMOTIONAL XI kept No1 Ranking. ESPN FANS REALISTIC AND LOGICAL XI fall below Bangladesh...ESPN FANS REALISTIC AND LOGICAL XI 's - Reality and Logic did not work...

  • BillyCC on October 27, 2010, 20:05 GMT

    JigneshPatel, would like to explore your theory that "if any of your first 11 batsmen would have played the matches that Sachin has played, then they would lose their place from the average of 50+ batsmen list". I certainly think that Tendulkar's longevity cements him as one of the greatest ever. However, there were calls for him to be dropped during his lean patch three to four years ago. The selectors gave him more opportunities and he responded with his highest averages of his career. As you say, he got better with age. This means that other batsman can also repeat this, if they have the desire and the opportunity. Usually the selectors take away the opportunity even if the desire is still there.

  • Hema_Adhikari on October 27, 2010, 19:50 GMT

    Hey Crickechopper< whats the score PAK_SA. Did you guys lose second 20-20 as well? All the best.

  • 114_in_final_Six_overs on October 27, 2010, 19:45 GMT

    "Sachin Tendulkar is the only reason, Wasim and Waqar had to retire from International cricket. Remember the match between India vs. Pakistan in World Cup 2003, Sachin blasted and destroyed both of the bowlers and after that match they both got kicked out from their team. So think before speak any non-sense."

    You can add Abdul Qadir to the list as well. Waqar was finished by Jadeja in 1996 banglore world cup match and Sehwag took care of Saqlain in Multan.

  • vatshy on October 27, 2010, 19:43 GMT

    No Murali is surprising if you look at his records but not if you look at his country. He has picked 113 wkts in 18 matches played in Eng, NZ and SA at 21.52 runs per wkt. Corresponding figures for Warne are 239 in 43 at 22.41. This shows even in so called 'unhelpful' pitches Murali was better than Warne marginally. It is not Murali's fault that SL played less matches gainst these countries. The players from Australia, England get more hype than others. Had Murali been Indian, English or Australian he would have been automatic choice. And yes I am not a Lankan.

  • on October 27, 2010, 19:36 GMT

    @SFGoldenGate Hope 'you are insecure about Lara's position' not being the reason you responded to my comments.Hope the 'magical moments' comment is not the part of such insecure feeling too.I just expressed my objection against those blind SRT haters and tried to claim why SRT is a deserving candidate.That's all.I too is an ardent fan of those magical moments of Lara.But more than that not even a single 100(let alone those magical moments) against the 2 Ws, Donald & Kumble in INDIA is a 'huge hole' in my opinion which reflects a lot more than the magical moments.The core of the matter is this.When Lara gets going he is in the next level to SRT.But SRT scores over him in ensuring that he can be successful in a lot more varied match conditions that Lara.

  • EverybodylovesSachin on October 27, 2010, 19:14 GMT

    Sachin can play like Viv Richards and Sehwag anytime even Ravindra Jadeja also can do that......But they cannot play like Sachin.....

  • cricketchopper on October 27, 2010, 18:38 GMT

    ESPN FANS EMOTIONAL XI; EverybodylovesSachin, Cricket.Buff, Ji,gnesh_Patel007, BillyCC, Gulshan_Grover, TheOnlyEmperor, Martin_Hooks, CricFan24, crickbuff11, nlambda, zxaar


    Cricketchopper (captain) ..... seeking other players.

  • EverybodylovesSachin on October 27, 2010, 17:46 GMT

    It is final Viv Richards played like Virendar Sehwag...Iresponsible many times and game saved and won by other players in the team...Now Sehwag is not in the eleven WHY Viv Richards is...Because he played 20 years ago...If he had been playing today they would not have included in the team....

  • ThugbyFan on October 27, 2010, 15:42 GMT

    SEHWAG? are you kidding me. He was dropped from the Indian team in 2007 because his reckless slogging kept exposing Dravid to the fast bowlers. He is way too iffy to be spoken of in the same breath as the other contenders here. Sadly Barry Richards didn't play more test cricket as he appeared to be one of the greatest opening bats, but he wasn't around long enough. And dredging up Hobbs and Hutton over Greenidge and Gasvaskar, sheesh, The G's have it over the H's here, boys.

  • on October 27, 2010, 15:38 GMT

    @JigneshPatel_007 I can only laugh at ur thinking, according to ur thinking tendulkar should have been retire when fernando kicke him and team india out of the competition in wc 2007, but unlike wasim and waqar he didn't quit... let see what he does special in his 6th attemp in 2011, so far world cup is like 'graps are sour'

  • on October 27, 2010, 15:20 GMT

    @ JigneshPatel_007 and some of my other indian friends Tendulkar is probably the best batsmen the cricketing world has ever seen or probably will ever see but honestly waism and war are legends in their own stature, Pakistan never produced a batsman of tendulkars caliber but india never produced a bowler like the two Ws either, so my friend zip it, when you say Sachin Tendulkar is the only reason, Wasim and Waqar had to retire from International cricket"

    You can not compare the best surgeon in the world and the best marathon runner in the world in the same sentence, they both have their own class

  • nipo10847 on October 27, 2010, 15:07 GMT

    No murali? What a joke! If Murali was an Indian or Australian his place would have been as certain as Bradman's. Murali is the hands down greatest match winner of all time. He is the Bradman of bowling. Or if he existed before Bradman, Bradman would be known as Murali of batting. Murali is THAT good. And I am not even a srilankan.

  • Jaggadaaku on October 27, 2010, 14:46 GMT

    Barry Richards has played only 4 test matches, but got a place in World 2nd XI. What a rediculous way to show the stupidity by idiot juries. If they wanna pick by players first class averages and records, Greme Hick and Mark Ramprakash are the better choices than Barry Richards.

  • SuperSharky on October 27, 2010, 14:39 GMT

    I totally agree with camcove "Posted by camcove on (October 27 2010, 11:11 AM GMT)" I'm glad to see Jack Hobbs made The World XI and that George Headley are at least in The Second XI with Barry Richards and Wally Hammond. And 'The Three Little Masters' Bradman, Tendulkar and Gavaskar would shine on most of the pitches all over the world. It's sad that Graeme Pollock isn't mentioned. And Batting coach and overall coach has to be WG Grace with Frederick Spofforth as bowling coach (to keep the flame firing).

  • SuperSharky on October 27, 2010, 14:26 GMT

    The World XI and the The Second XI with the Readers XI, are all great legends. But we do need a 'The Third XI' and 'The Fourth XI'. The thing is, if I can think of a legend that needs to be in the Best XI, I can't figure out who to drop. All I know is that all the pitches in the world differs. Spinning, Fast, Slow, Bouncy, uneven bounch, sticky, dusty, wet, ect. pitches. The weather is also not always the same. But If The World XI had to play a 5 day Test against The Second XI on a wet pitch at Trent Bridge, I would not hessitate to pick Graeme Pollock ahead of Tendulkar, Lara, Viv Richards or George Headley.

  • Gulshan_Grover on October 27, 2010, 13:52 GMT

    Jignesh Bhai, Jack hobbs also averaged 60 intest cricket :) Graeme Hick did not.

  • the.begotten on October 27, 2010, 13:49 GMT

    The team is GOOD but INCOMPLETE without the Wizard LARA. I AGREE tendulkar is a great batsman , myself being an indian would prefer to watch lara the great west indian toying bowlers... it is absolutely ridiculous not to have him in the team. in tendulkars own words he describes lara as" being the greatest batsman of his generation if not the greatest ever" when he scored his 400.. i can imagine how the selectors turned a blind eye on Lara. Sachin is good. but no more the great he used to be.. he is just a run machine accumulating runs.. there is no joy in watching him bat. obviouslt the selectors had to satsify the idol worshipping indian fans....

  • talhaovi on October 27, 2010, 13:33 GMT

    Imran Khan should be in the final he deserves the spot if not in place of Sobbers as an allrounder than ha can easily made spot as a facst bowler insted of lille .. look at stats lille was a bowler of favourable cnditions who totally failed in subcontinent but If u see Imran khan's record he was outstanding an any condition or in any country , the jury must go with two allrounder option

  • Jaggadaaku on October 27, 2010, 12:40 GMT

    @ KiwiRocker, Let me tell you "Sachin Tendulkar is the only reason, Wasim and Waqar had to retire from International cricket. Remember the match between India vs. Pakistan in World Cup 2003, Sachin blasted and destroyed both of the bowlers and after that match they both got kicked out from their team. So think before speak any non-sense.

  • Jaggadaaku on October 27, 2010, 12:39 GMT

    @ KiwiRocker, Let me tell you "Sachin Tendulkar is the only reason, Wasim and Waqar had to retire from International cricket. Remember the match between India vs. Pakistan in World Cup 2003, Sachin blasted and destroyed both of the bowlers and after that match they both got kicked out from their team. So think before speak any non-sense.

  • EverybodylovesSachin on October 27, 2010, 12:34 GMT

    Sachin is the best batsman in this eleven....Bradman Second...Viv Richards is the last..

  • Jaggadaaku on October 27, 2010, 12:33 GMT

    @ Nayeem_Kohir, If any of your first 11 batsmen would have played the matches that Sachin has played, I am sure they would lose their place from the average of 50+ batsmen list. Sachin has played 170+ matches and could maintain the average of 55 in Tests yet. Day by day Sachin got older but becomes greater and greater. Some of your first 11 batsmen, kicked out from the team because they started failing for example, Javed Miandad.

  • Cricket_Raj on October 27, 2010, 12:28 GMT

    To all those who think Lara is better than Sachin, please find fact before commenting. Lara was able to lift his carrer avg in the last 4 yrs of his carrer coz by the time Waqar and Donald were retired. Once Waqar mentioned that he could take Lara out with 5 out of 6. His avg before 2003 was 48 with 18 hundreds. Later in the next 4 yrs he made 16 hundreds out of which 8 are against SA and Pakistan. Lara needs to be at his best to dominate bowlers but Sachin at any given point can Dominate bowlers. Sachin is great and will reamin great no matter how you look at things. He is probably has less avg compared to Don but he has Double the runs of Don and 20 more centuries than Don. Except for avg he beats everyone in all other feats. I am also suprized someone saying Sachin a selfish player (what a joke). I think they want some limlight and congrats u got it. If u look at the records u will find no player in history of the game contributing more than Sachin in wins unless u r blind

  • Jaggadaaku on October 27, 2010, 12:21 GMT

    @ Meety, the most disadvantages of modern cricketers is the invention of "third umpiring", "Snicko", and "Hawk Eyes". Now no batsmen can escape from it. So, depend on your advantages and disadvantages stretagies, the modern batsmen's averages and records are greater than the older batsmen's records and averages.

  • Jaggadaaku on October 27, 2010, 12:12 GMT

    Gulshan_Grover, Greme Hick also has hit 150+ First Class hundreds and Mark Ramprakash also has hit 110+ first class hundreds. You might wanna add their name in your fantasy World XI. But then you have to name your team-"World First CLass XI".

  • Nayeem_Kohir on October 27, 2010, 11:40 GMT

    In all time greats I will place Tendulkar at 12 at his best. The greatest batsmen in test cricket 1. Don Bradman 2. Brian Lara 3. Wally Hammond 4. Vivian Richard 5. Jack Hobbs 6. Virender Sehwag 7. Javed Miandad 8. Greg Chappel 9. George Headley 10. Adam Gilchrist 11. Sunil Gavaskar 12. Sachin Tendulkar. The greatest batsmen in one-day cricket 1.Vivian Richards 2. Yuvraj Singh 3. Michael Bevan 4. Adam Gilchrist 5. Brian Lara 6. Javed Miandad 7.Inzimam-ul-Haq 8. Sanath Jaysurya 9. Dhoni. 10. Zaheer Abbas 11. Arvinda Desilva 12. Sachin Tendulkar

  • Pathiyal on October 27, 2010, 11:14 GMT

    who wants javed miandad to be included? :-) give me your details boss, i will try for your name also to be included (ok?). they are talking about the greatest cricketers of all time - and mind you, virender sehwag is not in the list (may be its their mistake) and sunny is only in the second eleven, ricky ponting is absent and hence you can imagine where javed stands. talk sense, people. i am sure its the sachin factor again which invited 960 odd comments so far, undoubtedly the most loved and envied cricketer of all time. probably one of the most dedicated sportspersons in the whole universe. people who dont know how to pick up a genuine bat criticising a legend is a joke. ask international cricketers who will unanimously say 'sachins the boss'. also have gr8 opinion about Viv richards (not brian lara, please....) and wasim akram is a great bowling strength, no doubt. and here the readers xi have only players from the 90s. that means people have just heard about sobers and don

  • kirksland on October 27, 2010, 11:14 GMT

    Len Hutton has proably the best technique of any opener ever and at 21 broke the world record, vs Australia with Bradman on the field, he edges out Gavaskar. Barry Richards is the most destructive opener of any era and had a technique to match. PLayed his best againts the best and world series cricket was a testement to that. Don Bradman, The Best Ever. Braian Lara, passes the eyeball test, ability to compile massive scores at great speed, ability to score match winning innings of the highest quaility when needed is unmatche. Sachin Tendulkar, holds or will hold every major record. Garry Sobers, Greatest All Rounder Ever and probably 2nd best batsman. Adam Gilchrist, changed the position and the game. Imran Khan is the greatest swing bolwer ever and also second best allrounder in the history of the game. Malcolm Marshall, best fast bowler ever, had it all speed, bounce and swing. Shane Warne, best spinner, great sliper. Greatest match winner. Glenn Macgrath. Most accurate evr

  • camcove on October 27, 2010, 11:11 GMT

    I find four interesting things about these teams. First, in the experts' selections, Barry Richards is selected in the second eleven. Given that he only played one test series, it would seem that the selection was based on perception of what he would have done with the opportunity. Personally, I would think that if you did that, you would have him in the first eleven, not the second. Secondly, the man who would rate by many as up there with Lara and Sobers as a leftie, G Pollock, doesn't make it anywhere, which I find difficult. (By the way, I'm an Aussie, not a Saffer). Thirdly,the readers' eleven shows that the readers are probably dominated by people of recent generations. I think if you look at the history of cricket, for example, Jack Hobbs would have to be there. Fourthly, I would think G Headley would be there in the middle order. It is so hard, isn't it? There are so many great players!

  • zxaar on October 27, 2010, 10:40 GMT

    @BillyCC off course you are correct, i was replying in kind to one of the stupid comment.

  • javedaziz on October 27, 2010, 9:52 GMT

    why is javed miandad not even in second eleven?strange though is the exclusion of imran khan and micheal holding

  • SuperSharky on October 27, 2010, 8:45 GMT

    The World XI and the The Second XI with the Readers XI are all great legends. But we do need a 'The Third XI' and 'The Fourth XI'. The thing is, if I can think of a legend that needs to be in the Best XI, I can't figure out who to drop. All I know is that all the pitches in the world differs. Spinning, Fast, Slow, Bouncy, uneven bounch, sticky, dusty, wet, ect. pitches. The weather is also not always the same. But If The World XI had to play a 5 day Test against The Second XI on a wet pitch at Trent Bridge, I would not hessitate to pick Graeme Polock ahead of Tendulkar, Lara, Viv Richards or George Headley.

  • Jaggadaaku on October 27, 2010, 8:26 GMT

    @ CricketChopper, There is no big difference between you and Ian Chappel. Read my comment, which I wrote about Ian. Because you and Ian are the twins by brains. Copy and paste this link in your browser: http://www.cricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/481212.html?comments=all#comments

  • adi.0807 on October 27, 2010, 7:53 GMT

    Lot of discussion about Sachin..Lara..Richards etc but I think the biggest joke is selection of 2 fast bowlers. Cant believe in my wildest dreams that Lille and Akram are better than Hadlee, Mcgrath and Ambrose leave aside Trueman, Holding and Holding. They all have better averages and strike rates than the two selected ones. Akram might only be selected because he is left hand bowler but that should have never been criteria.

  • Meety on October 27, 2010, 7:33 GMT

    Alot of bloggers, (I suspect Indian), have been banging on about Sehwag ahead of Hobbs & Hutton. This is complete ignorance. Sehwag is destructive, & he may well be rated as a great by the time is career is over, but before you bag players of the past consider the advantages modern cricketers have; 1. Shorter boundaries, 2. Protective gear for head, arm, ribs & thigh (better gloves), 3. Better batting pitches, (an advantage for batsmen - disadvantage for bowlers). If you consider occasions where matches have been played on sub-standard pitches in the modern era - scores have been abysmal, yet pre WWII cricketers regularly played out their careers on these dicey strips. 4. Better technology - again advantage for batters over bowlers. Bats are sprung better, heavier & hence produce larger sweet spots. The only disadvantage batsmen of the modern era have is that I believe fielding standards - particularly ground fielding his higher because of ODIs.

  • zxaar on October 27, 2010, 7:27 GMT

    @dmqi "Hay crazy selectors. this is the most difficult task to select the best 11. There can be 10 different combinations with 10 different panlsl. If you judge by talent, Lara comes much ahead of Tendulkar or Richard." ------------- Its not random as throwing dice. I would argue that no matter who the judges are this will be the team because this is team of best XI selected by most knowledgeable and experienced guys. They are not blinded by mindless love to certain player like you are to Lara and some others with Kallises dravids, laxmans or any other X Y Z untalented player. It is a great exercise that has answered who belongs where.

  • Meety on October 27, 2010, 7:25 GMT

    Hadlee like M Marshall were outstanding bowlers who could bat - NOT allrounders IMHO. The allrounders of their era were Botham, Khan & Dev. I have seen requests for Kallis, as great a batsmen as he is - his bowling is average, his 250 wickets are primarily are result of the amount of Tests he has played. Sticking solely to statistics is very misleading, players of the 1980s generally had lower averages than the 21st century so I get annoyed when people quote statistics as proof they are indisputably correct. I once read a book written by Ashley Mallet about the "Bradman of Spinners". He was writing about C Grimmett, where he statistically proved that Grimmett could get 5wick. hauls more often than Bradman got 100s. Of players to have taken 200 Test wickets, NOBODY got them in fewer test than Grimmett. So is that an arguement for Clarrie being the greatest bowler of all time, answer is No. Most pundits rate his team mate Bill O'Reilly as a better Leggie. But alas, no Clarrie, oh well.

  • Meety on October 27, 2010, 7:15 GMT

    Man, people get worked up when theiite doesn't get picked. It was always going to be impossible to appease everybody. I think the most unluckiest player was Hadlee, I remember what he did to Oz in about 1985, (admit it was one of Oz's weakest sides), I couldn't watch the TV because I thought he would get a wicket with every ball. I think there is a good case for Hadlee ahead of either Akram or Lillee. Most Lillee bashers here have to consider that when looking at statistics, the Super Tests were not included, and Lillee was the best over the 2 years of Packers World Series. I am glad Lillee got selected but Hadlee would of been a good alternative. On his day Akram was amazing, having said that I felt "His Day" - was a bit too sparse to be in the WorldXI. I also think Imran Khan was unlucky not to be selected, but its hard not to pick Sobers (Miller was my choice). It apears in some reporting that Hadlee was considered in the Allrounder category. TBC

  • --.-- on October 27, 2010, 7:05 GMT

    http://sachinandcritics.com/sachin_is_a_match_winner.php .........This page is for people like cricketchopper. i haven't created it though !

  • dhanusha_so on October 27, 2010, 7:04 GMT

    How come there is no Murali in the world XI????? he is the highest wicket taker and best spin bowler in the world... Warne is no where close to him... murali average of taking wickets against england is far more better than warne... he could hav passed the 1000 wickets mark, if he had got some more matches against england... and pls compare the number of matches they hav played... so we dont belive this world XI team.... not without murali....

  • SFGoldenGate on October 27, 2010, 6:56 GMT

    @mak102480 , Yeah people gets it, Sachin is great. You dont have to pollute every corner of Cricinfo just saying what is said million times. It will not change the people who thinks Lara is better than Sachin or vice versa. Why Sachin fans are so insecured that everywhere they have to prove that Sachin is great and so and so. Great people does not need to be proven all the time. Just check how many times it is Bradman or Lara is the best and compare it with the insecured Sachin fans comment, you loose.

  • --.-- on October 27, 2010, 6:56 GMT

    If Gavaskar too would have been selected, 'cricetchopper' would have committed suicide ! Btw, which country he belongs to ? Why he never reveals it ? Is he ashamed of his nationality ?

  • --.-- on October 27, 2010, 6:52 GMT

    @ All .....This guy "cricketchopper" is an anti-Indian. He wants to create rift among us. Here, he is favoring Muralitharan but look @ his previous comments when World-XI was not chosen.........http://www.cricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/478566.html?comments=all#comments ..... Read his very first comment, he is calling Warne the best spinner and Murali a controversial bowler>>>> "10)Shane Warne (best spinner of history - Murali is controversial)" ... What a hypocrite ! cricinfo should ban these double-faced people.

  • BillyCC on October 27, 2010, 6:52 GMT

    zxaar, 4 Australians, 3 West Indians, 2 Englishman, 1 Indian and 1 Pakistani reflects the true dominance of these countries over cricketing history. So it's not really about pleasing anyone, it's just fact.

  • SFGoldenGate on October 27, 2010, 6:42 GMT

    @ Mohan Lal , Hey man, why Indian cricket fans and specially Sachin fans are so insecure about their feeling? Look, Sachin is a great batsman whether people like it or not. He is one of the best. But there might be some people who might not like him. It is not necessary to everyone to like him. Its everyone's personal choice. Another thing, he really has not achieved some magic that Lara achieved (300 twice, 9 double hundreds). And Lara played only 131 tests while Sachin played 171 and counting. If Lara played that much test he also would have 50 test hundreds and 15000 test runs, yeah more than Sachin. But I admit that Sachin is the greatest batsman in ODIs, no doubt. I know now you will explode all over the park because I just told that Lara is better. But if you say Lara is the worst batsman I will not mind. Everyone has their own opinion. So grow up and enjoy the both great players. I know what you need, is a warm cup of milk and lots of hugs. Cheers

  • Meety on October 27, 2010, 6:35 GMT

    @Clive Dunn - LOL - yes where is Alan Mulally????

  • Gulshan_Grover on October 27, 2010, 5:45 GMT

    My eleven 1. Jack Hobbs : Can't argue with 200 hundreads in FC cricket 2. Sunil Gavaskar: Best technique in the world 3. Don Bradman (C): 99.94 4. Junior Don Bradman (SRT): 30,000 international runs and 100 international centuries, second automatic name on the list, annoy cricchopper :) 5. Graeme Pollock: What a batsman 6. Gary Sobers: Best cricketer ever 7. Alan Knott: Best WC ever 8. Malcome Marshal: Best fast bowler ever 9. Shane Warne: Best spinner but Murli is at his heel. 10. Glen McGrath: Cant argue with 600 test wickets at 20 11. Michael Holding: Silent death

  • Gulshan_Grover on October 27, 2010, 5:33 GMT

    Helooo chopper bhai, I missed 20/20 betwen PAK-SA..whats the score?

  • TheOnlyEmperor on October 27, 2010, 5:33 GMT

    I think the lone guy who didn't cast his vote for Sachin was either an Aussi or Clive Lloyd. If it was Clive preferring Lara over Sachin, I can understand. Me thinks it was Gideon. I wish cricinfo would let us know the jury preferences in the selection of the first and second teams. That would give interesting insights into jury thinking. What's the big secrecy anyway? Surely, as cricket experts, they are not ashamed of the choices they made? One thing's clear, with Warnie being unanimous in the first-11, it's probable all 12 of the jury (if they didn't go for a 2 spinner combo) knocked Murali out! What a shame!

  • Gulshan_Grover on October 27, 2010, 5:27 GMT

    @chopper: "according to my predictions, bowling strength of world Xi has been sacrifised just to please indian spectators": nothing has been SACRIFICED as this is an imaginary eleven and few players are already dead so beat it.

  • MosheArens on October 27, 2010, 5:25 GMT

    It is unfortunate that Shane Warne got into the list at all. Remember, Shane W. was banned for a full year for using banned substance, also was 'reprimanded' or something like that by the Cricket Australia for providing "pitch report' to bookies along with his team mate Mark Waugh. He was an exceptionally capable bowler, perhaps even a cricketer. But never a great 'sportsman'. Gone are the days when cricket was considered an 'gentleman's game'.

  • priyantha123 on October 27, 2010, 5:24 GMT

    can anybody explain how could Shane Warne be picked instead of Mujralitharan? Warne has taken 708 wickets in 145 tests and Murali has taken 800 wickets in 133 tests.Warne has 37 five wickets hauls and 10 ten wickets hauls. Murali has 67 five wicket hauls and 22 ten wicket hauls. Considering these statistics how can Shane Warne be selected instead of Murali? Is ESPN supporting Australia? that"s what I feel. I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE EXPLANATIONS FROM ESPN, PLEASE.

  • TheOnlyEmperor on October 27, 2010, 5:18 GMT

    The Don was good but terribly over-rated. He played against just one country mostly, at the same grounds over 20 years. In the 1948 Ashes, he wasn't even amongst the top-2 run getters, even though he scored 500 odd. Goes to show that batting wasn't all that difficult those days. His innings against India, WI and SA don't count just as the Aussies don't count Zim and Ban to make Warne look better than Murali. The Aus seem to go to ridiculous extents to prop up their players "greatness". Dean Jones comes on Indian TV and repeatedly claims that "Ricky is better than Sachin" because Ricky won 3 WCups and Sachin didn't win any. Are there any WCups in Test cricket? Dean must know something we don't. And seriously, when it comes to ODIs, who in their right mind would deny that Sachin is the GREATEST batsman ever? I used to laugh but now am sick of this Aussi flogic. :P

  • 114_in_final_Six_overs on October 27, 2010, 5:16 GMT

    @dmqi: if triple century is the critaria than Sehwag is in, he has 2 at better than run a ball plus a 292. I hope dm is not for demented !

  • 114_in_final_Six_overs on October 27, 2010, 5:15 GMT

    Great SACHIN: Neighbour's envy, India's Pride

    Sachin has now been selected by Bradman, Warne, Benaud and now cricinfo eleven. He was also called the best by Shane Warne and Alan Donald while Nasser Hussain thinks of him at par with Sir Don. Who really cares what an arm chair expert has to say. Rise Sir Sachin tendulkar!

  • BDHUNTER on October 27, 2010, 5:02 GMT

    My best of all time ever................

    World XI: M.Hyden,G. pollock, Sachin Tendulkar, Viv Richards, Garry Sobers, Jacques Kallis,Adam Gilchrist,R. Headlee, Shane Warne, Wasim Akram, G. McGarth

    Waiting: S.D Lilee,Imran khan,M Murali,C Ambrose

  • dmqi on October 27, 2010, 4:40 GMT

    Hay crazy selectors. this is the most difficult task to select the best 11. There can be 10 different combinations with 10 different panlsl. If you judge by talent, Lara comes much ahead of Tendulkar or Richard. How many players have the records of 9 double centuries and two triple centuries? Lara and no one is going to break that soon. Tendulkar has 49 centuries but not a single triple, does not look good. Both deserve to be in the team though.. And who would not pick Imran Khan? With 3 qualities- as bowler, batsman and Captain. I would put him ahead of Lilee, but it is difficult to avoid lilee too. Hard job indeed. Imran was not picked for his arrogance, right?

    It is better not to make such list of 11. may be you should pick a squad to 20 to players of all time.

  • CricFan24 on October 27, 2010, 4:24 GMT

    Tendulkar/Bradman.........................................The rest.

  • Pathiyal on October 27, 2010, 4:17 GMT

    where is the greatest opening batsman of all times? virendar sehwag. i think the list is not really about the match-winners.

  • cricbuff11 on October 27, 2010, 4:13 GMT

    Though I am not the one to claim Sachin is God or whatever, I enjoy how some peoples' blood is boiling on his inclusion and all the conspiracy theories doing the rounds.

  • nlambda on October 27, 2010, 3:26 GMT

    I think Tendulkar was picked just to annoy and irritate cricketchopper. Good job by the selection committee!!

  • on October 27, 2010, 3:15 GMT

    BCL should be in the all time list

  • mk49_van on October 27, 2010, 3:10 GMT

    Why was Warne unanimous - when he had a major chink in his armour? 43 wickets at 47.61 in 14 tests - against the sternest test of them all, an Indian team that had the best players of spin in the world. That is exactly like a great batsman failing against say the mighty Windies attack. Might such a batsman have been chosen in the final XI, even if he had played incredibly well against the rest? Probably not, and certainly not unanimously. Go Figure.

  • zxaar on October 27, 2010, 2:57 GMT

    @cricketchopper "according to my predictions, bowling strength of world Xi has been sacrifised just to please indian spectators." ----------------- There are 4 Australians in there seems like team to please our Aussie friends. How about drop Bradman. Then include Kapil dev. Now we have real balanced side.

  • on October 27, 2010, 2:43 GMT

    Man with more than 32000 international runs, almost 100 100s truly deserves to be in any wprld eleven. The only surprise is that 1 jury man didn't pick him.A lot of big 100s,aggressive 100s, defensive 100s as per match situation,100s over varied bowling line ups and bowling conditions,match rescuing 100s like 119*,176,203,104* lot of inns when team in trouble and then going on to win like 214, 109,155*, several lone hands like 112,122,169,119,3 4r th inns 100s of which 2 resulted in team win and draw, several critical non 100 inns, a lot of amazing 1 day 100s and what not ?? it is only a case of sour grapes that certain people here are crying here for Lara and that too at his cost.It is ok for them to go for Lara but siimply can't replace this man.Such people must not forget that Lara only has a str of 5 more but most importantly 4 less than Sachin in bat average.Yet Sachin has 15 more 100s and 2300 more runs.Then in one days.. no comparisons...

  • EverybodylovesSachin on October 27, 2010, 2:27 GMT

    If we exclude Wasim Akram and Viv Richards..then it will be a better and balanced side.. I think Richards is like Sehwag and not be included in the team .Wasim Akram also not that great...

  • Jaglal on October 27, 2010, 2:27 GMT

    BRIAN CHARLES LARA,the best there was ,geawan you are absolutely correct with your analysis .

  • Swingit on October 27, 2010, 2:22 GMT

    TWO world XIs, 22 players and only ONE West Indian quick? And worse the readers 11 have NO Windies paceman. Frigging ridiculous. tells you who runs things in this rigged system. lets all go get us 1 billion countrymen. That is from a team that dominated the world for two decades ONLY because of their pacmen (yeah even with all that batting they would not have dominated as was clearly shown when Lara, Chanderpaul and even Jimmy Adams were scoring in bunches but still few had wins to show for it). Among those 22 should be Marshall, Holding (yes whispering death himself), Ambrose and take your pick from Walsh, , Wes Hall, Charlie Griffith, Garner, Roberts or even crazy Roy Gichrist. Sacrifice a batsman if you must, or hell a spinner (did Sir Viv not say spin belong on a washing machine only). Crazy how stupid dead pitches and garbage bowlers of today make people forget the genius of great fast bowling.

  • Rahul_666 on October 27, 2010, 1:30 GMT

    It may be argued that Murali should be there ahead of Warne but its not something you can complain about way too much. But the obvious mistakes with this team are: 1) Gavaskar should be there ahead of Hutton, he played against the best fast bowling attack in history and had a fantastic record against them and was the best opening test batsman of his generation. 2) Gilchrist should not be there. He is definitely not the best wicket-keeper ever, even though he is the best ever batsman among wicket-keepers. Alan Knott would have been a smarter choice. Apart from these oversights, the team is fine. People may argue for Imran Khan, Kapil Dev, Botham, Hadlee, Dravid, Murali, etc. but it is impossible to create a perfect all-time XI. The closest that you can get is: Hobbs, GAVASKAR, Bradman, Tendulkar, Richards, Sobers, KNOTT, Marshall, Warne, Akram, Lillee

  • levin36 on October 27, 2010, 1:29 GMT

    can u imagine a team without MURALI..:(

  • EverybodylovesSachin on October 27, 2010, 1:03 GMT

    Looks like some commets people wrie against Sachin so they can get maximum attention.against them .in comments world........

  • mak102480 on October 27, 2010, 0:36 GMT

    @geawan - it's obvious that you don't know too much about cricket when you suggest names like dravid and greenidge to be included and names like warne, tendulkar and bradman to be excluded.......you seem to think that as you play more matches one's average should go higher.......and what does the fact that Lara did not have anybody to bat around, which by the way is not true, have anything to do to the fact that he averaged around 52-53. how does that make him better than tendulkar? Greenidge in an all-time XI??? That's laughable...he was a great batsman but in an all-time XI...he probably would not even make it to the all-time third eleven (sehwag, barry richards, graeme smith, gavaskar are all better).........and dravid? as much as i love dravid, and he is probably in my top 5 fav batsman, he just doesn't belong in all-time XI.

  • on October 27, 2010, 0:03 GMT

    Oh my gosh where is Waqar Younis? The fastest bowler to get 100 wickets in both test and ODIz and 200 in test!

    Its unbeleavable how these English and Australian bowlers have been picked in the 2nd XI. Waqar certainly beats all of them easily in terms of talent and skill.

    Other then that the first XI is good. The readers choise is just made out of Indian people voting on this website but anywayz it partially looks good.

  • PTtheAxis on October 27, 2010, 0:01 GMT

    majority is sheep and they tow the line. the line is that - bradman is great. so they all agree without ever having really seen him in action. you are right, he would would be just another cricketer in modern era. everyone is a great when playing the english. even vengasarkar made 3 centuries at lords against them. richards always pummeled them. english like to give opportunity for everyone to shine. they want to and do create heroes for these other nations desperately in need of idols. no cricketer is actually great. all have their flaws and none of them are regular matchwinners for their respective teams. there is not one player in this 11 who one can be sure of performing under any conditions. the truth is that most of the genepools here on earth have not reached god-like perfection but they all would like to believe they have. all the cricket players are mediocre at best. they are not jedi's or shaolin monks or rishis. they are all average joe, don & sachin.

  • EverybodylovesSachin on October 27, 2010, 0:00 GMT

    cricketchopper SEMI ALLROUNDERS..GIVE ME A BREAK...IN WORLD ELEVEN THERE IS NO WORD LIKE SEMI.....Please give me a break from comments...

  • lamarsachin on October 27, 2010, 0:00 GMT

    @chopper:: if u want to make balance side.. u can remove richards.. after all sachin can bowl too and has taken wickets in both test and odi's + has a higher higher avg..than richards.. and one thing richards avg against Aussie is a only 44..

  • EverybodylovesSachin on October 26, 2010, 23:58 GMT


  • Hema_Adhikari on October 26, 2010, 23:14 GMT

    Sir Sachin Tendulkar! It just rings so well. Knighthood beckons!!

    SACHIN: Neighbour's envy Owner's Pride

  • Gulshan_Grover on October 26, 2010, 23:10 GMT

    @Chopper: why dont you say that you are raving mad about Imran's exclusion. 8 test captains including Mr. Alam did not find him good enough so be it. Live with it. At least Akram got through the back doors.

  • 114_in_final_Six_overs on October 26, 2010, 23:07 GMT

    Sachin Tendulkar and Bradman are only two certainties. Rest of the spot is up for grabs. Imran would be lucky to get into ASIA 11 where Kapil and Vaas would do much better in properly supervised match.

  • mak102480 on October 26, 2010, 23:04 GMT

    (from previous post)...He has played 110 more matches than Jack Hobbs and 90+ more matches than Len Hutton so far with just about the same average; 40 more matches than Brian Lara so far with an avg of 4+ higher than him...you all think it is easy to maintain an average that high as you progress through your career?.... Not enough match winning hundreds? He scored 20 hundreds in indian wins (4 against aussies).....People keep saying Brian Lara had so many match winning hundreds. Count it up...a grand total of 8 (3 against aussies).....I am not saying that means a lot because winning is a TEAM effort...thats for the naysayers out there....Not enough 2nd inning hundreds? You win MORE matches with first inning hundreds...that's a fact..... Have you looked at his technique? He is equally proficient in attack and defense. He can play shots equally well in the air and on the ground. Do you people realize how hard it is to maintain an avg of 55+ when you have played 170 matches?

  • mak102480 on October 26, 2010, 22:52 GMT

    People who are bashing about Tendulkar being included are just plain naive. On what basis can you claim that he would not have done so great on uncovered pitches, he would not have done so great without helmets and other protective gear, etc? .............Going by this hypothesis, I guess we can also question would Lillee and bradman be so great had they played more matches in the subcontinent?........... Would Bradman, Hobbs, Hutton, Sobers would be so great had they had to deal with playing so much cricket in so many countries, on so many grounds in two/three different formats? ............Would Richards have been so great had he played 50 more tests (which would have been equal to sachin's total today)? Richards had a hard time keeping his career avg barely above 50 in his last few tests..........How would ANYONE have coped with the pressure of billion people playing in cricket-crazed India for 21+ years? (Cont'd in next post)

  • BillyCC on October 26, 2010, 22:43 GMT

    Hi Cricketchopper, bad luck on your theory about the World XI. I thought you worked it out extremely well, but I think the panel ended up voting with only individual bias and so the more personal biases cancelled each other out.

  • Sal076 on October 26, 2010, 22:41 GMT

    ...cont...so as I was saying, Dravid can perhaps stay at the crease the longest however, once again, if we look objectively, all factors and criteria aside, these choices are based on expert opinions. Experts are not always right but that's ok. They're humans, which is why I believe Cricinfo perhaps asked for each of them to pick 2 teams and chose higher probability of selection. I believe what these choices mean, that these players have a HIGHER probability of being on that team. It has also been pointed out, that the Second Team would probably also give the first choice team a run for it's money. Easy people, relax, chill out, have some fun with it. Don't take it too personally. CHEERS!!!

  • Sal076 on October 26, 2010, 22:35 GMT

    I want to first address a couple of things. I have been following the World XI selection series and I want to first address the "sour grapes". Firstly @ CricketChopper dude - this is a selection based on opinions. The selected jury had an opinion based on their experience and their expertise. While I myself am not a fan of the BCCI weilding it's financial power, I do not believe this selection had anything to do with it. So please make objective statements and not prejudiced ones. You obviously seem like a "Sachin" hater.

    To the rest of the crowd - While I do agree that some of the choices are very questionable, i.e., Ambrose, Larwood, Muralitharan, missing? In Gilchrist's own words, there are many wicket-keepers who could have been selected before him, my personal favourites being Sangakkara and Boucher. Yes, Lara's exclusion is a surprise, no doubt, so is the absence of Dravid who I believe can face any bowler in the world and perhaps stay....(cont.)

  • cricsavvy on October 26, 2010, 22:09 GMT

    How come these people are not in the XI - Tatenda Taibu, Venkatesh Prasad,Bandula Warnapura, Chris Tavare, Geoff Howarth, Iqbal Qasim, Andrew Hilditch, Thomas Odoyo, Larry Gomes????? Does n't this sound funny?? All these "All Time XI" selections by one or the other end up in disgusting, childish hate comments from the readers. Each player would have given their best - some delighted the fans some did not and every single one of them will have at least one fan! It is painful to see people passing nasty comments on great players like Tendulkar, Sobers, Warne. Let us respect players and not demean them and their efforts. Hope Cricinfo publish my comments. For some reason my honest comments have been barred earlier.

  • cricketchopper on October 26, 2010, 21:54 GMT

    according to my predictions, bowling strength of world Xi has been sacrifised just to please indian spectators. Just exclude the Sachin from the Xi and you will find a real and balanced side: Hobbs,Hutton,Bradman,Richards,Sobers,Gilchrist,Imran,Waseem,Marshal,Warne, Murli.

    Anyone to tell me which side is more balanced? Is batting of my team is weaker where semi-allrounders Waseem,Marshal,Warne are at No.8,9,10?

  • Gulshan_Grover on October 26, 2010, 21:50 GMT

    Sachin has now been selected by Bradman, Warne, Benaud and now cricinfo eleven. He was also called the best by Shane Warne and Alan Donald while Nasser Hussain thinks of him at par with Sir Don. Who really cares what an arm chair expert has to say. Rise Sir Sachin tendulkar!

  • Gulshan_Grover on October 26, 2010, 21:49 GMT

    Sachin has now been selected by Bradman, Warne, Benaud and now cricinfo eleven. He was also called the best by Shane Warne and Alan Donald while Nasser Hussain thinks of him at par with Sir Don. Who really cares what an arm chair expert has to say. Rise Sir Sachin Tendulkar !!

  • mailsiddu on October 26, 2010, 21:41 GMT

    Firstly ,No offence against Hutton , I think Sunny could have been replaced him in WORLD XI.

  • srivatsan on October 26, 2010, 21:36 GMT

    @@Pratyush, I agree with you, Mcgrath is much better than Lillee.I'm also surprised no mention of Walsh and Ambrose :-) . Ambrose at his peak was just as unplayable as it gets.

  • Ulysses on October 26, 2010, 21:26 GMT

    great team, i had barry richards instead of len hutton and imran instead of wasim in the best X1 but no quibbles

  • JSavidge on October 26, 2010, 21:13 GMT

    I think its stupid how players such as Harold Larwood have been forgotten and left out. He is one of the few genuine fast bowlers who scared opposition batsmen and just because he did what his captain wanted in the Bodyline series he shouldn't be left out. He was the one bowler whoever caused Don Bradman any trouble. Its ridiculous how he is not mentioned more.

  • surgeon101 on October 26, 2010, 20:52 GMT

    Warne! What a Joke! Banned from the sport for DRUGS, Womaniser and Gambler!! aren't legends meant to be role models??? That aside, he got most of his wickets by tormenting useless English batsmen who could never play spin and with amazing support bowlers around! Murali on the other hand...single-handedly got a 100 more wickets (even minus the ones against Zimbabwe/bangladesh) and with a smile on his face throughout all the hardships! He overcame race, religion and poverty in a country torn by war to become the greatest wickettaker!

  • BillyCC on October 26, 2010, 20:52 GMT

    Someone has suggested that one person in the panel didn't vote for Tendulkar. Is that true? I haven't seen the full list of votes (if they have been released). I was under the impression that at least two or three didn't vote for Tendulkar in their First XI and may have voted for him in the Second XI, which leads to his 51 out of 60 votes.

  • geawan on October 26, 2010, 20:49 GMT

    In the lead up to the naming of the "world" XI several people picked their world XI's. Lara made three of those teams and Sachin made one. And you know what?!!!!!!! Dravid should have been on that team instead of him as well (For your money and your life)!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    This world XI is an obvious fluke with no Greenidge and/or Gavaskar as opener, Warne instead of Murali, Bradman who played against probably four teams (anybody ever notice the disparity in scores between Bradman and the aussies and their opponents?). Even Chappel (one of the selectors) basically said that Lara is better than Sachin and adds the left hand option.

    If Sachin was SO great he should have an average over 60 especially with ALL those hundreds from the most years and matches in Test cricket than any other!!! If not he is a waste!!! Remember Lara had no one to bat around. Sachin had Ganguly, Dravid, Sehwag, Laxman, and many others!!!!!!!

  • BillyCC on October 26, 2010, 20:43 GMT

    Dikshit, Tendulkar would be the seventh choice captain by my reckoning.

  • on October 26, 2010, 20:31 GMT

    I think Glenn McGrath should be in World XI in place of Dennis Lillee.Glenn McGrath is one of the greatest bowler and he has taken wickets in all the countries.This jury have to show respect to this great bowler.I think jury members should judge themselves before neglecting or judging a great player.

  • on October 26, 2010, 20:03 GMT

    Imran Khan should have been an unanimous pick along side Bradman and Sobers. How can you not have 2 of the greatest allrounders in the all time test 11. Not suprised the over rated Lillee made the 11 instead.

  • LT11 on October 26, 2010, 19:57 GMT

    I still believe Sehwag should be in the Opening slots. I have heard VIV riChards once saying if Sehwag continue to play like this foranother 4-5 years there will not be any discussion of gratest Test batsman of all time. My XI

    Sehwag , jack Hobbs, Brad man, Sachin, Lara, Sobers, Gilli, Warne, Akram, Marshal and ( Mc Grath, Waqar or Donald )

  • cricketchopper on October 26, 2010, 19:51 GMT

    Sachin has been selected only to please one billion peoples of India. Because game of cricket depened on Indian fans. Commercial diplomacy. Suppose the jury had justly axed great Sachin from this team, you can imagin about financial implications for ESPN Channel and this site. This is the reality. As Sri Lanka are with less population and less income hence their great Murli in not in the list despite having better bowling records rather he is Bradman of bowlers when it comes to records. And Bradman of bowlers has not been selected just for the sake of Bread and butter of journalists and tv channel.

  • Ultimate_Challanger_X1 on October 26, 2010, 19:42 GMT

    Now I summon the greatest cricketing men picked to clash with the greatest chanlleger team for the ultimate test. My challenger team,

    Desmond Haynes, Rahul Dravid, Ricky Pointing (Capt), Inzimam-ul-haq, Jack Kallis, Kumar Sangakara (WK), Shaun Pollock, Waqar Younus, Curtly Ambrose, Walsh, Abdul Qadir

    if I were a betting man I would bet on the challenger team any day!

  • on October 26, 2010, 19:36 GMT

    I think Warne was an unanimous choice on the basis of Tendulkar being in the same side. So in effect Tendulkar is the only unanimous choice, not Warne. I still cannot digest that they did not consider Gavaskar and Lara in the side. It's not that grow up hearing stories of Hobbs and Hutton.

  • BoomBoomAdnan on October 26, 2010, 19:18 GMT

    imran khan has better average than lillee then y the hell is he in world 11 and not imran khan .imran khans ave is better than both wasim and lillee and imran is also a great batsman and a great captain. pathetic selection

  • gauravdik on October 26, 2010, 19:10 GMT

    I was born in 1980. For all those of my generation, I would like to present my "Best I've Watched XI" (excluding those already picked in Cricinfo's First XI and Second XI, i.e. Tendulkar, Lara, Warne, Gilchrist, Akram, and Muralitharan).

    1. Virender Sehwag 2. Matthew Hayden 3. Ricky Ponting 4. Jacques Kallis 5. Inzamam ul Haq 6. Steve Waugh (captain) 7. Ian Healy 8. Graeme Swann 9. Waqar Younis (sorry to Alan Donald) 10. Curtly Ambrose 11. Glenn McGrath

    Not bad, eh? And since I am of the quintessential ODI generation, here is my One-Day XI:

    1. Sanath Jayasuriya 2. Saeed Anwar 3. Chris Gayle (captain) 4. Aravinda de Silva 5. Shahid Afridi 6. Andrew Flintoff 7. Jonty Rhodes 8. Mark Boucher 9. Shoaib Akhtar 10. Curtly Ambrose 11. Dale Steyn

  • Murtaza. on October 26, 2010, 18:56 GMT

    Wasim Akram is best choice in bowling line, He had more varitey then any body in history of cricket, even more then Marshal and Lilli. He is automatic choice, I like Ambrose, but Akram was much better. mc Grath played 80% matches on bowling( in Australia, England, NewZealand, S.Africa and West Indies) tracks. and Akram played his 60 (out of 104) matches on asian batting or spin tracks. But people like you are and will think about statistics like ever.

  • omairhr on October 26, 2010, 18:44 GMT

    hahahaha... people still cribbing about Tendulkar!!!

    c'mon guys... cricinfo put his name on the TITLE of this thing!!!!

    cricinfo should announce all time gods XI and put 11 Tendulkars and Sachin as 12th man in that team!

  • LT11 on October 26, 2010, 18:21 GMT

    Akram is the best bowler in the history of cricket. No doubt he should be in World's XI of any era. Gary sobbers can bowl left hand but can not replace Akram in bowling. This is like replacing Tendulkar by Murali Vijay because both doing Right hand Batting.

  • on October 26, 2010, 18:10 GMT

    Good selection, but i have few questioning over removal of dashing test batsman "Virender Sehwag" who was known for "best attacking opener in all form of game " the rate at he scores the run in the test match was amazing i never seen or heard batsman like this ..

  • on October 26, 2010, 18:09 GMT

    Good selection, but i have few questioning over removal of dashing test batsman "Virender Sehwag" who was known for "best attacking opener in all form of game " the rate at he scores the run in the test match was amazing i never seen or heard batsman like this ..

  • on October 26, 2010, 17:52 GMT

    I think Tendulkar should be the captain of this team..and he should open wearing the ODI jersey and then come at no. 4 in test colours..Tendulkar should also have been in the 2nd XI..how dare he is not part of any XI..the greatest batsman,allrounder,spinner,fielder and captain of all time..

  • hmia1001 on October 26, 2010, 17:50 GMT

    @Pratyush Nidhi Sharma: Because that selector was realistic, rather than inspired by the number of runs!

  • tiger9999 on October 26, 2010, 17:37 GMT

    guys I think there's a typing error -- the real XI is: Openers #1 Junaid Sidiqqui, #2 Imran Farhat, Middle Order #3 Maurice Odumbe, #4 Ian Chappel (Captain), #5 Martin Guptil Wicket Keeper #6 Chris Read, Allrounder #7 Robin Singh, Spinner #8 Nathan Hauritz (Fearsome Pace) #9 S Madan Lal #10 Roger Binny #11 BS Sandhu , COACH - GREG CHAPPEL, TEAM MANAGER - HARBHAJAN SINGH, BOWLING COACH - SREESANTH, BATTING COACH - Kambli, FIELDING COACH - Dilip DOSHI, PR MANAGER- Andrew Symonds

  • Cricster1 on October 26, 2010, 17:18 GMT

    Team 1

    Gavaskar,Lara,Bradman,Headley,Tendulkar,Knott,Barnes,Marshall,Akram,Warne, Murali.

    Team 2

    Hobbs,Sehwag,Viv Richards,Pollock,Sobers,Healy,Imran,Hadlee,McGrath,Kumble,Gibbs

  • nasshhh on October 26, 2010, 16:47 GMT

    Dennis lillee?!!??? u'have got to be silly!!!most ridiculous choice ever! the guy has taken like 6 wickets in total in all of Asia!!! Sir Hadlee was an obvious choice....its almost as if they left him out on purpose....his records are waayyyy better then lillee! He lifted New Zealand to unprecedented feats in the Test arena and was definitely one of the greats of fast bowling...cant believe he dint make it even in the The Second XI.... Only aussies get selected always!

  • Vijay_P_S on October 26, 2010, 16:35 GMT

    If they do World XI for ODIs Sachin would be there in that team too. What a player!

  • on October 26, 2010, 16:32 GMT

    cricinfo x1 Jack Hobbs Leonard Hutton Donald Bradman Sachin Tendulkar Viv Richards Garry Sobers Adam Gilchris tMalcolm Marshall Shane Warne Wasim Akram Dennis Lillee vs my 11. Barry Richards Virender Sehwag Ricky Ponting brian lara jacques kallis steve waugh MS Dhoni Richard Hadlee Anil Kumble Muttiah Muralitharan Allan Donald what do u think?

  • soaf on October 26, 2010, 15:45 GMT

    for those who are criticizing on the selection of wasim.i think unfortunately they didnt get the pleasure of watching wasim in 90s era.ambrose and mcgrath required zip and bounce from pitch but that was not the case with wasim he was so exceptionally talanted and what he could do with a cricket ball ,mcgraths and ambrose could only dream of it.i remember once imran was asked in an interview about who is the best bowler he has seen and his reply was straight one wasim akram.no one can ever come close to wasim and he probably is the greatest match winner bowler ever because he has always performed best when pakistan was down and out.richard hadlee i think is not 50% of wasim he was fortunate enough to play on lively pitches of nz otherwise if he is born in pakistan and played on dusty wickets of pakistan he couldnot get 50 wickets in his carrer.mcgrath was a good line bowler but not a great swing bowler that is why failed in 2005 ashes and couldnot surpass freddy and jones.

  • mahjut on October 26, 2010, 15:38 GMT

    "We have taken great care in choosing the jury for the world XI. All the cricketers on the panel have been captains, and are thus well-versed in the business of selecting teams. Also, they have either played alongside, or watched first-hand, a significant number of the nominees."........and are therefore thoroughly biased by this...having faced Warne in a truly great team who you know you're about to get a kicking from will always be more stressful than facing a Murali who will be the only pressure you face (I may not have experienced this but obviously we all have transferable experiences). I'm not sure there actually is a best 11 - but it sure creates a bit of meaningless, but enjoyable, discussion... I guess, in the end, people, even those 'well versed in the business of selecting teams' are ultimately human and therefore hugely influenced by their prejudices no matter what the facts are. Murali with 34 points less than Warne and not one inferior comparable stat is a funny one:)

  • on October 26, 2010, 15:24 GMT

    Wow wat a big team almost wat i pick just a diffrent opener rest is good i would go for murali rather den shan warne ...

  • on October 26, 2010, 14:31 GMT

    One generation wasted all their resources for the Sachin and they are compelling the next generations to do in their way..Next generation is wasting their money and time and following Sachin blindly..Its a sheer waste of time..Me living in a society..Their acting towards life affecting everyone including myself..

  • trueanalyst on October 26, 2010, 14:30 GMT

    Any team without McGrath is an incomplete one.McGrath selected the oppositions main batsman as his target before every series & almost always has come on top.Sachin & Lara have modest record against McGrath. I even fancy McGrath's chance against the Don himself.Where is Allan Donald by the way??

  • on October 26, 2010, 14:29 GMT

    I love VivRichard. I think they did a good job in selecting the team. I still think saeed Anwar should had been in the equation too but i guess he is not thus its cool. I do believe he was the best left handed batsman every but due to health issues and loss of a daughter, he lost his game. I feel sorry for the mate but It happens..

  • PakPhenom on October 26, 2010, 14:01 GMT

    A very good team, few complaints. Although I would have liked to see Imran Khan and Brian Lara in there. Dennis Lillee probably a question mark with his performances in the sub-continent. Maybe could be replaced by Imran/Holding or maybe Waqar/Donald for the pace variant. And maybe Brian Lara could come in in place of (you know who). All in all a pretty exciting team. The scenario I am drooling over imagining is the prospect of watching Warne and Akram bowling in tandem with an old ball. They would make the ball talk, and with ooh's and ah's literally every delivery, it would get any new viewer to fall in love with the game!

  • on October 26, 2010, 14:00 GMT

    Disagree with the Bradman naysayers. He stood out in his era. All the greats then were just average compared to his ...um...average. He dwarfed everybody for all time. Even WG's record is fairly modest in terms of his average, but he was a colossus and you'd probably back him to bat for his life in a WorldXI.

  • on October 26, 2010, 13:55 GMT

    I think this is a good side...However i would have selected sehwag instead of len hutton...because of the fact that he is so destructive that you need someone like him at the top.......also if hobbs and hutton were at the top they would be at the crease for so long that it would be just frustrating for the rest of the middle order....... My middle order would be Sir Don Bradman, Sachin Tendulkar and Brian Lara.....i went with Brian instead of Viv coz u dont need too much of aggression as Sobers and Gillchrist are going to follow up.......Lara is a much better batsman and is also a lefty...... My bowlers would be Micheal Holding and Malcolm Marshall with Anil Kumble and Wasim Akram... i wouldnt imagine going with any other pacers if you have the west indians...they are the best at it.......I picked Anil Kumble coz i feel he has been shortchanged.Look at his record 619 wickets which he took with a bowling attack which with due respect was nothing.....Warne had Mcgrath and Murali had Vaas

  • needgreenpitches4bowlingallrounders on October 26, 2010, 13:54 GMT

    The World XI: Jack Hobbs, Len Hutton, Don Bradman, Sachin Tendulkar, Viv Richards, Garry Sobers, Adam Gilchrist, Malcolm Marshall, Shane Warne, Wasim Akram, Dennis Lillee gr8 batsmen is always gr8 irrespective of his position and allrounders are better then pure bats and pure bowlers. don't know why team requires so many genuine bowlers and batsmen and specialist openers with Don , viv and sachin in team. Would like to c Lara and kallis instead of these openers. and hadlee instead of dennis meaning

    The World XI: Kallis, Lara, Don Bradman, Sachin Tendulkar, Viv Richards, Garry Sobers, Adam Gilchrist, Malcolm Marshall, Shane Warne, Wasim Akram, Hadlee thats the best

  • on October 26, 2010, 13:54 GMT

    Disappointment for SAfricans.no RG Pollock. But a pretty impressive team nonetheless.

  • rkannancrown on October 26, 2010, 13:48 GMT

    It is funny to read about Warne being an unanimous selection. Bradman & Sobers were expectedly unanimous but Warne ? He has a poor record against good players of spin and if you take out his English wickets, he is lucky to be even in the running.Marshall is also a bit of surprise because Walsh, Ambrose and Holding have all outperformed him. Hadllee has a better strike rate than Lille and had greater variety - how could he have been ignored ? The committe seems to have prefixed the number of players from each country before selecting. It is difficult to comment about players such as Hobbs & Hutton because they played in an era where the skills were less but the wickets were treacherous. Their records are not as impressive as many others but I wonder if any of the selection committtee actually saw them play.

  • on October 26, 2010, 13:33 GMT

    I have no idea why the one selector did not select Tendulkar - otherwise he would have been unanimous choice too.

  • RANAROYALS on October 26, 2010, 13:27 GMT

    readers selection is better than world XI by jury hobbs even with stats and at no. of different venues he played he is no more greater than gavaskar. without muralitharan that team cant be a complete test team. he is a great and leading wicket taker of test cricket.is being srilankan is his main drawback

  • Bollo on October 26, 2010, 13:26 GMT

    Also interesting to look at the bowlers re.wickets in fewest test matches. At 200w Grimmett(36matches) pips Lillee and Waqar(38). At the lowest round figure which all 4 World XI bowlers qualify it`s Lillee(56) ahead of Murali(58), Hadlee/Marshall(61), Warne/Donald(63). Akram(70),comes in behind McGrath, Trueman, Waqar, Kumble and Imran.

  • soulstealer on October 26, 2010, 13:20 GMT

    I deem the pickers incapable based on the one fact that Tendulkar was not unanimously selected. Who in their RIGHT mind will not pick him?

  • Bollo on October 26, 2010, 13:14 GMT

    Right, I`m on a roll. Thought I might put up the quickest to each of the 1000run milestones per innings just for fun, and the second fastest for comparison. 1K Sutcliffe/Weekes(12), Bradman(13). 2K Bradman(22), Headley(32). 3K Bradman(33), Weekes(51). 4K Bradman(48), Sutcliffe(68). 5K Bradman(56), Hobbs(91). 6K Bradman(68),Sobers(111). 7K Hammond(131), Sehwag(134). 8K Sangakara(152), Sachin(154). 9K Dravid(176), Lara/Ponting(177). 10K Lara/Tendulkar(195), Ponting(196).

    Fascinating stuff.

  • Bollo on October 26, 2010, 12:20 GMT

    Thought it might be instructive to look at the fastest players to reach 5000 test runs in terms of innings played, 5000 runs being the highest round figure all top 7 selected in the World XI achieved. Bradman(56), Hobbs(91), Sobers(95), Richards (95), Hutton (98), Tendulkar(103), Gilchrist(122). Other notables include Gavaskar(95), Hayden(95), Sehwag(99), Hammond(97),Lara(104).

    Things get fascinating at the 10,000run mark, Lara(195), Tendulkar(195), Ponting (196) then Dravid(206) and Gavaskar(212). Lara(213) easily fastest to 11,000, ahead of Ponting(222) and Sachin(223).At this stage Ponting and Sachin the only two to have reached 12,000- both in 247 innings.And Sachin obviously the only man to reach 13,000 (266inns) and 14,000 (279inns).

  • hmia1001 on October 26, 2010, 12:16 GMT

    Steve waugh, ponting, or even lara should have been in for sachin!!! Formers had far more better capability to take the attack on the bowling side as compared to the later!!!

  • BillyCC on October 26, 2010, 12:13 GMT

    Does anyone know how tall Hobbs and Hutton were? If they were short, the batting order starts off with 4 short right-handed batsman which plays into the hands of some very useful bowlers all capable of bowling that troubling length to a short right handed batsman. Add a 5th right hander who was tall in Viv Richards and you have quite an unbalanced batting lineup. Luckily, 3 of the best bowlers to right handers made it into the same team.

  • on October 26, 2010, 12:06 GMT

    Congrats Teddy!!!.... But i"m sorry guys.. there's no way and all time eleven can be choosen and Brian Charles Lara isn't there.

  • on October 26, 2010, 12:03 GMT

    All are just seeing the statiscs of Muralitharan and Warne and thinks Murali is best... Undoubtedly muralitharan achieved a lot. But one thing has to keep in mind, Murali played almost half of matches is Srilanka Which were prepared especially good to spinners and consider the matches played in Sub continent those are also helps only to spinners(See Seamers resord of Indians and Srilankan compare to spinners-It clearly shows). But in contrast consider shane warne he played only abou 15 to 20% of matches in Sub continent and Srilanka which was helpful to spinners balance all he played in Fast and Bouncy wickets only. No where spinners were shined except Asian spinners bcoz in all countries pitches are made for Fast bowlers only. This will explain Warne is best ahead of Muralidharan.

  • hmia1001 on October 26, 2010, 11:48 GMT

    @biju: Dhoni :) probably this is what you wanna listen :)

  • the_sherminator on October 26, 2010, 11:41 GMT

    I can't believe anyone is seriously suggesting Kapil Dev. He was a good cricketer, but of the great all-rounders of his era - Kapil, Imran, Botham, Hadlee, he was the third best batsman and fourth best bowler. C'mon, is that really worth considering for AN ALL TIME XI? Can I put up a wild card for the 2nd XI - Johnny Wardle - the best chinaman bowler ever, a world class orthodox SLA (Test bowling average of 20) and a useful big-hitter at 10 or 11

  • hmia1001 on October 26, 2010, 11:39 GMT

    @Naiyar Saifi: I agree, but there are many other great batsmen who are missing; only because the selectors had to accomodate sachin some where. Otherwise, they could have found many better players with less matches but match winning hundreds!

  • Stolen1 on October 26, 2010, 11:36 GMT

    My team compositios are. Sunil Gavaskar, Saeed Anwer, Javed Miandad, Sachin Tendulkar, Viv Richard, Imran Khan, Hadlee, Gilcrisht, Wasim Akram, Ambrose and Murli. Lets the debate begin and i will justy why i chose these legends.

  • 2.14istherunrate on October 26, 2010, 11:31 GMT

    Warne vs Murali: I think with Warne opponents played the man, with Murali the bowler. Hell, Warne's now playing professional poker,so it goes to show. Some magician!! Also you could never break him-viz 2005 ashes. with the Australlain side stripped bare, he was the core of that side. He did half the batting that year well as take 40+wickets. Indomitable. He should have captained the side in my view, but I'm glad he didn't. As for Murali, very innovative and mysterious and virtually impossible to play with tthe doosra. For readers who don't why understand Hobbs as great opener, he scored 100 tons after the age of 40!!! He could play oin any surface( all uncovered) against any attack. Hutton has been termed the best technician ever. They were my picks as well as the judges.

  • veeranna_moli on October 26, 2010, 11:25 GMT

    Here is my XI: Sir Jack Hobbs, Virender Sehwag, Brian Lara, Sachin Tendulkar, Sir Donald Bradman, Sir Garry Sobers, Adam Gilchrist, Glenn McGrath, Malcolm Marshall, Shane Warne, Sydney Barnes...

    Good to see 7 out of above in the officially declared World XI. Its always good to have a second spinner in the team..

  • 2.14istherunrate on October 26, 2010, 11:16 GMT

    I think the whole process of picking these elevens has been a lot of fun and seems to caught many people's imaginations. It's never taken long , usually 2 or 3 seconds to decide on picks and only ever a couple of places to ponder over. To me there are one or two surprises in the final selections by the judges-but in the case of Wasim Akram and Fred Trueman especially, very pleasing ones. That Imran got the nod over Boitham was more shocking given the runs Beefy scored even if he did bowl more long hops than Imran. Also Bedi and Sehwag not appearing in either XI is mysterious to say the least. Anyway thanks for the pleasure, Cricinfo.

  • lsd123 on October 26, 2010, 11:06 GMT

    I go with 3 changes: 1. Murali for Warne 2. Lara for Tendulkar 3. Sangakara for Gilcrist

  • MilindaSB on October 26, 2010, 10:55 GMT

    i would love to c a match btw world XI and da second XI

  • vin93 on October 26, 2010, 10:37 GMT

    Would defenitely pick murali over warne, just for Warne's poor show against India (the best spin palying team of his time, where Murali dominated everyone including Indians. Murali's numbers did not turn into big match winning performances that people boast about warne, just because there are not many good bowlers around murali to complete the job.

  • on October 26, 2010, 10:36 GMT


  • Srikolith on October 26, 2010, 10:22 GMT

    What is this? Where's murali? The world's best wicket taker is not included in all time 11. How can warne ahead of murali? This is ridiculous. Anyway murali won't be upset by these ....... things. The world know he should be among the list.

  • on October 26, 2010, 9:57 GMT

    How on earth Jack Hobbs be selected instead of Sunil Gavasskar. If not for any thing, he gets in only on his performance against West Indian bowlers - certainly the most lethal pace attack in history of the game...

  • Strongscotch on October 26, 2010, 9:39 GMT

    Barry Richards..how many test matches he played.. G.Pollock should have been there...what a great batsman..

    Alan Knott> Gilchrist

    There were e-mails going around to vote for players from your country..Just imagine the Indian Votes..!!! those votes should be divided by 2 and SL votes should have been multiplied by 2...hahahhaha..

  • NISH67 on October 26, 2010, 9:29 GMT

    Hobbs and hutton both played the majority of their test cricket against one team whilst the rest of the teams including WI and SA during their period were not very competitive - so I would have had Gavaskar in there in one of the opening spots as a certainty . Lillee was a utter flop in Pakistan , didnt do much in the only test he played in SL at the fag end of his career and never played in India . Infact almost 90% of his wickets were in either Aus or England - Holding or Ambrose would have been a much better choice . The fast bowling in both the first and 2nd eleven looks thin . We expected a much better choice - a real disappointment after all the hype .

  • Nayeem_Kohir on October 26, 2010, 9:28 GMT

    f there is an Indian who deserved to be in the World XI, it is Sehwag.

    Brian Lara, Greg Chappel, and some other batsmen from the past are superior batsmen than Sachin Tendulkar. Ricky ponting, Kevin Pietersen and Jaysuriya are as good as Sachin or even better when playing under pressure. Though Inzimam did not dominate as these batsmen did, he delivered when it mattered the most.

    Sachin is a selfish player and plays for records and always want to be called himself the best. He never comes up with the best batsman comment for anyone like Sehwag, Brian Lara or anyone else.

    On the other hand, a selfless Lara or even a fan in Sehwag called Sachin the best.

    Sachin is the most selfish cricketer I have even seen.

    So to see Sachin in the world XI makes me laugh at the Jury. This world XI should have the likes of Greg Chappel, Brian Lara, and Imran Khan to make the World XI instead of the likes of Sachin Tendulkar.

  • MozCricket on October 26, 2010, 9:27 GMT

    Amazing that Kallis doesnt even raise a mention. He and Sobers are the two greatest all-rounders ever, no matter which way you cut it. Sobers batting average is a 2 runs better than Kallis, whose bowling average is 2.5 runs better than sobers. After that it is a very long way down to Dev and co. A very long way


  • Adeel-Shehzad on October 26, 2010, 9:25 GMT

    @Dil_CricketFan @Rooboy @CSpiers Never actually watched gilchrist playing outstanding & glorious strokes.. he just used to throw his bat on every ball & it was his luck that favoured him most...not a handy batsman, couldn't play in tough situations.. so u cant consider him as true batsman & if u only rate him over MS Dhoni just bcoz he averages 47 in tests which was only bcoz i said earlier his luck..but he is too far away from the the genius & brilliancy which Dhoni possesses...

  • Beertjie on October 26, 2010, 9:07 GMT

    Having had my beef about the World XI, I can't help but mention my big problem with the Second XI: How could Fred Trueman make it ahead of bowlers like Holding, Donald, Waqar, Hadlee, Ambrose, even McGrath (who confessed to boring batsmen out)? On hard wickets he was pretty ordinary and like others his strike rate was enhanced by cleaning up against weak teams. On the captaincy of the first team, I agree with @Atul about Warne having the best brain. For the Second XI, it must be Imran!

  • biju on October 26, 2010, 8:57 GMT

    Who is the captain of the team.Or is it a team with out captain. I think Jury forgot about that.

  • PGW81 on October 26, 2010, 8:37 GMT

    @mknmak : Sachin is not such a great player as he is made out to be - I would have 11 Lara's instead of 11 Sachins. And you have no clue of what talent is - for someone like Akram who could swing the same delivery both ways, could talk the language of the ball, Shane Warne whose aura got him more wickets than his talent, Richards whose sheer presence could enthrall millions across the globe - his concentration and power immense - his jaws working rhythmically, his hand eye co-ordination - supreme... well the world has got many more batsmen than Tendulkar - Tendulkar is a good batsman but not the best. Had Lara and Ponting been Indians they would have scored more than 20000 runs each, by now.

  • on October 26, 2010, 8:28 GMT

    Great selection. Only I don't know about the opening pair of Hobbs and Hutton. I'd rather go with the reader's selection. Those against Akram's making it haven't probably seen him bowl. Lethal's the word. And this is an Indian fan speaking who's seen his team face the brunt of the music. And Trueman in the second 11 is just a bunch of nostalgia. A host of choices from Hadlee to Holding.

  • Amol_Gh on October 26, 2010, 8:22 GMT

    Bradman scored against the SAME opposition on the SAME pitches every single time and also when cricket was in its infancy.

  • BRNUGGET on October 26, 2010, 8:19 GMT

    99% Thumbs up for jury's choice though readers choice is too biased in favor of the last two decades. 1% I would have had Holding or Lindwall (though his name was not there in choices) or Ambrose instead of Wasim. Agreed Wasim is all time great, a super left arm quick, but then we already have Sir Gary who was no mean left arm quick, there is no need for another leftie. Glad to see KING Sir Viv and Macko in jury's XI, they were super greats, entertainers of all times. Cannot make out how the READERS choice could leave out both especially King Viv, the most destructive and devastating batsman of all times, destroyer of bowlers especially quicks, the ideal No 3 followed by Sir Don ..

  • ceserpeter on October 26, 2010, 8:08 GMT

    i cant beleive why all of you forgt KAPIL DEV one of the best allrouder who standouts for his best perfomances comes out from him when his team really needs.... antony

  • on October 26, 2010, 8:06 GMT

    @ mknkmak , with all due respect, get a life. you have a right to express your opinion, but also you need to be sure what you're saying. Zaheer is not at all a LEGEND, you just cannot compare atleast ZK to Wasim Akram, look at his stats if you're unsure, world was AFRAID to face Wasim. wont ever happen to ZK. and by the way, its WORLD XI, not India XI. if India had been such a great team, with the so-called (in my opinion "overrated") "talents" like sachin and ZK, it would have been stayed years on no.1 in all the formats, fact is that India's bowling attack has never been lethal, India is a batting team, taking advantage of its batting wickets. can tendulkar bowl? may be but very average bowler, chk his stats. can he keep wicket, NO way. so how do you expect a team full of "sachins" u gotta be dreaming. stop "overrating" indian team

  • on October 26, 2010, 8:00 GMT

    Where is Grame Pollock> I think he is the best batsmen to have played after Brdman

  • --.-- on October 26, 2010, 7:58 GMT

    @ Haqikat Dhillon ... Here's My XI..>>> Sehwag, Gavaskar, Dravid, Sachin, Sangakkara, Laxman, M. Jayawardene, Imran, Akram, Waqar and Murali. Do you think your team will be able to beat this team IN INDIA ? Look @ your Warne's record in India and think twice before challenging :). Your fast bowlers will look ordinary in spinners paradise. And Muralitharan is enough to get your team out twice. Everyone knows very well that Australians don't play spin bowling well.

  • Bukansi on October 26, 2010, 7:54 GMT

    George Headly for Viv any day, look at their averages (a gap of 7 and 10 for test and 1st class respectivelly) and remember Headly was carrying a weak team and playing on uncovered surfaces!!!

    I am not sure how Akram got into side before people like Ambrose, Heedle, Mcgrath, Murali and a host of others. the left hand thing does not hold as sobers negates it

    Kallis would have been my all rounder for the 2nd team as his stats are actually better than Sobers!!

    On a different not, how come LARA does not make the ESPN 25, it is ludicrous as you cannot check for any batting record and he does not appear in the first 5!!!

  • on October 26, 2010, 7:52 GMT

    I think the selectors have done a failry good job of the world XI. Though as an Indian I would a little disappointed to see the name of Virendar Sehwag missing out. Yes he is not an all time great but in the last decade or so he along with Gilchrist have redefined how test cricket is really played in the current context.

  • hatrick26 on October 26, 2010, 7:45 GMT

    @Haqikat Dhillon..may be in Perth, Aus ur all time Oz XI might be great but not elsewhere. The bowling attack you mention,xcept Lillee, played so many times in India and could not even do much against an Indian team with only member of the World XI (SRT) , so how are they going to compete with a World XI that is held in say, Lords/Port of Spain/Eden, against Richards,SRT,Lara,Sobers,Akram,Marshall,Hobbs,etc. Nice try.

  • omairhr on October 26, 2010, 7:44 GMT

    The Second XI can bowl the World XI, TWICE. Not sure about the reverse!

  • Bukansi on October 26, 2010, 7:35 GMT

    As great as the master blaster (Sir Viv) was and as much as i enjoyed following him, i believe George Headly deserved to be in this team before him. He has a better average, played in a very weak team, played on uncovered wickets, and his first class average (69) shows his consistency for some may argue he played very few tests to be fairly judged

    As for Wasim, i really do not know how he made it to this side, i can name at least 5 bowlers better than he was and as someone mentioned, Sobers presence negates the left handers argument

    On a different note, how come LARA does not make the ESPN 25???? it is both ludicrous

  • on October 26, 2010, 7:18 GMT

    Don't think some Lara supporters crying to place him in place of SRT makes sense.Their claim is that Lara scores huge when on song.If that is the case what about Sehwag ? STR: of 82 & avg: of 54. scored 3 scores of above 290. 2 resulted in wins and 1 enabled a draw. 2 scored at above 100 STR: and 1 about 85. Also total 6 200+ scores.A lot of 150s too.And these all against new ball.amazing!!! isn't it ? Easily throws Lara into oblivion. Then why didn't he get a selection in the eleven ? There in lies the answer.At consistancy he falls behind Lara.Similar is for Lara against Tendulkar.But even at aggressiveness Sehwag is way above Lara compared to what Lara is against SRT.Yet Sehwag not in eleven. So is Lara's case.He is only slightly more aggressive to SRT at his very best but falls a lot behind when over all consistancy is taken into account.And that is why Lara is not in the eleven. Hope all Lara supporters and Sachin bashers get a lot out of this message.

  • CharlieAlanJakeHarperFamily on October 26, 2010, 7:07 GMT

    ponting should be there as no 3 and as he is the best slip catcher anyone who can beat ponting in catching in entire XI common u cant get 20 wickets as LBW or BOWLED and hence got to expect catches and hence u have to take in the criterion of athleticism and physical fitness in the selection mere numbers or stats are not good enough in the modern day cricket so this XI guys is absolutely is not flawless

  • CrackerDaddy on October 26, 2010, 7:04 GMT

    Well, Murali might not mind for not being selected to the 1st XI...He's from Sri Lanka ladies and gentlmen, I'm sure he knows that he will not be belong here, though the fans will always know what a great cricketer he is...not matter he's included in this list or not....If I want to pick a team that will win matches, he's on my team any day!

  • the_sherminator on October 26, 2010, 7:02 GMT

    I reckon the team below is stronger than the one picked by the judges and I have also decided that my decision is final, so everyone else may as well stop posting:

    Hobbs, Sutcliffe, Bradman, Lara, Tendulkar, Sobers, Gilchrist, Akram, Marshall, Warne, Barnes

    Openers play as pair and Hobbs/Sutcliffe were the best ever, no argument. I would normally have Tendulkar at 4 but wanted to split the lefties. You can't not have Lara, twice Test world record holder - and he is another left hander. I have picked an attack that will take wickets in all conditions. Lillee goes because he wasn't even the best in his own era (Hadlee, Imran, Holding, Garner). Akram gets the nod over Imran as he was so devastating he could turn any match.

    Imran and Murali just fail to make the cut, but would be in my touring 16 along with Sehwag, Richards & Knott

  • mknkmak on October 26, 2010, 7:00 GMT

    the world xi should be like this. 1) Tendulkar (2) Tendulkar (3)Tendulkar (4)Tendulkar (5)Tendulkar (6)Tendulkar (7)Tendulkar (8)Tendulkar (9)Tendulkar (10)Tendulkar (11)Tendulkar . No other cricketer come even close to the greatness of sachin. sachin is the best. i dont think don bradmen or viv richard have even a tiny drop of talent compare to sachin. why akram is on the the list Zaheer khan is the best left arm bowler ever world has seen. there should be anil kumble not shane ware. kumble is far more destructive then warne. warne was sachin bunny. he never able to get sachin wicket in his career. dhoni is the best wicket keeper batsman ever world has seen, what creep players like adam or alan are in the list. no othe country come close to india in cricket. india is the best. even indian club team beat so called greats from australia, west indies pakistan or south africa srilanka. india is the best other stink..

  • on October 26, 2010, 6:55 GMT

    bad selection indeed.. murali should be there.....Lara is better tendulkar!

  • nitrixx on October 26, 2010, 6:54 GMT

    We want Sir Ravindra Jadeja!

  • CharlieAlanJakeHarperFamily on October 26, 2010, 6:53 GMT

    well can anyone tell who will make an excellent slip catcher if the LILLEE and AKRAM get the edges whom do u think can pounce on the oppurtunity anyone ? like ponting ,mark taylor,mark waugh,rahul dravid (RECORD HOLDER) kallis,mahela. now then who at short leg with SK WARNE bowling ? katich, de villers,jonty rhodes, u talk about people not being selected to save matches in world XI ,agression and ruthlessness are there any physically fit and athletic guys i guess ponting at 35 is the only fittest guy

  • on October 26, 2010, 6:52 GMT

    Ambrose is the greatest under-rated fast bowler. He could tear down any batting line up with his bouncers and york lengths. And also, Richard Hadlee had more variety than Akram. Perhaps Akram finds a place because he is left-handed. Hadlee surprisingly is is none of the teams. He was miles ahead of Freddie Trueman et al.

  • brohitb on October 26, 2010, 6:44 GMT

    @haqikat ... come back to reality ....removing all the australians & filling in other people ... new xi would be something like ...hobbs, hutton, lara,sachin,viv,sobers,sanga/knotts,wasim,marshall,murali,ambrose...nd australian team hayden,taylor (<<hobbs+ hutton any day - i have only stats & people's words at my disposal, so u can argue) , bradman (>lara , but on a given day lara ~= bradman), ponting (<<< sachin, now don't argue on this , u can have a discussion but please dont argue), stevy (sir viv, need i say more), gilly (here u score most points), [no allrounder] [gillespie vs sir garry] will edge sobers out in bowling, leee (no matter how many e's u put still way less than wasim bhai), warne (murli is comparable as far as wicket taking capabiliy is cosidered, but warne is my fav so a poibnt given)... now mother of all contests ... mcgrath+lillie (again marshall + ambrose will edge out)... u can have a dicussion but in my opinion world eleven will win on 6.5 ocassions

  • cricfanraj on October 26, 2010, 6:40 GMT

    @Haqikat Dhillon - How about WI 11. Just add Headly,Sobers to 70's team . They would have beaten Ausis by fair distance.

    Greenidge,Hynes,Headly,Richards,Lara,Sobers,Dujan,Roberts,Marshal,Garner,Holding .

  • on October 26, 2010, 6:40 GMT

    @Haqikat Dhillon : Let's say the world 11 plays the Aussie 11 you mentioned. Since Bradman,Warne,Gilchrist and Lillee are wanted in your great team , let's put Graeme Pollock in Bradman's place and have Viv Richards batting at no 3 where he was a colossus averaging 65. By general public opinion in cricinfo , I'd say most people would have Curtly Ambrose / Richard Hadlee filling Lillee's shoes with Ambrose getting the nod in most cases. Warne can be replaced by Muralitharan as all the Sri Lankans have been wailing for. Finally let's get Alan Knott in for Gilchrist . So it's your Aussie XI : Hayden , Taylor , Bradman , Ponting , Steve Waugh , Glichrist , Warne , Lee , Lillee , McGrath and Gillespie.


    Hobbs , Hutton , Richards , Tendulkar, Graeme Pollock , Sobers , Knott , Marshall , Akram , Ambrose , Muralitharan (This is not the non-Aussie 11 I'd have picked , just the popular one)

  • SHAKMOH on October 26, 2010, 6:38 GMT

    Murali should have been there insted of Warne......

  • delta20 on October 26, 2010, 6:29 GMT

    No Ambrose, McGrath, Holding, Donald even in the second XI....... laughable.. Most of the selection are good but I still say some selections are purely based on market value and stats of the players rather than purely on performance and stats... Llet me present before you all my all time Indian XI Gagan Khoda, Deep Das Gupta, Vikram Rathore, Rohan gavaskar, Pankaj Dharmani, Hemang badani, Robin Singh, Ishant sharma, Harvinder Singh, Debasish Mohanty, Nilesh kulkarni 12th man: Nikhil Haldipur

    And all time World XI Stuart carlisle, Vikram rathore, Ian bell, Mohammad ashraful, Matthew sinclair, Salim elahi, Lanka desilva, Nicky boje, Paul reiffel, Debashis mohanty, Nixon mclean 12th man: Alan mulaly

  • Jaggadaaku on October 26, 2010, 6:16 GMT

    These players-Don Bradman, Sachin Tendulkar(Master), M Murlitharan(Spinner), Garry Sobbers(All-rounder), Brian Lara(Biggie Maker), Adam Gilchrist (Wicket Keeper /Batsman), must be in any World XI without any exceptions, and they are not comparable with others or each other because they have their own techniques and skills to play. All other spots in the team they have to look for other qualified cricketers.

  • BlueyCollar on October 26, 2010, 6:05 GMT

    Generally agree but Ambrose was the best fast bowler I have ever seen live, thankfully from the stands not from 22 yards. There has been better glovemen than Gilchrist but I suppose he got the nod for his batting as well. And what about captain!!! My pick for captain never got the opportunity to captain his country SHANE WARNE not only the best cricket brain but the best competitor and the best player ever. I judge champions by how often they win a game by their own efforts and warne did that more often than anyone I have ever seen. If there was a stat for percentage of wins vs games played in all formats in all grades Warne would be a mile out in front.

  • PHANTOM-X on October 26, 2010, 5:58 GMT


    XI = 11 players. In a Cricket team there are 11 players. The world XI means the greatest Cricket playing 11 cricketers the world have ever seen.

  • on October 26, 2010, 5:56 GMT

    i do believe imran khan should hv been included in the team not only as a normal player but as the captain of the team. however my team that was submitted was -hobs,gavaskar,don,sachin,viv,sobers,gilcrist,imran,akram,murali,lillee...sunil in the opening slot was straight pick 4 me but cudnt find any lefty as his partner. however picked hobbs 4 his outstanding record. there was no way i cud hv excluded don or sachin from middle order,had 2 do it at the expense of one of my favourite lara.dint had any 2nd thought abt viv,sobers,gilchrist, imran & wasim. warne was behind murali on the basis that warnie dint had very good record in india.i want lillee 2 open the bowling with wasim 1 for right- left combination & 2 for fearsome speed he had....the weakest point of my team i blv that there is no lefty in the top order courtesy 2 don,sachin,viv & sobers & sorry lara..wasim,lillee,imran,sobers & murali have a formidable record nywhere in the world......

  • on October 26, 2010, 5:51 GMT

    Where is Javed Bhai ? In any form of Cricket, In any situation , against any bowling attack, Javed Bhai's batting was a treat to watch.The solid defence, the nimble footwork, the body balance,running between the wicket -specially for stolen singles -everything was a lesson for youngesters.I feel that he was even better than Sir Viv Richards.His strokes were never flashy, but well executed with complete authority.As a Indian spectator ,whenever he was playing against India, I never felt comfortable as long as he was at the crease.The same I can not say about Richards.Even though Richards was dominating, we knew that he could be out at any moment - just like Sehwag.But Javed Miadad's wicket was never cheap. Was he not considered because of on and off the field behaviour ? Come on... his beaviour was better than Lillee

  • Dhanesh_D_Prabhu on October 26, 2010, 5:49 GMT

    Great job by the jury and also the readers. I appreciate that the readers have picked 6 out of 11 who were picked by jury. I think the readers are too attracted towards a little bit modern players because they choose 7 players who are currently playing or have retired in this decade or last. Only Bradman, sobers and gavaskar fit from the olde era. I would have loved to see keith miller in the playing XI too but unfortunate to hear that Murali is not in the playing XI

  • on October 26, 2010, 5:46 GMT

    i really think s.gavaskar should 'e been included @cost of j.hobbs! no one faced andy roberts, wes hall, griffith, marshall, garner, lillie n thompson,hadlee,imran khan in most testing conditions ! though i personally dont like sunny!

  • Crickettalent on October 26, 2010, 5:46 GMT

    Waseem was very exciting player, who have a variety of delivers...Ambrose or Hadlee does not have variety....The opening spell waseem do are the best spells in bowling history, u can watch ball moving every where.... :)

  • on October 26, 2010, 5:43 GMT

    My picks,

    Bradman Era: J.Hobbs, A.Morris, G.Headley, D.Bradman*, H.Sutcliffe, K.Miller, D.Tallon^, S.Barnes, A.Bedser, J.Laker, C.Grimmett

    Sobers Era: B.Richards, E.Weekes, Hanif Mohd, G.Pollock, C.Walcott, Garry Sobers*, A.Knot^, F.Trueman, B.Statham, BS.Chandrashekar, W.Hall

    Richards Era: S.Gavaskar, G.Greenidge, G.Chappell, J.Miandad, V.Richards*, Imran Khan, J.Dujon^, I.Botham, M.Marshall, M.Holding, D.Lillee

    Tendulkar Era: Hayden, Sehwag, Lara, Tendulkar*, Ponting, Kallis, Gilchrist^, Warne, Akram, Muralitharan, McGrath

  • Crickettalent on October 26, 2010, 5:35 GMT

    I think Lara or ponting must be picked in place of sachin, sachin is not a match winner when he is young, but the real beauties of batting are Brian Lara or Ponting...

  • PGW81 on October 26, 2010, 5:34 GMT

    My XI will go as under : Darryl Cullinan, Ajit Agarkar(c), Abey Kuruvilla, Romesh Kaluwitharana (wk), Phil Simmons, Eddo Brandes, De Villiers, Sunil Joshi, Shakib-al-Hassan,Asif Mujtaba,Staurt Law - the team with two left feet. I am still astounded by the fact that the jury did not consider selecting Ajit Agarkar - the man who could play the dual role of being a bowler for India and the 12th on field player for the opposition... I dont know any other player who can play this role to perfection. The jury must have Agarkar in the first as well as second XI 0 he provides fine balance - both teams can then go in with only 10 players.....

  • TheOnlyEmperor on October 26, 2010, 5:30 GMT

    I think Warne, Wasim and Gilly didn't deserve a place in the 11. Warne wasn't the best spinner if you compare 10 and 5 wkt hauls of Murali. Gilly wasn't the best wicketkeeper around nor Wasim better than Hadlee. No way. Look at the number of 10 wkt hauls that Hadlee took! Wasim doesn't compare favorably even to Imran. Wasim had Waqar to hunt as a pair - a bowler who was his equal if not better in every respect. Hadlee didn't have anybody. Imran had Sarfraz, but nowhere his equal. That's what makes Hadlee great.

  • on October 26, 2010, 5:23 GMT

    Well in my opinion the jury did wonderful job and decided an excellent team..Just I would like to add here that Richard Hadlee should be in the time..may be over. Lillee as Aussies are already in majority so one way to add surely from NZ side.

  • on October 26, 2010, 5:17 GMT

    here is the challange.

    remove all australians from World X1 and add players from other countries. Let Don Bradman play at no. 3 and Steve Waugh at no. 5 along with Australian side of 1995- 2005 and i bet nobody will match that team.

    Australian X1 - Hayden, Mark Taylor, Don Bradman, Ricky Ponting, Steve Waugh, Adam Gilchrist, Warne,Lee, Lilee, Mcgrath, Gilspee

    I bet Australian X1 will smash World X1 any day at any pitch.

  • Amol_Gh on October 26, 2010, 5:13 GMT

    Lara straightaway should have been in the 1st XI, any day. It's not easy to play in a consistently losing team & score. Also any bowler who took LESS than 4 wickets per test should NOT EVEN BE CONSIDERED. So choosing Akram (an excellent ODI guy though) is a farce, especially when he has replaced the Great Imran Khan who should have been in the 1st team. Also sometimes Stats do mean something so: Kallis easily bowls Sobers out of the team, any day, apartheid or not. And if the total number of WI fast bowling greats in first two teams is a Grand Sum of just ONE, then something's obviously wrong. I would have loved to see Gavaskar in the 1st XI, just for the fact that he faced/braved/scored against the cricket's greatest tricky/fastest missiles ever, the WI quartet. As for the Readers XI: just take it with a pinch of salt & I'm an Indian saying this.

  • VASEE86 on October 26, 2010, 5:09 GMT

    No, just justify the commission of "Murali", point out any bowler in the world of cricketing history who announce his retirement at the stage where he is 8 wickets short of 800 to become first bowler to achieve this mile stone. can u name one bowler who got the guts to announce his retirement in situation like this????????????, there is absolutely no one then or after..... piss off the selection jury.................

  • on October 26, 2010, 4:56 GMT

    Its very surprising to see that Crtly Ambrose doesn't find a place in the neither of the elevens ! I would have him in place of Lillee any day especially coz his great performances are not localized..........

  • lsd123 on October 26, 2010, 4:44 GMT

    Some changes has to be done in ALL Time FIRST XI. Alan Knott or Kumar Sngakara can replace Gilcrist. If u re going with a pure wicket Keeper Alan Knott could be a automatic choice. If u r going with a Wicket keeper + TEST Batsman Sanga is better than Gillcrist. ( Gilchrist is better to One Day formats as a batsman ). Other change i would prefer to go with Lara rather than Tendulkar. (To have to balance the team with Left hander). And also my personal view is Lara is better than Sachin . Because Lara played with weak WI side and Tendulkar now playing with best batting line up in the world. So he can score runs easily. and also Lara played every single run for his team like Sobers. Lara scored 21% of team runs in his career. That's is only behind to Sir Don and George Headley .

  • on October 26, 2010, 4:43 GMT

    only 2 changes are required, lara instead of tendulkar and hadlee instead of akram

  • Hamdard786 on October 26, 2010, 4:27 GMT

    Can some one explain, What is XI? Thank you

  • BRNUGGET on October 26, 2010, 4:25 GMT

    99% Thumbs up for jury's choice though readers choice is too biased in favor of the last two decades. 1% I would have had Holding or Lindwall (though his name was not there in choices) or Ambrose instead of Wasim. Agreed Wasim is all time great, a super left arm quick, but then we already have Sir Gary who was no mean left arm quick, there is no need for another leftie. Glad to see KING Sir Viv and Macko in jury's XI, they were super greats, entertainers of all times. Cannot make out how the READERS choice could leave out both especially King Viv, the most destructive and devastating batsman of all times, destroyer of bowlers especially quicks, the ideal No 3 followed by Sir Don ..

  • arun_gga on October 26, 2010, 4:21 GMT

    I think Grimmet should have been included. The team would have looked more balanced with 2 seamers and 2 spinners (leaving out Akram - who surely appears to be slightly overrated to be in this team). The team is very batsmen dominated.

  • PHANTOM-X on October 26, 2010, 4:01 GMT


    Richard Hadlee and Murali have soooo many similarities. Richard Hadlee was one time record holder for most number of wickets and most number of five wicket hauls and ten wicket hauls. Murali took the lead and now he reigns supreme at the top. When Richard Hadlee was playing he had only few support bowlers He did all the hard work he had to do both containment and taking wickets. Murali had only one support bowler. If you take Warnie for example he had so many great bowlers around. when he comes to bowl the other bowlers had taken 2-3 wickets and all he had to do was attack from the beginning. there batsman normally post 500+ scores, and they were No. 1 at the time he played the game and he knew Aussies were a Superior unit and other countries were lesser (except India and Arjuna Ranathunga). Richard Hadlee and Murali had sooo much pressure when these two came to bowl. most of the time batsmen were well set when these bowlers came to bowl. I dunno why they were left out ?

  • on October 26, 2010, 3:58 GMT

    It would have been great to see Kallis in there, even if in the second eleven.

  • blackie on October 26, 2010, 3:43 GMT

    I agree MarkM33. Even though this is great fun, its really very subjective and based on nationalistic biases, or on the players we've actually seen, etc. I'm a west indian and I've seen Marshall but only heard of Lillee, who do you think I'm going to pick???? if you compare records(Tests and ODI) of bowlers, Hadlee(most 4 and 5 fors) noses out the others(no pun intended) with Mcgrath(most wickets), Marshall(best average and strike rate) and Ambrose very, very close by. I also think they are some players who made the game very exciting because of their special skills whose records are not as great as some others; Botham, Imran Khan, Akram, Younis, Garner, Miandad, Martin Crowe, Mark Taylor. These guys made us want to watch the game but may never get mention in any 'Best. X1'.

  • Marcio on October 26, 2010, 3:43 GMT

    I'm an Aussie, but sympathise with the kiwis on the Hadlee issue. I think he was as good as Lillee, and he sure knew which end of the bat to hold. Perhaps Lillee was quicker, and at his peak, more terrifying than Hadlee. In his later years Lillee was more a medium pacer. In fact their styles were very similar: masterful control, tremendous variation, and most of all complete bloody-mindedness.

    And it's obvious why Warne was picked a head of Murali - for publicity reasons. While the show was in town Warne, the circus master, would be sure to be out causing havoc downtown and making headlines, thus ensuring plenty of media attention.

  • stoat on October 26, 2010, 3:28 GMT

    Sir Richard Hadlee would have had a much better chance of being selected for one of the teams as a bowler (that could bat a bit) rather than as an allrounder.

  • on October 26, 2010, 3:17 GMT

    I would pick either Curtly Ambrose or Richard Hadlee over Wasim Akram, and neither have made it into the 1st or 2nd XI. The rest of the line up looks pretty good.

  • MartoAus on October 26, 2010, 3:07 GMT

    I'd have Imran Khan over Wasim Akram any day!

  • Amol_Gh on October 26, 2010, 3:01 GMT

    I choose The White Lightning:Allan Donald over Fred Trueman even though it seems that their stats at par at first, Donald is ahead in terms of strike-rate & 5W hauls. And Averages are marginally different and MOST importantly, Donald faced modern and hence more equipped/trained/capable/competitive batsmen.

  • Amol_Gh on October 26, 2010, 2:29 GMT

    ...And BTW, finally common sense prevailed and McGrath was not chosen and it's a very sensible decision.

  • CricFan24 on October 26, 2010, 2:18 GMT

    And let's not even bring ODIs into the picture. I'll risk sounding like a troll and say that it's ludicrous to me that anyone would look beyond Sachin as the greatest player in limited overs history. He has 33 hundreds in winning causes, has made runs eveywhere and in real pressure cooker situations (he averages 56 with 6 hundreds in ODI finals v Ponting's 38 or Lara's 28). The closest anyone comes in the ODI greatness stakes is Viv Richards, and Tendulkar has more than 10,000 more runs (say it out loud - more than TEN THOUSAND), at a marginally (45 v 47) lower average and marginally lower strike rate. So, please, I beg of you fine folks, end this Sachin v Lara debate once and for all. I'll get an aneurysm if I have to listen any more about Brian Lara winning more matches (all eight of them) or having been a better batsman than Sachin.

  • CricFan24 on October 26, 2010, 2:18 GMT

    I think Brian Lara, bless his heart, was a great batsman. But he is held in such high regard partly because of his swashbuckling style and the fact that his few highest notes in a career spanning hundreds of matches were as high or higher than anyone else's. The truth is that he was nowhere near as consistently good as Tendulkar has been and still is. Consider this. In 4th innings, Brian averaged 3 runs lower than Sachin, In 3rd match innings 7 runs less. Lara has 8 hundreds in winning causes vs Sachin's 20. And apart from the 153*, he has done virtually nothing in 4th innings chases. But that innings has always been cited in a "what has sachin done?" argument. Before Sachin buried the idiots at Chennai, of course.

  • CricFan24 on October 26, 2010, 2:13 GMT

    YES!!!........... I got 3 out of 11 right !I had picked 5 Tendulkars, 5 Akrams , 1 Gilly................Unfortunately the 12 experts got Tendulkar, Akram and Gilly right but went in for 8 other lesser players.

  • EverybodylovesSachin on October 26, 2010, 2:01 GMT

    The best No 4 in the world Sachin Ramesh Tendulkar...............Love It........

  • on October 26, 2010, 1:56 GMT

    I like Bhatin's lists, especially the World's Worst!! As for the best fielding side, I thought Murali was a better fielder than McGrath.

  • s-cube on October 26, 2010, 1:55 GMT

    These all time list are mighty entertaining but always awfully incomplete.

  • Markus971 on October 26, 2010, 1:27 GMT

    I didn't vote on the All-Time XI, because the format did not allow me to.. So here it is --- WORLD XI: John Hobbs, Virender Sehwag, Donald Bradman(c), Sachin Tendulkar, Garfield Sobers, Imran Khan, Adam Gilchrist, Malcolm Marshall, William O'Reilly, Curtly Ambrose, Muttiah Muralitharan !! --- SECOND XI: William Grace, Sunil Gavaskar, Ricky Ponting, Brian Lara, Vivian Richards, Ian Botham, Mahendra Dhoni(c), Wasim Akram, Shane Warne, Dennis Lillee, Sydney Barnes !! --- THIRD XI: Victor Trumper, Len Hutton, George Headley, Graeme Pollock, Walter Hammond, Keith Miller(c), Alan Knott, Richard Hadlee, Alan Davidson, James Laker, Frederick Spofforth !! ---All Teams Have a Lefty Batsman & Bowler & a Batsman who can Bowl in the top 5...

  • on October 26, 2010, 1:17 GMT

    One can imagine how hard it would have been to differentiate between Warne vs. Murali; Sachin vs. Lara; Imran vs. Botham and etc. Nevertheless good to see Wasim, Sachin, Gilchrist and Warnie as part of the XI. Readers and fans would have their grudges but it can never be easy to select XI players from the 99 players who have represented their own team's Top XI.


  • Silverstar on October 26, 2010, 1:10 GMT

    a Few changes for me: definitely Lara in, tendulkar out, which most agree. next would be Ambrose in, Lillee out. i would put gavaskar in with hobbs. i dont have a prob with warne or nurali, but i would also choose warne. for me he is more attacking, get in ure ear, try new stuff... so it would read : Hobbs, Gavaskar, Bradman, Lara, Viv, Sobers, Gilly, marshall, Akram, Ambrose, Warne. but to be quite honest if u wanna destroy the opposition i would sub these bowlers for : roy gilchrist, sylvester clarke, Wes hall, Charlie Griffith....

  • on October 26, 2010, 0:58 GMT

    @Ananthu Santhanagopalan, Hobbs played in the era when England and Australia would play with each other with occasional tour to South Africa. He had tremendous domestic record, however, his career average has been in lower 50s - which is good, but one of the criteria should be whether these guys succeeded in all kinds of condition and against all oppositions. Ian Chappell says he was looking for people who would dominate. Now nobody dominated West Indian pace attack, arguably the all time best of all era, better than Gavaskar. I think the concept is a gimmick and you simply can't judge two players from two era. Mental part and fatigue is most important than anything these days and by that virtue most players from current era should be selected, if at all.

  • on October 26, 2010, 0:51 GMT

    Wow..look at the furore regarding a completely hypothetical team's strength in a completely hypothetical situation :)

  • Rakesh_Sharma on October 26, 2010, 0:50 GMT

    @ adavidk . I would not say Hadlee was better than Marshall or Lilee. They could be on par. But he was 100% better than Wasim Akram. Infact Even Ambrose, Holding,Garner and croft were better than Wasim Akram. Akram is here probably as they wanted to accomodate one fropm PAkistan. If Akram and Imran were the best based on 1st 2 lists than they were the best bowling side better than WI quartret which is silly since they more or less played in the same era.May be Akram a bit late.

  • Cricster1 on October 26, 2010, 0:47 GMT

    Bradman picked because of best batting average, but Barnes was not picked although he had the best strike rate/average as a fast bowler. Warne unanimously picked despite a poor record against India - 2 Indians went along with others in the panel ? , a different criterion for Kallis or Inzamam who didn't have a great record against Aus. Selection of Lillee who took wickets in Aus and Eng over McGrath(bowled well everywhere), Donald (started at age 26 after SA's inclusion in 92), Hadlee , Imran/Waqar, Ambrose is unjustified. Was Hutton better than Gavaskar? Lara has no place in a test team despite playing some of the best knocks under pressure? Sir Viv was helped by the presence of good batsmen and fast bowlers. Sobers had to be picked as an allrounder and not as a middle order batsman ? This exercise will only divide cricket fans and not help anyone to appreciate real talent. ESPN could have picked 40 top players instead of choosing all time XI.

  • Engle on October 26, 2010, 0:41 GMT

    How about a Sobers XI comprising players from his era onwards vs a Bradmans XI comprising players pre-Sobers. Bradman XI : Hobbs, Hutton, BRADMAN, Headley, Hammond, Miller, Tallon, Lindwall, Trueman, O'Reilly, Barnes. Sobers XI : Gavaskar, Hayden, Richards, Tendulkar, Lara, SOBERS, Gilchrist, Imran, Marshall, Warne, Murali. Now, that would be some contest.

  • xenon555 on October 26, 2010, 0:14 GMT

    Bad team...

    The real all time XI: Sunil Gavaskar, Donald Bradman, Viv Richards, Tendulkar, Allan Border (capt), Sobers, Gilchrist (wk), Malcolm Marshall, Shane Warne, Glenn McGrath, Dennis lilee

    2nd team: Jack Hobbs, Len Hutton, George Headley, Brian Lara (capt), Hammond, Richard Hadlee, Rodney Marsh/Knott (wk), Michael Holding, Murali, Wasim Akram, Curtly Ambrose

    Seriously...After making many pointless XIs (left handers, gentlemans, bet your life on's, I mean youve got to be kidding me) this is the best you guys could come up with?

  • on October 26, 2010, 0:07 GMT

    @Cricket Chopper You are talking about a batsman who got hit by a Waqar bouncer on debut, but still continued to bat without any medical attention and went on to score a 50. The man's guts and grit are legendary!

  • Will_Scarlet on October 25, 2010, 23:46 GMT

    Statistically, Hadlee is the greatest of the top bowlers other than Murali. The arguement that Hadlee only took so many wickets because the rest of the bowlers were rubbish (and they were) is very weak. He had many factors counting against him: 1) If he didn't bowl well he didn't get to bowl a second time around in a test; 2) It's difficult to maintain pressure if a team doesn't bowl in partnerships; 3) Batsmen were generally cautious against Hadlee because they could score runs against the other bowlers; and 4) NZ's batting was weak and consequently unable to post many large totals - unlike those Warne and McGrath were able to defend. This factor is important because fields tend to be more defensive plus batsmen following large totals are immediately under significant pressure.

    The other bias against Hadlee is that he played for New Zealand, who are seen to have always been a second rate team - despite their regular strong performances in world cups

  • Fahii on October 25, 2010, 23:46 GMT

    nice selection..............

  • on October 25, 2010, 23:44 GMT

    Many Indian supporters may think that they should select the whole Indian team for world 11 hahaha. I don't think apart from Tendulkar no one els in the Indian team deserved the spot in world 11. I think saeed Anwar was far better than Tendulkar because he was a match winner. Tendulkar will score Hundred but india will lose the match. I remember one of the test match between Pakistan and india back in 97-98 when shahid afridi score 141 with getting 2 wickets on the other hand tedulkar scored 139 when there was 17 needed to win the test with four wickets in hand but india lost that match and Tendulkar was named man of the Match which he never deserved it and then 10 wickets to anil kumble given by J parkash.

  • on October 25, 2010, 23:37 GMT

    What a great bit of fun this must have of been! There are three that I have to say raised my eyebrows in the World XI that was eventually chosen. Jack Hobbs, Len Hutton, Dennis Lillee?

    As much as I appreciate these players outstanding ability and class. Ian Chappell spoke about technical brilliance and batsman who can take on any attack. Greenidge and Sehwag would be mouthwatering. As for the bowler that I think was better than Lillee, Ambrose. I would opt for Lara to take Sobers spot because he is best batsman this world has ever seen.

  • 400_notout on October 25, 2010, 23:29 GMT

    how can peoplple who have watched cricket over the last 20 yrs not include brian lara in the world xi. only man in history to hold the world record twice

  • 2929paul on October 25, 2010, 23:20 GMT

    Lots of ignorance of the history of cricket and context. I can assure you all that the likes of Bradman, Hobbs and Hutton settle down to receive slow floaty half volleys, push the ball past the left hand of cover point, then watch as the fielder waited for his butler to throw the ball back from the boundary. Prior to the 1983 Cricket World Cup, there was quite a lot of cricket played, you know. The quick bowlers mentioned here were genuinely quick. The spinners really could spin the ball - and with variations. The batters played with bats you wouldn't believe unless you picked one up and compared it to today's beasts. Pitches were uncovered and open to the elements. Helmets didn't come in until around 1978. Runs scored and wickets taken pre-1983 were just as valuable in comparative terms as those scored/taken now. You cannot just discount the oldies without a full understanding of the history of the game.

  • text4sure on October 25, 2010, 23:14 GMT

    cricket is a stats game and alot of people are basing their decision on stats but their is no other player i would rather go to war with but the great viv richards, yea we know lara and sachin got the better stats, but no other batsmen put fair in bowlers as viv did not to mention those days west indies played 1 or 2 series a year compare to now and not to mention the man never wore a helmet. And there is no other bowler i would rather go to far with but the west indies five prong(roberts, holding, garner, croft and marshall), lillie, imran and haddle, those bowlers put fair in batsmen, thats why i have to give it up to gavaskar cause coul u imagine facing those westindies bowlers all day, and consideration to lawerence rowe before his eye injury

  • Beertjie on October 25, 2010, 23:12 GMT

    I mostly agree but... Akram could never replace Barnes, nor Hutton replace Gavaskar/Richards. No need for Akram's left-arm swing (except the reverse kind) if you had Sobers' version. Lillee and Warne knockers seem to forget the quality of the Oz attack (that's why Marshall's wickets per match is lower than Lillee's - because he was just one of 4 masters, whereas Murali only had Vaas with whom to compete). I found using thought-experiments a useful tool. Barnes would have been the most difficult bowler to face for the top 7 batters (Bradman included), because they wouldn't know which way it would swerve. Lillee and Marshall would be there to test the openers on hard bouncy wickets (How would Hutton succeed against them when he couldn't stand up to Lindwall, Miller and Johnston?) To those Viv knockers, once there was no challenge he threw his wicket away. More importantly, he scored at such a fast rate that his team would have every chance of winning. This is why Kallis could never play!

  • EverybodylovesSachin on October 25, 2010, 23:06 GMT

    My Sachin is the best two Elevens..I like it like it very much...good job ESPNCricinfo jury except one juror...I am happay I am going to have a Party..NOW I sing this song....Hahahaha........

  • on October 25, 2010, 23:01 GMT

    yeah thats funny you say that Mark because Murali who is THE leading wicket taking bowler the world has ever seen wasn't included in the 1st XI..However he always seems to get overlooked for Warne, who by all means was a great bowler, but doesn not have the same stats as murali and who has been suspended from the game at one point..perception does seem to be a different beast to reality.

  • on October 25, 2010, 22:52 GMT

    I would have chosen .Imran khan,Alan donald, ambrose and Walsh before Warne and lillee anytime ...

  • kenjai1 on October 25, 2010, 22:48 GMT

    Well,what a team..or should we say,"teams'?My only quibbles for the '1st XI"would be wicketkeeper,where I would go for the 'pure'wicketkeeper as opposed to the wicketkeeper-batsman,and perhaps Wasim Akram,since I already have Sobers,making space probably for Imran as a second all-rounder;right handed batsman,and genuine quickie,or even Richard Hadlee.

  • hatrick26 on October 25, 2010, 22:47 GMT

    Kallis/Lara ahead of Viv for test side. Sunny ahead of Hutton/Hobbs because he actually played excellent against Windies pace (13 100s out 34 against WI). Murali/Warne is a toss-up.Sanga over Gilly. Defnitely Hadlee/Others over Lillee. Lara is great but I have no idea why someone is bringing the individual test scores and number of double centuries as some sort of accomplishment over SRT and others. Lara scored 400 because he wanted to and not because he had to. He was getting trashed 2-0 in the series against Eng and instead of declaring and trying to force a win, the guy was going for his personal milestone to re take the record from Hayden.Great!! Btw, I would still have him in First XI or Second XI as noted above but he does give his wicket away for a great as evidenced by very less # of Not Outs and his % wise -less than 10 runs scored in an inning.

  • rpramod on October 25, 2010, 22:25 GMT

    What about captaincy? Who will captain the side?

  • surgeon101 on October 25, 2010, 22:19 GMT

    No murali!! what a farce! The Jury were clearly biased by his chucking allegations! how is that fair? either he is a chucker and u erase his records from the books or give him his place in history as the world's greatest ever spinner (as the current records clearly state). The records show that he is the Bradman of Spin bowling....i hope future generations will see it that way.

    Bradman and Murali should be automatics in any world 11....they have no peers! Warne is at best a great Support bowler, who spent his entire career with a good fast bowlers and took tons of easy English wickets. (not to mention a proven drug addict, womaniser and a gambler!)

  • waspsting on October 25, 2010, 22:18 GMT

    Readers 11 is dreadful. A very poorly balanced attack. but it shows the same trends as the experts always do of favoring your own era. Even guys like Bradman and Sobers did/do that. I agree with MarkM33 - Hadlee's as good a pace bowler as theres been, but he's a better batsmen than any of that calibre (Except Imran). what do you lose if you have Hadlee the bowler instead of Lillee? (IMO, you actually gain something, but i'll word the question this way for those who believe Lillee the better bowler). Very little - no one would say there was much between them. What do you gain if you have Hadlee the bat instead of Lillee? quite a lot. same logic to include Imran.

  • on October 25, 2010, 22:17 GMT

    @ shine kr : get some life..mate !

  • the_blue_android on October 25, 2010, 22:10 GMT

    No Hadlee. No Imran. I think the jury was smoking the wrong stuff.

  • on October 25, 2010, 22:03 GMT

    @ ALL 'PONTING' lovers : He is not selected because he was not available for selection ! You know why ? Because the jury chose from the ALL TIME XI of each country and PONTING did not even qualify in Australian ALL TIME XI .He was the 'appointed' 12th MAN !!

  • on October 25, 2010, 21:50 GMT

    evidently my previous post was censored :S

  • Bhatin on October 25, 2010, 21:46 GMT

    Just Imagine these 2 teams and the match between them Worlds Best XI - Victor Trumper, Jack Hobbs, Don Bradman (C), Sachin Tendulkar, Gramem Pollock, Gary Sobers, Alan Knott (WK) , Richard Hadlee, Curtly Ambrose, Allan Donald, Muralitharan Worlds Worst XI - Michael DeVanuto,W.V.Raman,Umar Akmal,Mohd. Ashrful,Chamara Hathurasingha,Floyd Reiffer,Chris Read (WK),Nathan Hauritz,Ata-Ur-Rehman,Doda Ganesh,Mick Lewis And it would be the best run fest for all ..!!!

  • Bhatin on October 25, 2010, 21:46 GMT

    Just Imagine these 2 teams and the match between them Worlds Best XI - Victor Trumper, Jack Hobbs, Don Bradman (C), Sachin Tendulkar, Gramem Pollock, Gary Sobers, Alan Knott (WK) , Richard Hadlee, Curtly Ambrose, Allan Donald, Muralitharan Worlds Worst XI - Michael DeVanuto,W.V.Raman,Umar Akmal,Mohd. Ashrful,Chamara Hathurasingha,Floyd Reiffer,Chris Read (WK),Nathan Hauritz,Ata-Ur-Rehman,Doda Ganesh,Mick Lewis And it would be the best run fest for all ..!!!

  • adavidk on October 25, 2010, 21:43 GMT

    Don't you love it when myths are related as truths i.e. Richard Hadlee only took as many wickets as he did because the other members of the New Zealand attack were weak. Richard Hadlee was New Zealand cricket and during the 1980s turned New Zealand into a very competitive unit. If anything with a stronger bowling unit Richard Hadlee may have been a greater wickettaker as he would not have had to perform two roles - that of strike and containing bowler. Hadlee was better than Lillee, Akram or Marshall.

  • __PK on October 25, 2010, 21:43 GMT

    I think it's immensely disrespectful to the craft of wicketkeeping that the best keepers don't make the side - they are just the best batsmen who can also keep. And the selectors have become blinded by the talent available and picked an unbalanced, aggressive side. This side would lose to a better balanced side picked from an undiscovered planet which had similar cricketing talent available. Where is the hard-working medium pacer who can bowl 30 overs in a day on a flat wicket?

  • AliOnline on October 25, 2010, 21:36 GMT

    Are you kidding me??? Imran Khan not in the World XI??? Give me a break

  • on October 25, 2010, 21:31 GMT

    Strange why Kapil Dev has been opted out from all the scenario's.

  • Bhatin on October 25, 2010, 21:20 GMT

    @ Rakesh Chandran

    My pick for best fielding 11 would be :- Mark Taylor,Ricky Ponting,Colin Bland,Jonty Rhodes,Yuvraj Singh / Herschell Gibbs ,Paul Collingwood,Gus Logie,Eknath Solkar,Kapil Dev,Alan Donald,Glenn McGrath

    Kapil Dev was a brilliant fielder along with his bowling, so was Donald as well as McGrath. I dont have any keeper in this team, but I believe anyone of these behind stumps should be great.

  • Bhatin on October 25, 2010, 21:20 GMT

    @ Rakesh Chandran

    My pick for best fielding 11 would be :- Mark Taylor,Ricky Ponting,Colin Bland,Jonty Rhodes,Yuvraj Singh / Herschell Gibbs ,Paul Collingwood,Gus Logie,Eknath Solkar,Kapil Dev,Alan Donald,Glenn McGrath

    Kapil Dev was a brilliant fielder along with his bowling, so was Donald as well as McGrath. I dont have any keeper in this team, but I believe anyone of these behind stumps should be great.

  • MarkM33 on October 25, 2010, 21:17 GMT

    Funny really - everyone thinks their pick is better. It's nothing more than a fun exercise and presumably without bias by the "selectors".

    While I'm from NZ and have an obvious bias, I'm a little surprised Richard Hadlee missed out completely given he is, statistically at least, one of the top 5 bowlers of all time but isn't one of the 8 bowlers picked. I guess perception is a different beast to reality.

  • LT11 on October 25, 2010, 21:16 GMT

    Gilly is tha genius and he is far far better than any of the WK in Cricket world.. Gilly actually changed the meaning of WK from bore dull Gloves holder, which does nothing but to catch the ball alltime, to a flambuoyant batsman WK who actually contributes to the winning of the match..Just go by the stats and check does any of the WK other than Gilly and Sanga ever collect Man of the Match award in a test match. You can find the contribution of WK in test match.

  • Bhatin on October 25, 2010, 21:15 GMT

    @ Rakesh Chandran

    My pick for best fielding 11 would be :- Mark Taylor,Ricky Ponting,Colin Bland,Jonty Rhodes,Yuvraj Singh / Herschell Gibbs ,Paul Collingwood,Gus Logie,Eknath Solkar,Kapil Dev,Alan Donald,Glenn McGrath

    Kapil Dev was a brilliant fielder along with his bowling, so was Donald as well as McGrath. I dont have any keeper in this team, but I believe anyone of these behind stumps should be great.

  • Cicero on October 25, 2010, 21:10 GMT

    I'm surprised that Herbert Sutcliffe seems to have been completely overlooked for an opening batsman's spot. You can't argue with the four chosen in the 1st and reserve elevens, but of test batsmen to have opened in more than 20 matches, no-one can match Sutcliffe's average of 60.73 from 84 innings. On the other hand, it's good to see SF Barnes make the 2nd XI.

  • thescorpio on October 25, 2010, 21:04 GMT

    Whats astonishing me is that the greatest all rounder ever " Mr. Ravindra Jadega" wasnt't included in any of the XIz. Pathetic!!!

  • vattikuti on October 25, 2010, 21:03 GMT

    what happened to the Humble Giant Anil Kumble , the man who is a real Gentle Man Cricketer ?

  • dhawal_singh on October 25, 2010, 21:00 GMT

    Here is my XI: Sunil Gavaskar, Virender Sehwag, Brian Lara, Sachin Tendulkar, Sir Donald Bradman, Sir Garry Sobers, Adam Gilchrist, Glenn McGrath, Malcolm Marshall, Muttiah Muralitharan, Wasim Akram.......coudn't choose a better team....warnie missed by a whisker.same for imran

  • philsil on October 25, 2010, 20:58 GMT

    What would be the top 5 wickets they would play on to make a test rubber?

  • surgeon101 on October 25, 2010, 20:58 GMT

    one of ian chapell's excuses for picking shane warne was his flamboyancy! what a joke....warne taking hundreds of wickets against pathetic English batsmen of the 90's was as 'flamboyant' as the wet, miserable english whether!

    This Jury has completely misunderstand the point of a world 11....its not flamboyancy...its about effectiveness and individual performances. The fact that west indes and australian teams have dominated cricket should not influence Individual selections!

  • Mannix16 on October 25, 2010, 20:55 GMT

    heres some stats: warne averages 4.88 wickets per match, murali averages 6.01 per match... warne has played more matches than murali but has 100 less wickets. Warne has 10 10 wicket hauls..... murali has 22.... warne has 37 5 wicket hauls... murali has 67.... murali beats warne in average and economy still... something really wrong here.... and dennis lillee? he played in the 60 of his 70 matches in aus/eng and had average of 101 in pakistan.... doesn't seem like world 11 type player to me.... only reason tendulkar was picked was because he was easily the best if you look at all formats and consistency..... if you are seriously just looking at tendulkar's test achievements alone, i can not see how he gets on the team by his test achievements alone... lara had far more double centuries and triple centuries (including creating two record highest scores)..... therefore looking at both formats, who can defeat murali as the best spinner and lara?

  • 114_in_final_Six_overs on October 25, 2010, 20:50 GMT

    Best Eleven: 1. Jack Hobbs 2. Virender Sehwag 3. Sir Don Bradman 4. Sachin Tendulkar 5. Brian Lara 6. Viv Richards 7. Imran Khan 8. Alan Knott 9. Shane Warne 10. Malcom Marshal 11. Glen McGrath

    12th man: Garry Sobers

    Was this soo difficult experts?

  • on October 25, 2010, 20:48 GMT

    I don't except it. Because my world XI is much much much stronger than selected world XI by ICC.

  • KhyberBoomBoom on October 25, 2010, 20:47 GMT

    a world XI without Qadir, Waqar, and Sachin in place of Miandad, this utterly stupid and unbelievable..may be i understand this, but XI without the greatest allrounder Imran Khan is ridiculous..ridiculously picked XI i must say

  • 375and400and501 on October 25, 2010, 20:45 GMT

    I believe Lara deserves a place in the First XI, elbowing out either Richards or Tendulkar. We are talking about an all-time Test XI, remember? ...

    Lara, at his best, is pure poetry -- "a thing of beauty is joy forever" -- while Tendulkar, at his best, can be likened to the finest prose. Lara deserves a place in the First XI just because of the sheer joy he brings to the audience in watching him play. As "Wisden Asia Cricket" put it, "For wholesome mastery, there's Tendulkar; for wizardry there's Warne; for technical virtuosity there's Dravid; and to bat for your life, there's Steve Waugh. But for light and song, for bliss and glory and for lifting the soul, who else but Brian Lara?"

  • on October 25, 2010, 20:39 GMT

    Hilarious , this world 11 team could be beaten even by Kenya. Some one should ask these pseudo intellectuals on what basis were malcolm marshal ,dennis lille, mgrath chosen and likes of Waqar younis were not even considered. Were these guys more devastating then him? Are their stats better then his even if we use segmentation techniques which includes variables such as different teams and home/away matches. Did these palyers play more cricket then him considering genuinley fast bowlers are more prone to injuries especially when they are playing both 1 days and tests. Why was Andy flower not even considered. Have these people seen Zaheer Abbas bat? what about allan border, richard hadlee, curtly ambrose, walsh.

  • Shripathi on October 25, 2010, 20:27 GMT

    Ridiculous that Trueman gets picked ahead of Ambrose, Lindwall, Holding, Miller, McGrath, Garner or Hadlee

  • hatrick26 on October 25, 2010, 20:23 GMT

    Including Dennis Lillee in the first XI is big joke over other suitable bowlers. You could name a lot of them. What are voters thinking? Just because he has good action and perfect motion or whatever, he is there? Even stats wise, there were bowlers much better - Ambrose, Younis come to mind. Mind you he played only 26 matches out of 70 away from Oz and that too in England when other nations were playing (this was not Bradman Era). For me any pace bowler who does not come into tough conditions like sub-continent to bowl is a coward (Botham,Lillee) because it doesnt suit them. He did not even take a wkt in Windiies for whatever reason. I admire the Windies pace greats who actually came and bowled successfully in the sub-continent. I didnt have Lillee in my radar even in the Second XI.

  • Shripathi on October 25, 2010, 20:23 GMT

    Imran Khan over Wasim Akram (the left variety is of little use, given that no such preference was given for left handed batsmen, or spinners) Alan Knott over Gilchrist (you need a better wicket keeper and the difference in batting should not be an issue when you include Imran) Barnes over Lillee. (Even Ambrose, Imran, Hadlee, McGrath as a bowler have better credentials than Lillee, since they were successful everywhere, even in the subcontinent)

    I could live with Hutton over Gavaskar

  • vinny21 on October 25, 2010, 20:20 GMT

    wow gr8 to see my fav gilly as the one an only ace choice for the wicket keeper

  • on October 25, 2010, 20:18 GMT

    World XI is such a waste of time.. It woudn't even make sense to create one This XI's are such a waste of time and are justuseful for fans to rant about their fav player missing from their list..

  • on October 25, 2010, 20:18 GMT

    I may add waqar younis into any side

  • cricketchopper on October 25, 2010, 20:16 GMT

    Tendulkar's selection was pre-planned based on influence and money of Indian cricket. I give you concrete proof. Can you remember that when were were voting for All time Team there were options to selection 1 or 2 or 3 all rounders and 3 or 2 or 1 specialist bowler. Why was that drama? Just to divert the attention of the public from the real fraud. Why not they left capacity/choice to select 2 or 3 or 4 middle order batsman and bounded all the voters to vote for exactly 3 middle order batsman. Because they knew that Gary Sobers is in all rounder category and Bradman and Viv cannot be touched. As far as appreciation of Bradman for Sachin is concerned, the fact is that Bradman had seen Viv and was jealous of him so he exaggerated Sachin. Murli Dharan who has average of only 21 and more wickets per test match and taken 800 wickets is out of the team just because of unnecessary selection of Sachin. If Sachin is selected on batting records why not Murli on bowling records.

  • on October 25, 2010, 20:09 GMT

    My Worrld (wrost) XI, Upul Taranga, Murali wije, Chamara Kapugedara, Pujara, Ms Dhoni,Ravi Bopara, R Jadeja, Ajantha mendis, Sreesanth,steve finn. and must incude Dilhara fernando,

  • the_blue_android on October 25, 2010, 20:04 GMT

    This team would struggle to beat the 1994 Indian team in Motera. No batting line up can take the immense pressure of batting last on day 5. The Indian spin trio of Rajesh Chauhan, Anil Kumble and Venkatapahy Raju will destroy any batting line up.

  • on October 25, 2010, 20:04 GMT

    don't agree with only one all rounder being selected......Imran Khan should hv been selected in place of Marshall....there should hv been 2 all rounders....rest of the list is good :)

  • on October 25, 2010, 20:01 GMT

    It is hard to select a team of all time greats and for that reason I never choose a all time cricket team.

  • putrevus on October 25, 2010, 20:00 GMT

    Imran Khan being on second XI is a joke this guy is the most overrated all rounder , his batting was a joke , all not outs contributed to his avg and I cant remember one knock where in this guy played a batting role to change match when rest of batting failed.

    His bowling peak was very short he started in 1971 and lasted till 1990 but played only 88 matches which shows he was not durable at all and also he being captain picked and chose when to bowl and never lead once Wasim Akram came into team.

    As all rounder Ian botham was by far better than this guy and his being in second XI is a just a joke.

  • vraja00 on October 25, 2010, 19:59 GMT

    As big a fan as I am off Tendulkar, I cannot believe that these selectors of all time world XI did not pick Ponting even in the second eleven. I think Ponting belongs in the first 11. Viv Richards was a great player but I think Ponting is a better test batsman than Richards. For one thing, Richards never played his own team's bowling. Ponting may have had a similar advantage but he played against South Africa and England very well. Richards never played against the lilkes of Allan Donald and Dale Steyn. In my opinion, Ponting should replace Richards in the World XI. Also, Warne getting more votes than Tendulkar. I don't buy that either. Warne is a great bowler, no doubt, but he had really poor returns on spin friendly wickets in India. Also, Allan Donald (has a great test strike rate) is not to be seen any of these lists. I have lost respect for Cricinfo today.

  • RajaNila on October 25, 2010, 19:58 GMT

    TWO OPENERS: Barry Richards & Hutton/Gavaskar. TWO BATSMEN: Bradman & Tendulkar/Lara. TWO BATTING ALLROUNDERS: Kallis & Sobers. ONE WICKET-KEEPER: Sangakkara/Gilchrist.ONE BOWLING ALLROUNDER: Akram/Imran. TWO FAST BOWLERS: Marshall & Barnes. ONE SPINNER: Muralitharan

  • Dr.K.H.Iyer on October 25, 2010, 19:52 GMT

    Hutton is an unwise choice ahd to be Sunny/ Viru( I prefer the latter)! Hobbs played on pitches where scoring was TOUGH so he is in! Bradman=GOD Tendulkar=God II Richards is actually an unwise though a great bat.the top 4 batsman are right handers hence Lara/Pollock fit the bill better! Sobers=The Other GOD, Gilchrist is a great sport & his choice is worth it! Akram has good record on all surfaces and a handy bat good choice, Warne well if not for the ActionFiasco I would have picked Murali! Marshall, Pacemen don't get any better than him! Lillee, a dissapointing choice! McGrath should be in there! Better control better record on UNFRIENDLY pitches! >>>>>>>> The Heartburns: Barnes, Hadlee,Imran

  • on October 25, 2010, 19:49 GMT

    Where is the hell is Imran Khan !!! I simply cannot believe that someone who even has an ounce of cricketing knowledge can leave out Imran Khan from World XI, thats........thats preposterous, that is !!!!

  • Karthik_Ram on October 25, 2010, 19:40 GMT

    More importance has been given to the pioneers of the game than to the contempraries. Barring THE DON, we have contemprary replacements for all the greats of the game. However 8 out of the 11 players in the all time XI belong to 1980's or before. I think since the Jury members belonged to the same era, we are seeing this abnormality. I am not convinced with the world XI.

    Even the Readers XI looks like a stronger and much balanced team.

  • on October 25, 2010, 19:40 GMT

    Very good team. I would pick Imran Khan instead of Viv Richards, Sunil Gavaskar instead of Len Hutton, and Glenn McGrath or Curtly Ambrose instead of Dennis Lillee, but the rest is fine.

  • on October 25, 2010, 19:39 GMT

    Two very good teams. My only input would be to swap Lillee with Imran. Imran as a pure bowler was still better than Lillee. The problem then would probably be - Who would be the alrounder in the second team? I really do not care. Imran deserves to be in teh first XI. Period.

  • znra251 on October 25, 2010, 19:35 GMT

    Some people have asked why Warne gets into this side instead of Muralitharan. The answer is simple, if we remove Bangladesh and Zimbabwe from both players respective stats then something interesting is seen.

    Warne took 691 wickets @ 25.4. Muralitharan took 624 @ 28.85.

    Check it for yourselves, but excluding 'competitive' matches against two teams who have never looked like winning a test series, or even really many test matches and Warne has much better stats.

    Thats not to knock Muralitharan took 624 @ 28.85 who was a world class spin bowler, one of the best ever, a true inovator and good sportsman, simply to state that against genune quality opposition Warne achieved better results.

    Warne played very few games against either Zimbabwe or Bangladesh, if he had then he may well have still held the world record for test wickets.

  • Karthik_Ram on October 25, 2010, 19:34 GMT

    More importance has been given to the pioneers of the game than to the contempraries. Barring THE DON, we have contemprary replacements for all the greats of the game. However 8 out of the 11 players in the all time XI belong to 1980's or before. I think since the Jury members belonged to the same era, we are seeing this partiality. I am not convinced with the world XI.

    Even the Readers XI looks like a stronger and much balanced team.

  • imz1 on October 25, 2010, 19:31 GMT

    I picked Brian Lara instead of Sachin Tendulkar

  • Champ2000 on October 25, 2010, 19:31 GMT

    Times of india read this article and wrote their own. Interestingly TOI one makes better reading. Cricinfo rock though.

  • text4sure on October 25, 2010, 19:26 GMT

    it is very unfair to select any best XI form different eras because their were so many great players and you have to look at the level of competition at that particular time, every era was different and i think at least they should select based on each decade, and most of us haven't seen half the players play we just going by stats, me personally ive never seen Hobbs, Hutton, Headly, sobers, etc play but i know they have great stats, whos knows how sacchin, sehwag, hobbs, hutton, lara etc would have done facing roberts, croft, garner, holding, marshall, lillie, thonpson, imran etc, we dont know, with that been said i will give my all time eleven in my era openers(gavaskar and Gordon greenidge), viv richards( the most intimidating batsmam ive ever seen) greg chappel, rohan kanhai, javed miandad my keeper would be alan knott,all rounder Ian botham, marshall, holding and lillie

  • masterblaster234 on October 25, 2010, 19:25 GMT

    Sagitrama lol Kallis? match winner? Dont go together. All kallis can do is score runs. I have watched him a fair bit now and never seen him win a match on his own or with thelp. He'll score like a fifty off 70 balls and then get out on like 60 off 90 balls, idf anything, wasting balls and taking south africa towards loss.

  • amitava0112 on October 25, 2010, 19:24 GMT

    My selection which I published long back was: Hutton, Gavaskar, Bradman,Tendulkar,Sobers,Gilchrist,Imran,Akram Marshall,Warne & Lillee (with Murli in for Akram on spin wkts) . The final World XI has been a decent selection ..however there are enough room for dissagreements..1st I do not have much idea of jack hobbs & bowling he had faced except that he was a polific run getter during his time..hence Sunny taken by me due to his great records v quality attacks in 70-80s. The World bowling attack is slightly weak due to extra batsman taken..strong bowling wins matches hence I hv taken bowling allrounder Imran (along with batting allr Sobers)with others & had to sacrifice one batsman & reluctantly after much thought Viv had to make way for Imran & Sachin stayed..Sachins 13000test+16000ODI runs & near 100 tons & that he played in a team with weaker bowling attack edges Viv out who though won more imp games was a part of a great team with grt attack & hence played with much less pressures.

  • on October 25, 2010, 19:17 GMT

    i think selecting an all time XI is such a waste of time - for this talented bunch of selectors.

    An all time XI is just an exercise in futility - like comparing a Charlie Chaplin with a Roger Moore or Sean Connery where Buster Keaton or Grouch Marx would be more apt.

    Will make more sense if this is done for every two decades - for a level playing field and comparing like players , like pitches and opposition - hence 20-40 would constitute one team ;50-60 second ; 70-90 (the golden age team); 90-onwards final team.

    I have a great regard for Ian Chappell as an upstanding leader .

    Isnt this the same Ian Chappell who had suggested Sachin retire from cricket during a patchy run in 2006 - not surprised he didnt plum for Sunil Gavaskar - in the late 70;s he thought Bruce Laird (who never made a test ton) as a better opener.

  • masterblaster234 on October 25, 2010, 19:16 GMT

    To be a legend in tests u need to not only have an average of over 50, but win matches single handedly, score runs all around the world on all pitches and against the best teams. so, my world 11 will have lara instead of bradman, coz bradman played only against 4 bad teams and in only two countries whom he was familier with the conditions in. waqar instead of lilee coz he wil take more wickets, bowl quicker, swing and reverse swing and win matches single handedly consistently, Imran khan as an all rounder is better than sobers in every aspect coz he bowled high 80s, started reverse swinging and lead a dead team to the world cup, murali instead of warne because batsman who genuinly could play spin well thrashed warne but struggled against murali. Warne's ripping spin only came alive against rubish spin playing batsman of teams such as England, but the moment he played against subcontinental batsman, even spinner friendly conditions didnt stop him getting thrashed.

  • Stark62 on October 25, 2010, 19:12 GMT


    Hobbs and Hutton didn't face much competition like Gavaskar or B. Richards!

    Warne averages a measly 30.64 in the Sub-continent, switch for Murli!

    Lille hardly played in the Sub-continent. He played 3 matches against Pak averaging 101.00 and took 3 wkts for 114 runs (in Pak), 1 match against SL averaging 35.66 and took 3 wkts for 67 (in SL).

    Lille should have been replaced by Imran!

    Other then that, I'm happy! :)

  • on October 25, 2010, 19:08 GMT

    No Graeme Pollock! The greatest lefthander ever by all accounts

  • Rakesh_Sharma on October 25, 2010, 18:55 GMT

    The series where Gavaskar effectively encountered fullstrength WI fast bowlers was in 1982 and 1983 series. In WI , Mohinder was the best Indian batsman. In dia after wc 1983 , Gavaskar as I mentioned was a failure on all lively piches. He scored one in Delhi and chennai where pitches were dead as dodo. In chennai he came a number 4 in rain affected ono innings match wher no competitive edge remains. I can remember Allan Border being an exceptional batsman against WI during this time infact. How can Ponting,Lara, Kallis Hayden be behind Gavaskar. By the way Chappel do you remember Ambrose 7 wickets for 1 run against Australia in Australia to win the series. Can you show me any of such brilliance of Wasim Akram to put him ahead. What about Hadlee, Holding .Wasim is a very great bowler but not above Garner,Holding,Ambrose and Macgrath.

  • dipayanghosh on October 25, 2010, 18:55 GMT

    The team selected by ESPNcricinfo seems skewed in favor of certain players. There is no way that Gavaskar/Sehwag and Muralitharan should be excluded from the team. Either Gavaskar or Sehwag should be there in place of either of the two selected openers, perhaps in fact both are a better combination than Hobbs/Hutton. I'm glad that the readers' votes, which is completely unbiased since it reflects popular opinion and not that of a few critics, have gone for Gavaskar and Sehwag. Also, Murali should be the very first bowler selected in the team, and there should be no question of his selection at all. His record and talent prove that he is more effective than Warne. Not only does he have many more wickets, he also has them at a far lower bowling average and much higher number of wickets per match. How can ESPNcricinfo's team have any merit if the most effective bowler in the hsitory of the game is not selected?

  • sagitrama on October 25, 2010, 18:51 GMT

    This is my 11....only allrounders....come to think of it, all are match winners with either bat or ball! Kallis, Sobers, Flower, Imran (capt), Kapil, Miller, Pollock, Hadlee, Proctor, Botham, Aubrey. BTW - Flower is the best wk, better than gilly! Look at his records considering he was playing for the worst test team and that too in the 90's when bowling was FAR BETTER)

  • bks123 on October 25, 2010, 18:51 GMT

    @cricketchopper...continued from last post....

    5 genuine bowlers is a luxury to be honest...Its a waste of resource..Can you tell me any team in the past that you saw with 5 bowlers? As I wrote before, I would love to have imran as the captain of this team and murli along side warne...Only thing that could have been done is to take imran and murli in place of sobers and lillee, respectively. But honestly, it is not possible to leave out sobers (based on what pple say abt him and looking at his stats)..And I am not ready to leave out a batsmen for imran as imran cannot fill in as a true batsmen...Now murli's place is dependent imran's place as you need 3 fastmen...hope I make sense..

  • Ijaz13 on October 25, 2010, 18:47 GMT

    I don't know how on earth there can ever be a World XI without Imran Khan!

  • tiger9999 on October 25, 2010, 18:46 GMT

    Obdurate XI (for luaghs... not to hurt anyone if your favorite player(s) are in this.. Boycott, C Tavare,Dravid,Nassir Hussain (capt.), Waugh, Shastr (vice capt.)i, Bob Taylor(WK), Nadkarni, Embury, Chatfield, Chris Harris; 12th Man Mudassar Nazar

    guess they would have had the talent to draw every match by batting for 5 days and sometimes or by bowling 100s of maiden overs...and through sheer boredom, won the occasional match... After the tearaway spell of pace from Harris and Chatfield the likes of sachin, bradman and lara would get mesmirized by the spin of Shastri, Embury and Nadkarni....Once they have ripped through the World XI batting the spectators would get to see a whirwind opening stand of 50 in 50 overs between Boycs and Tavare. After Tavare'w wicket Dravid would pick up the tempo and if it gets too hot, shastri would be there to cool things off so that the match stays competitive...

  • on October 25, 2010, 18:43 GMT

    @crickethopper- hey man why do u think tendulkar cant face Holding,Garner,Croft,Marshal without helmet ..If he wud have been in that era he can easily send their deliveries to fence.. He is considered to be the best technical batsman and rightly so..The man who has more than 31000 international runs ,you cant criticize him..I know everyone has opinion to say ..If u say team should have 5 best batsman then tendulkar should be 2nd best after bradman..you can exclude any other batsman if u want gavaskar to put in..but surely not tendulkar..

  • on October 25, 2010, 18:43 GMT

    I would definitely have Freddie Trueman over lillee any day, the man was a genius with the leather, and had such a smooth action

  • masterblaster234 on October 25, 2010, 18:39 GMT

    Its inevitable that many greats and many people's favourites are not in the world eleven. However, I would like to say some of the picks in this world eleven are bias such as waqar younis not even making the second eleven and gavaskar not being in the first team and what about murali??? I always believe that no batsman from before the 80s or 70s should be int he 11 because the bowling standards were too low. To be a legend u have to play against other legends and come on top like tendulkar thrashing warne, akram and playing against other legends not like bradman and hobbs playing against bowlers bowling 65mph at best!

  • bks123 on October 25, 2010, 18:37 GMT

    @cricketchopper...Though I am a die hard sachin fan, I do partially agree with your comments . But lets be honest...Sachin is not an automatic choice...And that is even reflected in jury's selection...However, Sachin is not as bad as you projected him to be...Look at gavaskar's record...He was no doubt the best against the pace battery of WI...But then what about with other teams...We just don't make a team thinking that holding or marshall is going to bowl...About richard, he is no doubt the most dominant batsman...But look at his stats with the best teams of his time...Not much better than sachin's (going by the rule that a super batsmen in one era will be a super batsmen in another era) ...Only, lara can be considered just above sachin in tests...And as I said before, I consider it as a all time world IX and not all time test XI...If you consider ODI sachin is way above all...And you just cannot ignore near 100 centuries and 14k test and 17k ODI runs

  • Rakesh_Sharma on October 25, 2010, 18:35 GMT

    Gavaskar has scored just 3 to 4 innings which has infact been useful. I am sure that Dravid,Laxman has produced more useful innings.During his time Vishwanath's innings were always related to Indian victory. It was a a normal saying that incase Vish scores , India wins. Vish always excelled on lively pitches. I even remember WI tour in 1983 when Mohinder Amarnath excelled and was rated the best batsman against Fast bowler. Gavaskar was total failure. His one century in Georgetown was totally insignificant where match was possible only for the last 2 days. No contest and dead pitch ,here Gavaskar again took advantage and scored 120 odd. Stats does not show these. He has just compiled runs. Of course he was an above average player , Very good indeed .No doubt. But , to consider him all time great is too much. For openers, Hayden- Langer, Greenidge- Haynes were excellent. How can Akram a better bowler than Holding, Garner, Ambrose, Roberts, Hadlee. Totally wrong.Lara, Ponting,Kallis???

  • Baptized_Into_Sachin on October 25, 2010, 18:35 GMT

    I just went through Ian Chappell's interview on picking of the All Time World XI at: http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/content/video_audio/480531.html .

    I could not help but notice Ian contradicting himself. Let me quote his words. He says:

    1. If there was to be a game play, then they would be up against another very very good team.

    2. As far as Batsmen are concerned, basically I am looking for guys who can dominate, because in your All Time XI you are not picking guys to save matches.

    I feel these two statements are contradictory, while the former assumes that you are looking for a balanced team to take on an equally good opposition, the latter discards the possibility of a 'Save the Match' situation.

  • Indus11 on October 25, 2010, 18:30 GMT

    I just checked the averages: Murli IS a better player in every respect than Warne: Warne 145 273 40705 17995 708 8/71 12/128 25.41 2.65 57.4 48 37 10 Murali 133 230 44039 18180 800 9/51 16/220 22.72 2.47 55.0 45 67 22

  • Murtaza. on October 25, 2010, 18:16 GMT

    I think Brian Lara was better choice then Tendulker, but in second XI is not bad for him. Same for Imran Khan he could have won the all rounder spot, but again there was better choice in Garry Sobers. Gavasker was very good but not Sehwag all India readers wants many Indien players in world XI..... My best XI were Jack Hobbs, Len Hutton, Wally Hammond, Brian Lara, Viv Richards, Garry Sobers, Adam Gilchrist, Wasim Akram, Malcolm Marshall, Muttiah Muralitharan, Dennis Lillee

  • Rakesh_Sharma on October 25, 2010, 18:15 GMT

    I do not believe in the Jury. How can Gavaskar be there in any of the eleven. Of course readers xi does not make sense as 95 % readers are Indian teens just as it represents sample population of cricket followers in the world. Gavaskar is totally an average player. I would rate Laxman a better player. In fact Vishwanath was a much better player during his time.Gavaskar mostly used to score in inconsequential matches played on batsman friendly pitches exactly the type of pitch we had in colombo where each team scored 600 runs. Many people talk of WI fast bowlers. Infact in most of the series Gavaskar played they did not have renowned fast bowlers eg. 1971, 74. In 1979-80 in India it was a 2nd string WI lead by Kallicharan. Here all piches were featherbeds. In one lively pitch in Chepauk, Madras India won because of Vish century.In 1983 Gavaskar scored again in dead matches, Delhi (run feast, Chennai rain affected one inning match(he played at number 4). -- to be continued.

  • abhinav999 on October 25, 2010, 18:13 GMT

    @crickethopper....are you nuts calling sachin a second class batsman. If what you say holds true then don bradman must not be the batsman ever1 thinks he is because back then fielding was not top notch and it was much easier for the batsman to score.. Sachin can score centuries against the best of all time. I would place him over every1 bar bradman on pure century conversion rate. when sachin was only 16 he was playing against some of the best bowlers in the world and was handling him self quiet well, a feat that i am sure non of the batsman on the XI can match. I take class from class even before sachin broke every1's records bradman himself said that he was the closest to him he had ever seen. and this was after sobers and richards were retired. he carried the hopes of an entire country on his back for the better part of a decade against some of the best bowling attacks ever.

    thank you sachin

  • mudassirrana on October 25, 2010, 18:12 GMT

    I had picked my XI and i m quite happy to see 8 names in this All time XI matching exactly those of mine. My XI (Hobs, Hutton, Don, Sachin, Viv, Gillie, Imran, Botham, Warne, Wasim, McGrath). But most surprising name for me is Sobers. This is absolutely illogicalllllllll....... i have great respect for him but when u have 5 most acomplished batsmen at top of the order and the most accomplished Wkt.Batsman; Gilchrist at no.6 then why go for another batting allrounder??????? this is ridiculous. Instead we should have picked a complete balling allrounder like Imran which i had picked in my XI. Imran was a match winner bowler but can sobers win matches for this XI with his bowling alone???? Remember, Imran was equally successful with his batting as he averaged over 50 in the 2nd half of his career. i had picked Mc Grath for Lillie but still Lillie is equally a good choice. Rest of the names are perfectly fine.

  • on October 25, 2010, 18:08 GMT

    1.Sunil Gavaskar,2.Virender Sehwag,Jack Hobbs is difficult to leave as the openerbut Viru is a TORNADO when batting.3.Sir Donald Bradman,4. Sachin Tendulkar,5.Brian Lara,I didn't find place for Viv Richards in middle order Just because Lara and Sachin didn't have the luxary of star players as Viv had, including the fearsome pace battery during his time.Talent apart,Lara and Sachin had to carry the entire responsibility of the batting of their team most of their carrier and excelled in that.6.Sir Garry Sobers,Imran Khan misses out.7.Adam Gilchrist,8.Wasim Akram, who can swing,reverse and bowl fast i.e 3 in 1 than Wasim and his batting is an asset. 9.Shane Warne,10.Malcolm Marshall & 11.Allan Donald. Both for their pace and ability to bowl in any conditions.Look at their strike rate. About Sydney Barnes,its again very difficult to leave him.

  • on October 25, 2010, 18:03 GMT

    It's very hard to bear the team...I am surprised to the absence of Sunny in the side..I really don't find any reason why Shane Warne was given more importance than Murali........just a tendency to support the Aussies I think....rather the reader's choice looks much better.....

  • Night-Watchman on October 25, 2010, 18:00 GMT

    It was perhaps fitting that both the openers are from an era with smaller bats, no helmets and very little protection. That said, Sunil Gavaskar was almost from that era and he played against the BEST fast bowling generation. The 70s and 80s had some of the most fearsome fast bowlers from West Indies, Australia, Pakistan & England and Sunny stood his ground against all of them. In fact, his average and runs against West Indies is better than against any other country. Hobbs has one thing against him, as an opener, he has only ONE double hundred, I suppose in his days, he was supposed to get out after a hundred to let the "amateurs" (read well heeled journeymen in the team) play. Shane Warne will always be judged by his inability to prise out the best players of spin - Indian batsmen - in the most spin friendly conditions. Gilly as keeper is absurd, we are not selecting a one day team, he has to do serious keeping to these bowlers!

  • Adhiqarie on October 25, 2010, 17:53 GMT

    where is Lara?? this is ridiculous??

  • Dr.K.H.Iyer on October 25, 2010, 17:52 GMT

    My Second XI Pick: Gavaskar, Greenidge ( Stonewall & Dominate respectively) Hammond ( splendid cricketer) Brian Lara (Well, a miracle maker!) Sangakkara ( a great Keeper) Now All rounders! Sir Botham ( a better bat than Imran and was on par with Hadlee till later in the career) Imran Khan (a fighter & Reverse Swing matters once the ball is Old) Kapil Dev (another Fighter,master bowler @ Flat Pitches) Now Bowling: Sir Hadlee (can walk into any team purely on bowling) Murali (800 wickets , Damn it!!) bill O' Reilly (would have preferred Grimmet but was not on the list!)

  • MBagchi on October 25, 2010, 17:52 GMT

    Having read a few of the comments by other readers, here are a few points i'd like to make myself:

    a) Tendulkar has to be selected not just because he has the highest aggregate in test match history, but also because he is perhaps the most technically sound batsman of all time.. also what hasn't been mentioned here is the sort of pressure and expectations he carries every single time he steps on to the field..

    b) Lara over Richards for me.. Richards was dominant, a real powerhouse and a gladiator, but Lara was the bigger genius.. an ability to single-handedly win games with the bat like perhaps no one else in the history of the game..

    c) Sorry Lanka fans but its gotta be Warne over Murali.. Murali was probably the more dangerous of the two but for pure joy, thrill, aesthetics and flamboyance Warne remains unparalleled.

    d) Alan Knott or Rodney Marsh over Gilly for sure..

    e) So pleased Akram got selected.. most talented fast bowler of our times..

  • synario on October 25, 2010, 17:51 GMT

    Why is Richard Hadlee not in the list? The best controlled seamer ever (Malcom Marshall a close second) and he could bat a bit!

  • on October 25, 2010, 17:49 GMT

    Seems to me that for some of the readers here, the world of cricket REVOLVES around India!! Sehwag isn't in there because there are a host of other, better players! And for Sunil Gavaskar, without doubting his clear class and skill, the same thing applies... Lara and Murali might've expected better luck, but I'd say that minus that, it's about right.

  • LT11 on October 25, 2010, 17:49 GMT

    Opening without Gavaskar is bit confusing and selecting those who has stats against mediocre bowling attacks of 50's. Gavaskar's performance agaainst the world class bowling is amazing and he shud be in the opening slot. Lara must be in the playing XI, the best ever in the modern time. Ppl who si still indoubt about Sachin's place, go and add all stats of your country man and see if it even close to Sachin's individual stats..

  • 114_in_final_Six_overs on October 25, 2010, 17:47 GMT

    @chopper: Sachin has now been selected by Bradman, Warne, Benaud and now cricinfo eleven. He was also called the best by Shane Warne and Alan Donald while Nasser Hussain thinks of him at par with Sir Don. Who really cares what an arm chair expert has to say. Ciao:)

  • EverybodylovesSachin on October 25, 2010, 17:46 GMT

    Sachin will excellent and fabulous without helmet also...Look Gavaskar is not as good as Sachin..Now if you put Sachin in his place..He will smash Garner, Holding, Marshall Croft and company all over the ground..Sachin is simply best and much better in all aspects of a batting than Gavaskar Richards and Lara and also Sobers....He is only in competition with Bradman...Surely Ian Chappell did not voted for him..He would vote for Sehwag.and Lara...He likes Sehwag and Lara so much I do not know why..Need to vote beyond one's personal likeness of a player..

  • on October 25, 2010, 17:46 GMT

    Can anyone suggest an all-time world eleven based on the fielding abilities? I believe Jhonty Rhodes would be the captain :) Would like to see the names of the bowlers who are good fielders..

  • pianofan on October 25, 2010, 17:37 GMT

    I have to think some of these choices are dubious. Hutton should not be in , I can think of a handful of better openers Sshewag and Greenidge for example. I also think McGrath is better than Lilee. So I am not impressed by the experts. It is virtually impossible to compare figures of todays era with those of the past like Jack Hobbs, S.F. Barnes and so on. Above all I cannot fathom why Hadlee is not the all rounder in the 2nd team. Sorry , poor job experts.

  • somnasa on October 25, 2010, 17:36 GMT

    This cannot be the best selection. Definitely the 2nd eleven will easily beat 1st eleven. Murali the greatest bowler of all time will ruin the 1st eleven batting line up easily. Lara, Gavaskar, Khan, Barnes & others have to do less & they will easily do it, as there arent anyone to mach Murali in 1st eleven. ( U compare anything Warne cant even come close to Murali) Murali shows it in his last mach also. This is very bad selection. Readers eleven also have very good potential than the 1st eleven.

  • universe on October 25, 2010, 17:33 GMT

    I can't believe Imran Khan is not in the first XI. Ridiculous!

  • Tallfellow on October 25, 2010, 17:32 GMT

    I got 7/11 correct! Didn't pick Warne, Lillee, Akram and Hutton.

    Gavaskar definitely scores over either Hutton and Hobbs any day!Just look at the attacks, the conditions, and the Indian teams he played for!

    Richard Hadlee -- the best paceman of a team that had no other big match winners, or Imran -- who defined Pak cricket during his time, over Akram. And Barnes or McGrath over Lillee.

    Murali vs. Warne's a real close call. My vote goes to Murali, any day. Lara deserves a place too, over Sir Viv? Maybe!

    World XI: Gavaskar, Hobbs, Bradman, Tendulkar, Viv Richards, Sobers, Gilchrist, Marshall, Hadlee, Murali, Barnes.

  • on October 25, 2010, 17:32 GMT

    All time TEST XI without RAHUL DRAVID , SUNIL GAVASKAR or KAPIL DEV is A JOKE --- nope its not. Rahul is not most talked about sort of player, he did had a good span of 6-7 years out of his 13 years cricket at international level but if u look at the class of players in the world XI all of these played superbly throughout their time. Sunny Gavaskar was good, touching the greatness, an indian legend but thats where it all ends, Miandad in comparison was much much better in comparison but none of these deserve to be in the world XI because simply there stats aren't good enough. Lara should must've been in the first XI but the rest are fine. Kapil dev simply wasn't good enough to be even discussed for that.

  • on October 25, 2010, 17:31 GMT

    Exclusion of Mcgrath is really surprising. he was the most consistent and accurate fast bowler ever.I would have replaced Wasim with Mcgrath & Murali deservers a place in the 1st XI.No major problems with choice of batsmen except non inclusion of great SA batsman Greame Pollock even in the 2nd XI . however reader's XI will beat 1st XI b'coz they are powered with more modern players.

  • cricketchopper on October 25, 2010, 17:27 GMT

    @bks123: I am here. I knew they will select Sachin at the cost of Imran and Murli. The bed intention can be seen with the fact that they left place for three middle order batsmen just to adjust Sachin. You can see that this team has a weak bowling line. There are only four bowler. Gary sobers has a very high strike rate hence he is not a real fifth bowler. All this is diplomacy and commercialism. You can see that Gavaskar is not in this team, why? Because they selected Sachin, though Gavaskar was a honest choice. This is not honest selection. Just imagin in your mind that you are going to select a world Xi. You will surely select 5 bowlers because you have best 5 five batsman. In this case one of Bradman,Sobers & Richards should live pllace for Sachin (which is not possible). Sachin is a second class batsman. Suppose he is facing Holding,Garner,Croft,Marshal without helmet, what you think what will he do. He will leave the crease at once.

  • Mahesh.R on October 25, 2010, 17:25 GMT

    1 jury member out of 12 didn't include Tendulkar inhis first or second XI. Who could that be? Anyway, Cricinfo had better not include him in future juries...partly joking but partly serious.

  • on October 25, 2010, 17:24 GMT

    Thanks to espn for generating so much discussion and debates regarding the selection of a world eleven. Since there cannot be more than 11 in a team some hard core supporters of outstanding cricket personalities are bound to be disappointed. I am indeed disappointed that Sunil Gavaskar does not make it to the world XI. To me he was the best of all times.

  • JoeKev on October 25, 2010, 17:23 GMT

    That's a pretty good team.. My eleven: Jack Hobbs. Virender Sehwag, Bradman, Sachin Tendulkar,Brian Lara,Garfield Sobers,Adam Gilchrist,Malcolm Marshall,Shane Warne,Wasim Akram,Curtly Ambrose. I have retained 8 out of the eleven.I have replaced len Hutton with Virender Sehwag cuz I dunno who mr.Hutton is(am sorry)..and I know Viru can blast a 300 in a day..or may be if he knows he is playing for the world 11...400 in day..Jack Hobbs I have read bout him...run machine...Bradman..they say he is the greatest ever...Sachin.. what can i Say...Mr.Cricket.and my favourite player..silken .. I have seen him all my life..gives me goosebumps..Brian Lara over Viv richards for me...style..substance ..single handed saviour ..and the man is a phoenix.. he can attack just as viv does..sobers cuz he is the greatest allrounder ever.. Bowlers I think warne is much better.. like his swagger...and he tuns em miles..Wasim for reverse swing...Marshall..best bowler ever...Curtly over Lillee..

  • on October 25, 2010, 17:23 GMT

    Is it possible to make a world XI without Brian Lara?

  • sahil_cricrazy on October 25, 2010, 17:19 GMT

    Sehwag...2 triple centuries and nearly a 3rd one as well in Tests......one of the most dominant batsman ever seen by cricket......someone who can win a match just on his own.......How can he be left out????????...............Straaaaaaaaangeeeeeeeeeeee............

  • Dr.K.H.Iyer on October 25, 2010, 17:18 GMT

    My Pick: V.Sewag ( opposition/pitch etc don't change his ATTITUDE), Sir Hobbs ( the first Superstar after Grace, scored on GRAVEYARD pitches & scored BIG), Sir Bradman & Sachin (These two are DEFAULT Values!!)!! Now we need a few left handers! ( sorry Sir Richards) G.Pollock (best averages after Bradman), Sir Sobers (DEFAULT Value) & Gilchrist(of course)!! Now the Bowling! Akram ( a great match winner, could reverse swing the OLD ball) Marshall ( watch out batsmen, ha ha). McGrath [even on on DEAD and FLAT pitches, he WON, {Lillee was sent on leather hunt across the sub-continent}& the ONLY bowler who stood up to both Lara and Sachin] The spinner: should complement a great pace attack & Warne did just that!

  • tiger9999 on October 25, 2010, 17:16 GMT

    Wonder who would have won among these teams... First XI Hutton, Sangakara, Bradman,Richards, Sobers, Imran, Botham, Dev, Hadlee, Marshall, Warne Second XI Hobbs, Knott, Hadley, Sachin,Mankad,Kallis, Miller, Akram, Lindwall, Ambrose, Murali Third XI Hayden,Gavaskar,Ponting,Lara, Miandad, Benaud,Flintoff, Gilchrist, Pollock, Lillie, O'Riley Fourth XI Sehwag,Greenidge,Dravid,Haq,G Chappel, Greig, Dhoni,Kumble, Holding, Roberts, Trueman Fifth XI Smith, Jayasuriya, Ponting, Jayawardane,Laxman,Waugh Healy, Vettori, Hall, Walsh, Mc Grath Tomorrow's XI Amla, Tamim, DeVilliers (WK) Chateshwar,Raina,Umar, Swann, Randiv, Amir, Bollinger, Steyn

  • on October 25, 2010, 17:12 GMT

    Why Sehwag is not there? just because he is from current era? ridiculous.

  • on October 25, 2010, 17:10 GMT

    Guys as per my guess... among 12 juries, 9 picked up TENDULKAR into first XI and 2 picked up into 2nd XI. Only one guy did n't pick him into any XI is IAN CHAPPELL for 99.94% sure.

  • on October 25, 2010, 17:07 GMT

    How come Richard Hadlee is missing....he made a fighting unit out of the newzealand side...

  • on October 25, 2010, 17:06 GMT

    The master is master after all...

  • MFNadeem on October 25, 2010, 17:00 GMT

    It is UNFAIR to exclude guys like Richard Hadlee or Glenn McGrath and choose Lilee. I think Lilee was a great bowler but McGrath is far better than Lilee (has more wickets with better average). I will prefer Hadlee due to and added advantage of batting.

  • muski on October 25, 2010, 17:00 GMT

    @Grame Swanns-I can only laugh at your statement of Dravid Not even making a 3rd World 11. That shows you have immense cricketing sense. Would not be surprised if you say it should be Allan Lamb. Be happy mate that 2 Englishmen got through the back door.

  • on October 25, 2010, 16:55 GMT

    Will all due respect to 12 jury members, did none of thm sit back and think why 1st or 2nd team don't have people like Richard Hadlee, Pointing, McGrath, or Holding?

  • nandydesikan on October 25, 2010, 16:54 GMT

    I dont know how some one can call Murali a "chucker". Aussies have the history of resorting to sledging or ostensible cheating to win some matches and it is evident clearly in many matches. So for those people who think Dennis Lillee is the "only" guy with perseverance, then he would have been the only best player in the world. Such Hypocrisy I have never seen in my life. There are far better players than Lillee and let me reiterate, without Murali or Gavaskar or Sehwag, this no ALL TIME XI. Look at the number of blogs for this article, it is plaintive that many are not happy with the selection panel.

  • muski on October 25, 2010, 16:54 GMT

    After seeing the final list I must say this- though the money for this game comes from Asians , it will forever remain a white mans game. I cant but help wondering what Ian Chappell was blabbering about Openers and destructive batsmen.He's got confused with T20 Tamasha. He was talking about how one of the 2 Englishmen was facing Lindwall and Miller. If Lindwall and Miller was Not better than Marshall or Lillie why was Gavaskar not chosen over these 2 Englishmen, when for better part of his career he was facing these 2 guys.Ian does have the capacity to bulldoze other members of the jury. As most have said, Gilly too is overated. In a world X1 you pick a keeper solely on keeping skills and not on batting skills especially when you have 6 men ahead of you who are competent in that department. On this point, Knott is notches above Gilly.

  • SunnyD on October 25, 2010, 16:53 GMT

    The Reader's XI will beat out the World XI for sure. The world XI seems more like Ian Chappel's XI.

  • topeleven on October 25, 2010, 16:52 GMT

    Am happy with the selection except for the allrounder slot. It should have been Sir Ian Terrance Botham.If not for the controversies he would have scalped 500 wickets by 1992 itself. Also Murali and Mcgrath or Walsh should have been part of the team. The reason being is the Cricket had turned into a Batsmen's game from late nineties and these guys performed in those time consistently in all formats of the game. My all time XI would be Jack Hobbs, Len Hutton, Don Bradman, Sachin Tendulkar, Brian Lara, Garry Sobers,Alan Knot,Ian Botham, Shane Warne,Muttiah Muralitharan, Glenn McGrath

  • on October 25, 2010, 16:49 GMT

    I think, Glenn Macgrath is much more better bowler than Dennis Lili, and there is a certain place for Murlitharan................

  • Arun14 on October 25, 2010, 16:49 GMT

    Barry Richards's career is a mystery. He played only 4 tests and his career could well have turned out like Kambli's who had spectacular success in the first few tests he played. For those who argue that he was awesome in county, so we Graeme Hick. Why don't we include Clive Rice in the XI as well? Rice was on par with the 4 great allrounders of the 80s. Barry Richards had no body of work in tests. And then to put him on par with a legend that scored 10,000 runs against the best of pace attacks when pace bowling was at it's best is a big insult to the legend that is Sunil Gavaskar.

  • on October 25, 2010, 16:45 GMT

    ................. coooolll ...:D at least 1 paki player is their :D :D ...

  • wibbly on October 25, 2010, 16:44 GMT

    The panel did a decent job but the inclusion of only one west indian fast bowler in both elevens is up for debate. What is even more bewildering is the inclusion of McGrath in the reader's eleven. Mcgrath before Marshall, Hadlee, Ambrose, Lillee? There are alot of people out there offering opinions from perceptions based on stats and precious little else, which is what makes exercises such as this fundamentally flawed. At least the panel would have seen players from a couple of generations which is why McGrath didn't get a look in. Stats have obviously bolstered Tendulkar's case for inclusion but if greatness is based on other things, the intangibles as well, then he might just make my second eleven. But hey this is the age of India and they certainly have more of them to vote than anywhere else.

  • 114_in_final_Six_overs on October 25, 2010, 16:42 GMT

    It is saddening to notice SriLankans failing to see beyond Murali (and they posted a lot of comments on Indian fans earlier), who was at his best a great bowler. But there was this doubt about his bowling action that Ian Chappel just mentioned. Plus he never turned the ball like Shane Warne and probably got extra 200-250 cheap wickets against the minnows and another 50 odd wicket with Dooosra before it was determined illegal by the ICC. That is a lot of baggage to be brought in to the world 11 if he was chosen as the spinner.

  • on October 25, 2010, 16:41 GMT

    not a great team..... it can't even win a test against the present indian team......

  • delta20 on October 25, 2010, 16:41 GMT

    The team is near perfect...... but there are always some issues with any selection.... however I could present some serious issues...... Shane warne may be better than Murali as jury voted but not an unanimous choice as it came to be....... but the actual reason for his selection is that he was more popular in media than poor murali....... Tendulkar over lara?? pretty much like warne over murali as tendulkar was more popular in media than lara but everybody know that Lara was always better batsman than tendulkar..... stats don't always show what is true.... and Ambrose over Akram and Hadlee over Lillee any day......... Just some suggestions but these are genuine and I am not writing this because of biasness as some of the SRT fans.......

  • on October 25, 2010, 16:41 GMT

    Fair team overall ... good work... dont know why all are picking out many errors in team. Both teams seem to be loaded with perfect players in perfect combinations...

    however i will feel proud to make 2 objections... Sachin ahead of Lara is bit hard to accept because lara was better test player on any day.. Most important objection is the position of barry richards who played just 4 tests. Why not include Sehwag who has some 22 impressive match winning hundreds in 75 odd tests???

  • EverybodylovesSachin on October 25, 2010, 16:39 GMT

    Very good selection of all three elevens....Perfect....Love it...Love it...Jury did a fantastic job. Good work...

  • crishantha_n on October 25, 2010, 16:32 GMT

    The highest wicket taker in Tests and ODIs is not in the First XI.. Isn't this a joke? ESPN should be ashamed of this JURY and this rankings.

  • Buck_Vass on October 25, 2010, 16:32 GMT

    What in the xyz...xyz!!! I ask anybody who anybody & knows anything about the history of cricket * WHERE IS Graeme Pollock on the all time list? Take a look (A Must Read) Graeme Pollock - A Retrospective - http://www.cricinfo.com/wisdenalmanack/content/story/153088.html If it is permissible to attach the word genius to the artistry of a batsman, then Graeme Pollock is such among cricketers. Like others so acknowledged he was ever the master craftsman. Perhaps the all-important factor was that from the start, the bowling he faced was more skilled and demanding than will have come the way of many others

    Profile - http://www.cricinfo.com/southafrica/content/player/46772.html Perhaps the finest left-hand batsman the game has ever produced - Donald Bradman certainly thought so, classing only Garry Sobers as his equal among those he saw play. Another deprived of greater exposure by South Africa's isolation, Pollock showed in his 23 Tests what an awesome talent he possessed; his highest scor

  • Hema_Adhikari on October 25, 2010, 16:28 GMT

    @Shabnam-there was no indian pressure on Bradman, Warne, and Benaud when they selected their eleven a few years ago. Sachin was selected by all of them and they are the greatest thinkers of the game. Imran was a great fast bowler/captain but pretty ordinary fielder and batsman, certainly not in the league of Miller and Sobers. And this is world 11 (not 15) so someone will miss out.

    Tendulkar is the one and his peers have always recognized that, thats all that matters.

  • Graeme_Swanns_Cat on October 25, 2010, 16:27 GMT

    raghu(followed by a million number):

    A cheap shot there. I never mentioned anything about English players being great and this isn't about being 'patriotic'. In fact, I'm the first one to admit that we haven't produced a great batsman in decades now, a far cry from the likes of Hammond, Hobbs, Hutton, Barrington, Sutcfliffe etc. The word great is terribly misused today. I've watched the likes of Sobers, Viv, Pollock G and Barry Richards (both a lot in county cricket) LIVE more times than I can count. I know a great player when I see one and I don't give a damn which country he is from. Dravid is NOT in that league, he never was and he never will be. Keep your useless partnerships stats to yourself since they mean zilch to me and most other cricket fans!

  • Nayeem_Kohir on October 25, 2010, 16:27 GMT


  • omairhr on October 25, 2010, 16:20 GMT

    Why was Tendulkar not mentioned thrice in the world XI?

  • Surabh on October 25, 2010, 16:18 GMT

    All time World-XI without a skipper... What a shame!!

  • josepfh77 on October 25, 2010, 16:18 GMT

    i dont understand why there is only one westindian fast bowler in both XI combined garner,ambruse or holding.not even one of them is in any of the XI.i think glenn mcgrate or ambruse should be implace of trueman ,barns and O'reilly.i guarentee this list was made by a bias englishman or australian..

  • nafzak on October 25, 2010, 16:18 GMT

    What.. No Len Baichan!! No Monty Panesar!! What a joke!!!

    On a serious note, I do think that Greg Chappell does not get enough love in these blogs etc., about all time XIs. Greg Chappell scored 621 runs at 69 per against the WI in 1979... that was when the WI was at their best folks. Unfortunately, it does not count in the record books, because it was Packer World Series Cricket. He was in my opinion one of the 2 best batsmen of his generation - the other being the great Viv Richards.

  • keralapara on October 25, 2010, 16:17 GMT

    Warne: unanimously picked, with Bradman and Sobers , MEANS, DULEEP MENDIS VOTED FOR WARNE, NOT FOR MURALI. End of discussion. Lankan selection, others people no need to compllain about it.

  • cricketfan09 on October 25, 2010, 16:13 GMT

    Seriously, Hutton over Gavaskar? For a minute, imagine that Hutton parlayed all his greatness - runs, centuries, style, averages, etc......for Sri Lanka or Pak or even India. Honestly, he would not have been chosen. Similarly, if all of Sunny's stats had been for Australia, he would have gotten the nod. Similar argument for Lillee vs Marshall, Lillee vs Imran, Lillee vs Walsh/Ambrose. Face it - the readers XI is the most exciting. Warne vs Murali is hard. Think Warne nudges ahead a little despite Murali's 800. Akram is a great selection though. The best left arm paceman ever. Though most of the comments are meaningful, some are painful. This is not an ODI XI - please do not talk about Kapil Dev in 83, Dravid, Ganguly, etc.

  • on October 25, 2010, 16:13 GMT

    Lara is missing and Ambrose as well

  • on October 25, 2010, 16:13 GMT

    Gordon Greenidge, Virender Sehwag, Brian Lara, Sachin Tendulkar, Sir Donald Bradman, Sir Viv Richards, Adam Gilchrist, Glenn McGrath, Muttiah Muralitharan, Shane Warne, Wasim Akram was my XI. lol.. quite closely matched to the final reader's choice team. :) but far from the jury

  • Faraz_Baig_AusFan on October 25, 2010, 16:11 GMT

    Thats good, like the team. This is my XI: Jack Hobbs, Victor Trumper, Don Bradman, Sachin Tendulkar, Garry Sobers Ian Healy, SK Warne Bill O'Reilly, Sid Barnes, M. Marshall DK Lillee

    Don't quite agree with the inclusion of Akram in the first XI.

  • waspsting on October 25, 2010, 16:08 GMT

    IMO, the optimum bowling balance is 3 pacers, 2 spinners. Many teams find themselves one spinner short on the last day. but to have that balance, you can only take 5 batsmen, leaving the batting a tad vulnerable. I would have liked Imran, Hadlee and Marshall for pace - and Warne and Murali for spin. Both departments backed up by Gary Sobers.Batting doesn't suffer much because of Bradman (virtually 2 batsmen), Gilchrist (adds more batting power than you should expect from a keeper), Imran and Hadlee (bowling-allrounders), and Marshall and Warne (long tail).Imran and Hadlee are as good as bowlers as anybody - Wasim, Lillee- but far better bats. The addition of Murali means one of the batters get the boot - Viv Richards. we have enough batting strenght, and the addition of another world class spinner gives the team greater overall strenght, IMO. Imagine facing Warne and Murali in tandem on a turning wicket. batting - strong pace - strong spin - strong the selected 11 is a tad off in spin

  • synergee on October 25, 2010, 16:04 GMT

    I can only rate the players I have watched (And I have been watching Tests since the early 80s). Here is my XIs:

    World XI: Sehwag, Greenidge, Kallis, Sachin, Lara, Gilchrist, Pollock, Warne, Ambrose, Waqar, McGrath

    Second XI: Gavaskar, Hayden, Ponting, Richards, Inzamam, Sangakkara, Hadlee, Marshall, Murali, Steyn, Donald

  • on October 25, 2010, 16:02 GMT

    Wasim Akram deserves to be in the Universe XI too!

  • on October 25, 2010, 16:02 GMT

    A good pick more or less. I think S. F. Barnes should have been there in the First XI instead of Dennis Lillee. If you go through cricket history you will find that Barnes was the Bradman of the bowlers. Lillee was picked in the First XI because all the jury members are his contemporaries. It is a pity that Imran is not in the First XI but there are no complaints. He was edged out by the great Sir Gary Sobers for the solitary all-rounder spot. ahassan

  • on October 25, 2010, 16:01 GMT

    @ Akshay Loomba - Its a TEST XI - Kapil Dev may have won the world cup single handedly but that doesn't matter!

  • on October 25, 2010, 15:58 GMT

    No Richard Hadlee even in the second 11 but include Dennis Lillie? His figures are better in a team without a lot of spearhead support and hes a better batsman. Sorry you've got it wrong. he dragged NZ cricket onto the world stage with support from other players who would never make a world 11. He probably produced more jaffers in his career than any other. As accurate as Glen McGrath faster than Glen McGrath and could swing it when the conditions were right. If you pick Lillee or McGrath you must pick Hadlee.

  • Charindra on October 25, 2010, 15:56 GMT

    Muttiah Muralitharan is not included?!?!!? I can even make my piece with Lara's omission since the middle order is unbelievably strong. But Warne instead of Murali is just ridiculous. And those who say Murali took wickets against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, even if u take them out, Murali does better than Warne (Much better strike rate). And Warne feasted on England in the 90's, the worst team against spin the world has ever seen!!!

  • on October 25, 2010, 15:54 GMT

    I would have picked qualis over sobers , qalis is probably the greets all rounder in history would have probably picked him over gavaskar.

  • Archit_Bumb1986 on October 25, 2010, 15:50 GMT

    Why isn't Sehwag included in the World XI or the Second XI....Its true that his average is a few runs less than that of Hobbs but Hobbs has played less number of matches and has scored less no. of centuries as well....and again in case of Sehwag's comparison with Len Hutton,Sehwag's average might be a bit less in comparison but again the no. of centuries and triple centuries scored by Sehwag is more...and not to forget the manner in which Sehwag handles his opposition on his day...He completely outclasses the opposition and scores at more than run a ball....His strike rate of about 81 glorifies this fact...and not to forget that he has 2 triple centuries under his belt and that he has already equalled the record of the 2 other masters of Test Cricket...Brian Lara and Sir Donald Bradman.

  • JunaidQamar on October 25, 2010, 15:49 GMT

    I am from Pakistan and love to see Wasim in the side...BUT i think that the jury should have included Lara in the All-Time World XI at all costs..I think ESPN Cricinfo should re-make the XI one it receives the feedback from its readers and the experts who were in the jury....And PLZ include Lara....even if u have to make it All-Time World "XII"...

  • raghurish on October 25, 2010, 15:44 GMT

    Why should Gilchrist be in the World XI when there are specialist batsmen who are legends like Don Bradman, Sachin Tendulkar, Viv Richards?

    World XI needs a legendary WICKETKEEPER, not a legendary wicketkeeper batsman. Gilly is more suitable for a weaker team to bolster their batting.

  • on October 25, 2010, 15:39 GMT

    GUYS.. Keep it simple.... After all CRICKET is a SPORT!! Any sport is made to entertain ppl... If anybody entertained more than others, then he should be in the list!! Regarding SACHIN being in the list of All time XI... He has entertained millions of ppl more than anyone else in the history of any SPORT!! YES I agree.. Indians watch cricket more than anyone... I am sure you dont need a proof outside of CRICINFO!!:).. I am pretty sure some of the guys in this list have entertained very few ppl compared to some others not in the list!!.. LARA was one!!

  • Cric_-spirit on October 25, 2010, 15:39 GMT

    All time TEST XI without RAHUL DRAVID , SUNIL GAVASKAR or KAPIL DEV is A JOKE. BY INCLUDING Sachin Tendulkar in the group JURY members got millions kilogram of LOVE from all the corners of India,,and they will expose their thanks and love to Jury members as before.

  • kemmisito on October 25, 2010, 15:37 GMT

    I think that the team chosen is quite fair as it does seem to be very well balanced and capable of standing up to any opposition. I would have replaced Viv Richards with Lara as Viv only had a handful of very good years throughout his career in which he scored heavily whereas Lara was brilliant throughout except a few years when he was out of form. Just check out their stats on a yearly basis to see that what I'm saying is true. It's tough leaving out Murali but only one spinner could be picked and it had to be Warne as off spin could be bowled by Sobers if needed.

  • on October 25, 2010, 15:36 GMT

    i dont know why lara is not there...but idont agree wid da rest about gilchrist...he is a very good batsman but he still remains the best keeper ever in test cricket. also i dont understand why cricinfo has picked most of the players who played b4 the start of the 20th century. i think more currrent players should be there as there is more quality cricket now than ever b4.

  • NeoTheSaviour on October 25, 2010, 15:30 GMT

    No way Sehwag can be left out of world 11. On 4th day Opposition sets 380 odd, 14 over left for the day. This guys comes scores 90 in 50 odd deliveries, Match over. 100% agree that world 11 should be for dominance not for saving games.

  • mits6 on October 25, 2010, 15:27 GMT

    with such teams playing opposite each other ,the test matches should be of 10 days ( difficult to bowl out teams twice)

  • RomanNoseJob on October 25, 2010, 15:26 GMT

    The all time great team should be a team of players that stand out from the crowd.

    Murali stands above any other spinner, 7 wickets a game, ran through top orders, bowled all day. It's all well and good to go on about a balanced side and obviously murali would not be bowling 35 overs a day in this team, but there is also the fact you should honour those that are truely special. Lillee over imran is also ridiculous. Lillee was a fantastic bowler, Imran was talisman, a leader, a fighter, did what no one dared to do on pakistani pitches. Bring back imran and put him in any side right now and you have a potential no.1 test team. Can you say the same of Lillee? no, of course not.

  • Engle on October 25, 2010, 15:25 GMT

    Gavaskar should have got in ahead of Hutton. While Hutton faced Lindwall/Miller, Sunny faced the most dominant attack in the games history, the WI. Also, he never had a decent partner for support. Tendulkar for all his exploits does not complement Bradman. Surprising that I.Chappell and others dont emphasize this more. The best partnerships are between those who complement each other. Knott should have been preferred over Gilchrist. The XI does not need further batting, but does need excellent glovework. Imran possesses big-match temperament and can raise his game to the occasion. He gets in over Wasim, whose LH bowling can be substituted for by Sobers. Marshall/Ambrose/Imran w/b a better attack than Marshall/Lillee/Wasim with Sobers for support. With Bradman in the team, the AR should have been a bowling AR in Imran rather than Sobers who could make it on batting alone. The 2 attributes that most define a good World XI, IMO, are TEMPERAMENT and COMPLEMENT

  • on October 25, 2010, 15:18 GMT

    Kapil Dev? Single handedly won the world cup!

  • on October 25, 2010, 15:16 GMT

    Everyone forgot about Kapil Dev?

  • eZoha on October 25, 2010, 15:16 GMT

    I got 7 correct. I'd select Lara over Sachin in the World XI. And probably Imran over Sobers, because we already have a good batting line-up. The selection of Akram is justified. This team won't play only in the bouncy fast pitches of Australia. When things are not working for the team on a dead track, you may throw the ball to Akram for reverse swing magic.

  • pradeepbharadwaj on October 25, 2010, 15:15 GMT

    who wants to watch test cricket or infact any form of cricket without viru sehwag??sorry no sehwag no test cricket.he is the greatest entertainer there ever was (inspite of victor trumper's and adam gilchrist's) and arguably the 3rd greatest batsmen ever after don bradman and viv richards (if the quality of the bowling is not the highest that is not sehwag's fault and whoever says sehwag scores only in subcontinent donot watch cricket regularly).his average is just a shade less that hobbs and hutton and way more than gavaskar but his strike rate is better than anyone that ever scored 3000runs in test cricket and he is not gd enough??you mean people really want to watch sunny gavaskar score a 100 of 500 bals??

  • keralapara on October 25, 2010, 15:09 GMT

    Sachin got all votes exceppt one. Guess who ? Who is IAN CHAPPEL ?

  • raghu1122000 on October 25, 2010, 15:07 GMT


    Not surprisingly, an ignorant comment from the world where the ian bells and clarkes are held in high esteem.

    On the contrary, dravid is the most under rated player, having lived in the shadow of tendulkar.

    figuring in 3/10 of the highest partnerships and after playing some stunning innings(adelaide anyone, kolkata, rawalpindi, SA), he still remains to be unknown in the indian camps where players normally turn idols overnight...

  • A_J.. on October 25, 2010, 15:06 GMT

    a balanced side; bt d absence of Veeru is really surprising>>>>>>>>>>>>

  • AqeelAsghar on October 25, 2010, 15:05 GMT

    when murali and lara are not in a team, then team chosen is biasedly chosen - definitely.

  • mits6 on October 25, 2010, 14:58 GMT

    mates a question .............. Who was better bowler dennis lillee or sir richard hadlee ?

  • pupmaddy on October 25, 2010, 14:55 GMT

    excellent team selected bt sehwag desired to be in that 11 he can win matches by his won i miss mcgrath who is all time best i think he desirvs place in 11 ahead of wasim

  • bks123 on October 25, 2010, 14:53 GMT

    where is cricketchopper btw?

  • on October 25, 2010, 14:52 GMT

    cant believe warne first choice of jury also gavaskar not making to final 11 is surprising

  • on October 25, 2010, 14:50 GMT

    3 changes must have been made in first 11.. Murali must be picked ahead of warne, and Sehwag is a much better choice ahead of Len Hutton.. List is biased towards WI and Aus.. Even McGrath cud have been considered for atleast de 2nd 11..

  • on October 25, 2010, 14:48 GMT

    It strikes me that the selectors have picked a team of iconic players and have favored style over substance. Having a team of champion players doesn't necessarily equal a champion team. Where are the second change hard slog bowlers? You can't guarantee that one of those 11 can turn the game on it's head when the going gets tough. Just a thought.

  • Shabnam-Narain on October 25, 2010, 14:46 GMT

    All the selections are expected except Lan Hutton instead of Gavaskar but all right no big difference. The only blemish is that the bowling strength has been sacrified under pressure of Indian funs. There was no room for Sachin. In his place one Bowling allrounder i.e. Imran deserved. In place of Wasee/Lillee, there should be Murli.

  • mudassirrana on October 25, 2010, 14:38 GMT

    I had picked my XI and i m quite happy to see 8 names in this All time XI matching exactly those of mine. But most surprising name for me is Sobers. This is absolutely illogicalllllllll....... i have great respect for him but when u have 5 most acomplished batsmen at top of the order and the most accomplished Wk.Batsman; Gilchrist at no.6 then why go for another batting allrounder??????? instead we should have a complete balling allrounder like Imran which i had picked in my XI. Imran was a match winner bowler but can sobers win matches for this XI with his bowling alone???? Remember, Imran was equally successful with his batting as he averaged over 50 in the 2nd half of his career. Rest of the names are fine.

  • mits6 on October 25, 2010, 14:37 GMT

    imran khan or richard hadlee in place of wasim akram . rest the team is good

  • on October 25, 2010, 14:34 GMT

    its sad to see that the greatest and only bowler on earth with over 800 wickets murali doesnt have a place on this list. for sure we should not call this the all time list, we should call it the panels favourite list cos if you want an all time list it should be taken from a bigger panel than the one we ve had here due to the bias some of these pannelists could hav against players.. from what i remember he was wisdens greatest bowler of the century a few yrs back. By the way @garreth, i wish murali played a lot more with the English like Warne did as they were the whipping boys in the 90s. Do you want to deduct warnes 193 againstr muralis 112 from overall score and give me the score and tell me murali was the overall greatest bowler or are you only willing to count the countrys where warne has fared better. i think this panel is more interested in history with 4 historisans also voting.

  • Hema_Adhikari on October 25, 2010, 14:33 GMT

    I am pretty surprised by few selections but obviously selectors are right in not letting 'very good/great' but 'not all time great players' in the first 11 like Imran Khan and Hadlee etc. This is all time 11 and it is no shame that even very good players missed out. Sachin Tendulkar now has unique honor of getting selected by Don Bradman, Shane Warne, Richi Benaud and Cricinfo 11 (8 test captains). That itself shows that his peers recognize hm as the greatest batsman of his time and perhaps all time barring Mr. 99.94.

  • ramz_01 on October 25, 2010, 14:32 GMT

    evn tho im a Sri Lankan im nt gona say murali is a better bowler then warne.bt dis selection is vry funny.thy all cl this all tym world XI bt thr is any rual thr is 3 fast bowlers must pick? and is dennis lillee beter then murali??? seems lyk dis is a joke.thy try to balance da side rather then try to pick all tym best XI.evryone knw murali is better bowler then lillee bt thy still pick lillee.if thy wont to balance da side thy cn choose fast bowling all rounder imran khan insted of sir Garry Sobers bt thy didnt pick murali simply bcz murali born in country lyk SRI LANKA.othr wise he will eisly pick in dis XI.all three bowlers out of bowlers cn take wickets in any wickets bt i dnt think lillee will if da wicket dnt hav green nd bounce.bt evryone knw murali cn do dat with marshall,akram and warne.

  • on October 25, 2010, 14:32 GMT

    Should pick two world XI, one to play on pacy wickets land another to play on spin firendly tracks. As playing conditions will alter the composition of sides.

  • on October 25, 2010, 14:32 GMT

    The all-time XI selected by the jury is a very good one.However,I am surprised that three players find themselves in the second XI and not the main one.I have been reading over the years,about the Best players chosen by people like Neville Cardus,Jim Swanton,Bradman,Richie Benaud and by Wisden,ESPN and Reuters.Putting together the choices of these experts,one would have expected to see Gavaskar,Imran and Syd Barnes in the World XI.

    However,the choice is by another jury and a very good one at that.The two teams chosen are fantastic teams.Its a job well done.And we have two teams to savour.

    The readers choice was expected to be different from the Jury's.It can be seen that the readers have selected players mainly from the last 15-20 years,mainly those that they have seen.They have also gone for those they have heard about most-like Bradman,Sobers,Gavaskar,Richards etc.

    There is also a bias towards indians in the readers choice with three players in the XI.

  • on October 25, 2010, 14:30 GMT

    evryone has his own choice nd i agree wid dem, but my world xi would be: virendar sehwag for his diffrenct approach to batting nd changing the scenario sunil gavaskar for solidity bradmon as ultimate thing sachin for his consitency viv richards for his flair sobbers for his all round ability gilchrist for his flam boyance warne as best leg spinner ever akarm as best left armer malcum marshal for his roaring pace glen macgrath for amazing line nd length nd i promise u guys no team wil be able to play more eye catching cricket dan dis team

  • GreatOsho on October 25, 2010, 14:30 GMT

    Sachin is better than Bradman or any batsman. There are various factors to make this statement. Bradman averaged 56 in bodyline and complained like a cry baby when was bowled bouncers. People have seen video of Larwood whose bowling resembled so much to Waqars and was probably as much fast. And puhlease Sachin never played like Bradman unlike the latters observation to his wife. We have seen videos of both, Sachin's technique, compactness, stroke play is so advanced that it cannot be matched. Bradman played typical old fashioned grip of the bat handle and without grace and flow of Sachin. Please!! Dont even mention Ponting, people should find out what Cricket Australia is hiding till date. Why did Ponting/Jayasuriya etc come back on earth after the Graphite was removed from their bats. Especially Ponting whose Bat was specially Manufactured by the Australian company. If the Graphite made no difference why the hell was it there in first place. Why Ponting declined after its removal.

  • on October 25, 2010, 14:27 GMT

    With Wasim & Gilchrist batting down the order, I don't think there is a need of 6 batsman in a side. I would prefer 5 world class bowlers.

  • Luckan20 on October 25, 2010, 14:27 GMT

    I am not sure why Gilchrist is in the list and he should be in the 2nd 11. Sir Richard Hadlee handsdown pick even ahead of Lillee and I dont believe Akram should be in the 1st list.

    I would have picked Hadlee, Marshal & Lillee for 3 quickies and we know Sobers is the best all rounder, while I will give Murali an edge over Warne. This is because of strike rate and matching winning % for their respective countries. It doesn't matter, which teams you play against, but who has won single handedly games for their respective countries. You can only play for your country based on other countries participating.

    If they choose Gilchrist becasue of Warne, I dont like that selection. In my books, Rodney Marsh should be up their.

  • on October 25, 2010, 14:25 GMT

    in my opinion the world XI: Sir Leonard Hutton, Sunil Gavaskar, Brian Lara, Sachin Tendulkar, Sir Donald Bradman, Sir Ian Botham, Adam Gilchrist, Glenn McGrath, Malcolm Marshall, Muttiah Muralitharan, Shane Warne my selection had 6 out of 11 right

  • SnowSnake on October 25, 2010, 14:24 GMT

    What a useless excercise. Who really cares about history?

  • Au_co on October 25, 2010, 14:20 GMT

    Brian Lara Vs World XI - Why Lara is not in the All Time World-XI? If anybody don't know, the reason is because of this. Because on his day, one man army Lara himself can beat this all time World-XI.

  • on October 25, 2010, 14:19 GMT

    ESPn World Cricket X1 ? ..shame ridiculous ..you telling me that Virender Sehwag, George Headley and Wally Hammond where better than Graeme Pollock ....that panel from ESPN should stick to American sports

  • Graeme_Swanns_Cat on October 25, 2010, 14:17 GMT

    Indian fans need to wake up. Dravid in a world 11? You're having a laugh. He is the most overrated player on Cricinfo boards.

    Dravid wouldn't make a 3rd 11, let alone the 1st one.

  • JamieRD on October 25, 2010, 14:17 GMT

    Warne ahead of Murali...unbelievabale...guys you were biased ...

  • kapilesh23 on October 25, 2010, 14:13 GMT

    all the people who have problem with the selection of warne i think should see the interview of ian chappel there he said that the warne is the greatest leg spinner of all times and not greatest spinner .i think the selection of warne is justified because leg spin is the most difficult art in cricket and though indians played him very well he was very hard to face for other teams.

  • on October 25, 2010, 14:11 GMT

    where is the decision maker (SEHWAG) who changed the fate of test cricket

  • rairatank on October 25, 2010, 14:10 GMT

    It was simple, select warne & murali and close your eyes select any other 9 player from the list and these 2 spinners will win all the matches for you.I read Greg Chappels comment about selecting attacking players then why all the jury chose Sobers,From which angle he was match winner spinner.Better select Murali instead of him and replace any fast bowler(not marshal) with an allrounder like Imran or Botham or Hedaly or any one, doesn't matter. We have Warne and Murali.

  • vipin.chaudhary2325 on October 25, 2010, 14:08 GMT

    good one.... people can only argue about their favourate players who r not in World XI.. but its a very difficult job to select 11 from 100 good players... all 100 can be in world 11... so some high quality players are left out, dats unfortunate, but anyone can't do anything abt this... so lets cheers for dis super world xi....

  • King_Anish on October 25, 2010, 14:06 GMT

    Murali over Warne is ridiculous and biased. Warne was good only in Australia and England. In the sub-continent where the ball "spins", he didn't do much.

    Also, Marshall ahead of Garner and Ambrose is not making much sense.

    Len Hutton is no greater "opener" than Gavaskar.

    Sangakkara can be a best test keeper than Gilchrist.

    Finally one bold question to all Bradman fans - He never played or proved on the spinning wickets in the sub-continent, he would've failed just like any other Australian. He made merry most against the toothless English attack only.

  • myaqoob on October 25, 2010, 14:03 GMT

    1)Saeed Anwar 2)Amir Suhail 3)Javaid Maidad 4)Inzamam 5)Mohd yusuf 6)imran khan 7)Moin khan 8)Abdul razack 9))wasim 10)waqar 11)shoaib

    This eleven can beat all the world elevens..lol

  • patra11 on October 25, 2010, 14:02 GMT

    Imran khan should have been there in place of sobers what a player and plus he could have been the captain as well

  • P.K.B on October 25, 2010, 13:58 GMT

    This is a complete joke of a selection.

    Sunil Gavaskar should be in the World XI. The guy was batting when West Indies were bowling balls that were extremely hard to defend. Yet Sunil stood out and eventually scored over 10000+ runs. Which was massive at that time.

    Shane Warne over Murali???? Is this a joke???? Brian Lara???? Sachin is ofcourse always going to be in the World XI but wheres Dravid???? Dravid is called "The Wall" because he can stand upto bowlers. If ever there was a tricky spell, Dravid was the one who would fustrate them and let the other end do the attacking.

  • maxkuiters on October 25, 2010, 13:58 GMT

    The World XI vs Second XI. That would be awesome to see, when can we schedule this? My money is on Second XI.

  • ArdentCritic on October 25, 2010, 13:58 GMT

    Poor Kiwis lone Juror - Mr Wright! Schocking as to not able to push the selection of Sir Hadlee in either of the 3 teams? Also Imran should replace Akram in Ist X1 - As Akram was the prodigy of him and Imran had a much bigger impact on the Pak /World Cricket.

  • Bollo on October 25, 2010, 13:57 GMT

    Pretty sick of reading about accusations of racism/nationalism when someone`s favourite isn`t selected. For those of you who`ve been brave enough to accuse Ian Chappell of such, I suggest you listen to his interviews re. the selections. He doesn`t make it entirely clear who he voted for, but clearly states his preference for Sehwag as one of the openers `the most destructive test batsman after Bradman`, Sobers `quite clearly the best batsman I`ve seen` and Alan Knott over Gilchrist.

    The one-eyed fools on this site are those clamouring for the inclusion of Dravid, Kapil and Dhoni, and crying foul that they are not even mentioned, not people like Ian Chappell who have made obviously considered decisions that one great just pips another.

  • doesitmatter on October 25, 2010, 13:56 GMT

    from grandmaster123: Tendulkar and McGrath have only played in 2 full-series(and they were at their peak then) 1998/99 in aus - [ 61 & 0 (both times incorrectly given out ),, 116 & 52,, 45 & 4]series avg = 46.33. 2000/01 in india - [76 & 65,, 10 & 10,, 126 & 17] Series avg = 50.67 McGrath dismissed him 4 times out of the 12 inns. Tendulkar and Donald have played in 3 full-series 1992 in SA (when sachin was 19) [11,, 111 & 1,, 6 & 0,, 73] Series Avg = 33.33 1996/97 in SA- [15 & 4,, 169 & 9,, 35 & 9] Series avg = 40.17 2000 in india [97 & 8,,21 & 20] Series average = 36.5 In these 3 series he was dismissed 5 times by H. Cronje and 4 times by Donald out of 16 inns. Tendulkar and the Pakistani W's (Akram and Waqar) have played in 2 series. 1989 in Pakistan [15,, 59 & 8,, 41,, 35 & 57 ] Series avg at an age of 16 = 35.83 Imran Khan dismissed him twice, Akram once and Waqar once. 1999 in india (W's at their peak) [ 0 & 136,, 6 & 29] Series avg = 42.75 They failed to dismiss him..

  • on October 25, 2010, 13:54 GMT

    Seeing Sachin bing picked ahead of Lara in the World XI just goes to show the form he is in these days..

  • viththy on October 25, 2010, 13:52 GMT

    without murali hahaha what a funny world XI......i think tha jury must see a doctor.....they did lot of mistakes...

  • Crazy_Cricket_Fan on October 25, 2010, 13:52 GMT

    Akram instead of Sir Hadlee or McGrath...If you are selecting for ODIs then of course Akram would be 1st pick..but for tests???? must be a joke..that's it guys...no more comments...

  • on October 25, 2010, 13:49 GMT

    i'd replace hutton n hobbs with sunny n viru...anyday..

  • Pravardhan on October 25, 2010, 13:49 GMT

    The only thing that puzzles me is that if Sachin has got 51 points, that means 1 of the selector has not picked him in both the teams. I dunno what to say about that! Lara instead of Viv Richards would be right, as Viv is more of a one day player, while Lara is a technical genius. And Gilly doesn't deserve to be there.

  • on October 25, 2010, 13:49 GMT

    Readers XI is better than JuryXI

  • AndieRae606 on October 25, 2010, 13:47 GMT

    'Its a joke if Jack Hobbs is picked up over Sunil Gavaskar and Brian Lara. Sounds like this is "English+Australian 11" including few exceptions.'

    And of course - you know so much more about cricket than the selectors, but clearly nothing about Jack Hobbs...

    England and Australia dominated cricket for decade after decade- you'd expect more of their players to feature. And the negative comment about Lillee is ridiculous - his pace, longevity and gorgeous action alone merit his selection. He was a terror long before he partnered with Thomson.

  • ThetigersofCricket on October 25, 2010, 13:45 GMT

    In my Opinion The World X11: Jack Hobbs Len Hotton Inzmam Ul haq Sachin Tendulkar Viv Richards Don Bradman Adam Gilchrist Imran Khan ( c) Waseem Akram Shane Warne Denis Lillie

  • cricfanraj on October 25, 2010, 13:43 GMT

    Very good selection. My selection had 7 players in common. I selected Gavaskar & Barry Richards over Jack Hobbs and Len Hutton . I think Gavaskar is definite bet over Hutton . Other two misses I selected GPollak over ViV but my heart was always for ViV. So No regrets over that. Mc.grath over Wasin . Hmm.. I think Mc.Grath is really one of the greatest fast bowlers. I think Mc.Grath would have been better bet . Just a question. Wonder who has not selected Sachin and Marshall easily the best

  • moscowman on October 25, 2010, 13:42 GMT

    The selection clearly indicates the colour bias. Muralidharan, tthe 800 Man is left out. He is the greatest bowler in spite of all out efforts to derail him by the powers that be. Any how My XI will replace Warne by Murali anytime.

  • LilleeTheLegend on October 25, 2010, 13:40 GMT

    I am also glad that the ever anoying debate on Warne/Murali is finally quashed. For despite the emotion and constant crying of one eyed Sri Lankan patriots, despite the stats which show who Murali/Warne took their respective wickets against wickets and despite anybodies personal opinion on whether Murali is a cheat as a sportsman or not... ...the cricket 'fraternity' has spoken. Just look at who was on the panel. Debate OVER !!! Warne is, was and always be reckognised as the best spin 'BOWLER' the world has or ever will witness. A true freak of nature, not just a freak...

  • BDKu on October 25, 2010, 13:40 GMT

    You want one reason why Shane warne is better than Murali Many people who say Warne is better will not asnwer this because no stats can prove it. But here are my 2 areas where Warne is better than Murali

    Shane warne is a better LEG spinner than Murali There is more light thats reflected off Warne than Murali. Did you get it now ?

  • robertssean on October 25, 2010, 13:39 GMT

    Great to see Tiger O'Reilly still included as one of the all time greats of the game. Bradman said he was the greatest bowler he ever faced. Would be interesting to see which bowler would be 12th man in the 2nd XI. Someone said that the 2nd XI would have trouble getting the 1st XI out needs to do more research on these bowlers.

  • gunnerz on October 25, 2010, 13:39 GMT

    This is an Anti-Climax!! Not the best of the selections at all! Len Hutton & Dennis Lillee better than Gavaskar/Barry Richards and Holding/McGrath? This World XI is kind of prejudiced because none of the juries have played contemporary cricket. If the panel had played (or at least involved in) decent amount of modern cricket, I am sure we would have Sehwag and Lara up in there. Sorry, but this is not the best of World XI.

  • TATTUs on October 25, 2010, 13:39 GMT

    Good selection. Many comments here make it clear that most have not understood, the selection process. I have my own differences as well in the categorization, but I salute the effort taken.

  • sangan3 on October 25, 2010, 13:38 GMT

    Richard Hadlee: better average than any bowler in the team, 1st to 300 wickets and a decent batsman playing in a fairly average team - hard to see him not in there to be honest.

  • trepuR on October 25, 2010, 13:37 GMT

    May I just say tht this eleven is nearly exactly what I would have picked. Also, anyone who claims that anyone is better than Malcolm Marshal either has a stick inserted in one of their orifices or is smoking something far too strong to handle, I am an Aussie, but I still think he was a god. As for those who claim that someone else deserved Lillee's spot more than he does, well you're plain wrong he was an incredible bowler, he broke his back and returened to mantain a standard of excellence, that speaks volumes about his perseverence and skill. It is frankly no surprise that the readers eleven is so far off the mark, this website has a huge Indian following, Gavaskar and Sewag the world's best openers, that is absolutely rediculous, Gavaskar is one thing, Sewag, oh man, that is a farsce. @ MrGarreth, I love the point you made about how many wickts Murali took against Bang and Zim as opposed to Warne, plus you can't have a chucker in an all time XI. Two more minor quibles are that mayb

  • nandydesikan on October 25, 2010, 13:32 GMT

    This is one of the most partial "All Time" elevens picked. Man, in those days, competition was less, though I admit protective gear was close to nothing without the helmet. But, I can brand them as braver compared to the current lot. With no Sunil Gavaskar, Imran Khan , Rahul Dravid and last, not least, Muralitharan, this is the MOST BIASED all time eleven being selected. No one will give any regard to this stupid selection. Pity the panel which selected!! Sorry guys, but you just cannot mix up different eras of cricket. It is like comparing Windows 95 and Windows 7 softwares.

  • zekie on October 25, 2010, 13:30 GMT

    I really cannot see how Brian Charles Lara is out of the World 11 the guy is the epitome of pure batsmanship. He never had the greatest attitude and played on a weak team for most of his career. I sure never saw bradman bat but only bradman i will have in front of Lara. He is the best batsmen i have ever seen

  • A_HTIMAN on October 25, 2010, 13:30 GMT

    Excellent Choice. It is obvious that the 6 batsean selected were the ones that should be. Lara is a great cricketer but no just misses the list. Though I prefer to see him other thatn most in the list. Gilly is by far superior to number 7. I still feel Lillie should be dropped and Murali too should be picked as readers suggest. But it's entirely rubbish to have Sehwag and Dhoni like Indian players suggest.

  • on October 25, 2010, 13:28 GMT

    I am not surpiised to see the brian lara bias alive and well. After all. his claim to fame is only the most runs in a test inning (400 n.o) and the most first class runs in an inning (500 n.o). So what if he played for a team that was second rate at the time (WI) and was their only beacon. So what if both shane warne and murli said he was the person they hated to bowl to most (because of willow). Who does he think he is? I guess he thinks, besides Tendulkar, He is/was the best modern day batsman!!!!!!

  • bharat2311 on October 25, 2010, 13:27 GMT

    Sunil Gavaskar Barry Richards Don Bradman Sachin Viv Richards Kumar Sangakara Imran Khan Richard Hadlee Shane Warne Malcom Marshall Murlitharan

    Not biased, pure selection, Having 3 genuine fast bowlers,all having strike rate of around 22, 2 greatest spinners with 1500 test wickets with very good strike rate. Wicket keeper who could bat at any number with same ease,and 5 best batters,

    I think my dream team is better than selected by jury........

  • on October 25, 2010, 13:26 GMT

    Good to see Wasim Akram there.

  • on October 25, 2010, 13:25 GMT

    Where the Hell is Rahul Dravid.. I dont Understand why rahul is under estimated everytime... This is not Fair :)

  • on October 25, 2010, 13:23 GMT

    Expected Murali to be left out, but Hadlee being overlooked for both teams is pretty harsh. He is statistically superior to Lillee in every department, without even taking his batting into consideration.

  • on October 25, 2010, 13:22 GMT

    I just don't understand how Warne became way better than murali????? Thats just unbelievable.... The selection is toooo biased.............

  • nishantintouch on October 25, 2010, 13:21 GMT

    Sachin tendulkar rules !!! not a bit surprised to learn that the world's all time no.1 batsman is in this , or any , list . Every time sachin goes to bat he takes a of little me a little of you with him in the middle. His all those countless match winning records are mine .. are yours .. are everybody's . He is reported to regularly miss promotional functions for NGOs or government welfare schemes for his presence makes it hard for the organizers to carry out the function smoothly. If he has to he does it clandestinely and camouflaging his appearance. SENSEX , as it has been reported , surges up whenever sachin scores . The TRP ratings of broadcasting channels go up whenever sachin is in business. They say ' Not sure of familiarity but success breads contempt ' , well OUR sachin proves it wrong. Cricket is blessed to have a sportsman like sachin and there is no element of hyperbole in it .

  • on October 25, 2010, 13:17 GMT

    Bias selection of the World Eleven. Muralitharan should have been in all three teams selected by various parties. According to my mind the Glen McGrath should have been selected over Dennis Lillie.

  • metrojonesy123 on October 25, 2010, 13:17 GMT

    If you look at the jurys set up, they have gone with the traditional 5 batsmen, 1 all rounder, 1 keeper, 4 bowlers. No offence to Imran Khan, but with that set up NO all-rounder is going to displace Sobers. I agree that he is a legend of cricket, and one could argue he could get in the side as a specialist bowler, but in replace of Marshall as some have suggested????? Marshall was the complete fast bowler, he averages less than 25 in all conditions he played (I don't know if Khan did, if he did SORRY).

  • on October 25, 2010, 13:17 GMT

    I would make 2 changes 1. Curtley Ambrose instead of Wasim Akaram, 2. Sunil Gavaskar instead of Jack Hobbs

  • on October 25, 2010, 13:17 GMT

    Totally ridiculous selection without Gavaskar for spot one and Murali for eleven. Murali has much more variety than Warne, and played for a much weaker team, where as Warne played with some of the best bowlers and a best team, that makes a huge difference in creating pressure on other side and getting wickets. Sunny Gavaskar deserves opening spot than Hutton and Hobbs, there is no need to explain about his greatness, we all know the facts. Rest are great selection, glad to see King Viv, Sachin, Don, Sobers, Marshall and Gillie. I would have loved to see the greatest M&M (Muthiah Murali) for Shane Warne and Ambrose/McGrath for Lillie.

  • LilleeTheLegend on October 25, 2010, 13:16 GMT

    Boy there are some dreamers on here!!! Waqar Younis? Javed Miandad? Mark Taylor? Ha ha ha, hands off it guys... really! Malcolm Marshall was the only surprise for me, all stats aside, Andy Roberts would have been the most logical and feared bowler to partner Lillee (thats if Jeff Thompson had a broken leg of course). Just to show that I am not biased by my Ozzy heritage, Gilchrist gets in on his batting prowess only and is certainly not the best pure gloveman by a long shot to have graced the great game. (Knott, Marsh, Dujon for eg.) But this is only my humble cricket educated opinion. I do enjoy reading all the opinions no matter how idiotic for humor value or intellegent. Well done everyone!

  • keralapara on October 25, 2010, 13:15 GMT

    One addition to first world x1 1. Sunil Gavaskar. Dennis Lille is not better than Ambrose, Holding, Botham or Hadle. SO add GAVASKAR AND DELETE DENNIS LILLE.

  • intcamd on October 25, 2010, 13:15 GMT

    A bunch of jokers is what is this selction panel. Hutton over Gavaskar is a pathetic choice. Gavaskar stared down the best pace quartet in the history of the game, and collected 13 centuries from them. WHo exactly did Hutton face? As for Hobbs, I guess he is there by some kinda obligatory paean to old historical records because no one here or on the sector panel ever saw him play. And why is Gilchrist in the top 11? Is he the best keeper of all time? If he is there to backup batting, what is the use of the top 6, who are supposed to be the best, anyway? Ditto Wasim, he is good, but he is there hecause he is a leftie? Too many strange choices from a bunch of goofuses.

  • on October 25, 2010, 13:10 GMT

    sorry.....no world XI can b justified without murali...its a biased western XI not world XI atleast..... bad unexpected work from a team like cricinfo.

  • Adhiqarie on October 25, 2010, 13:08 GMT

    not totally satisfied with the jury's decision ...but I am happy that most of the players that I had chosen are included. Exclusion of Brian Lara and Imran Khan from the World XI is not justified..!!

  • on October 25, 2010, 13:07 GMT

    why not murki in the first XI

  • Rajitha88 on October 25, 2010, 13:06 GMT

    SIR MURALIDERAN HAS GOT MORE THAN 5O WICKETs AGAINST EVERY TEST playngNATIONS...SO dont compair warne wth murali.....

  • TheOnlyEmperor on October 25, 2010, 13:06 GMT

    I just had a fresh look at the stats of the pace bowlers and I think Hadlee, Lillee, Marshall and Imran are really the top 4 pace bowlers, when one compares figures, like 10/5 wkt hauls, economy, strike rate, etc. Waqar's figures are very impressive on strike rate and most other counts - better than Wasim's, but for the taint of ball tampering for the reverse swing. Alas!

  • on October 25, 2010, 13:05 GMT

    Eh, Tony Greig as the England representative on the selection panel?

  • Arp2007 on October 25, 2010, 13:05 GMT

    I am so happy for Sachin as he is the World XI list along with Don Bradman, this says it all about the great little man. Without the Little Master Sachin you can't have a World XI. Its plain n simple...

  • tpjpower on October 25, 2010, 13:04 GMT

    Surely we should have Imran instead of Wasim. Other than that, the First XI selection is sound.

  • on October 25, 2010, 13:03 GMT

    Radhawa Bandara said: pleaseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee tell me in what way Shane Warne better than Muttiah Muralitharan...point me out a one reason ??????????????????????????????

    Because Warne didn't take a good number of of his wickets against a poor Bangladesh side. Also Warne was a better batsman and a fine slip fielder.

  • M_Hasan on October 25, 2010, 13:03 GMT

    Mcgrath was miles ahead of any white bowler in the history... even Lilleee He had the courage to come over to India, pakistan, Sri lanka, West indies and actually succeed with disctinction. No white bowler (except may be Donald) had to the courage to give it a fair try. The rather avoided these places to protect their records. Anyways, i would prefer Imran over Lillee or Mcagrath in this eleven. Look at golabl break up of his record and that of Lillee, Botham, Headley...

  • elmo_leon on October 25, 2010, 13:03 GMT


  • nitrixx on October 25, 2010, 13:02 GMT

    No Ravindra Jadeja, no Uthappa, no Sreesanth, no Venkatapathy Raju?? This list is a joke.

  • on October 25, 2010, 13:01 GMT


  • nitrixx on October 25, 2010, 12:58 GMT

    Sir Ravindra Jadeja is the greatest of them all! Period.

  • Proteas123 on October 25, 2010, 12:58 GMT

    @j.vivek88 - Kallis does not need a double hundred. He has a great average and over 500 international wickets to make up for that. Also think would 11 eleven should have 6 bowling options. Would pick kallis ahead of Tendulkar.

  • Cricket_sl on October 25, 2010, 12:57 GMT

    I do not agree with MrGarreth's comparison of Murali and Shane Warne, I know Murali has taken wickets against Bangladesh but Bangladeshi batsman's play against spin better than some of the Australian, South African and English cricketers. Therefore taking wickets against Bangladesh in Bangladesh tough, Shane Warne's record against them speak for it self - Career averages 25.41 Against Bangladesh 27.27.

  • on October 25, 2010, 12:55 GMT

    warne is ahead murali in d selection..JUST DONT JOKE>>>>>>

  • ana_ibrahim on October 25, 2010, 12:54 GMT

    Berry Richards, the men who played just four test, is inlucded in every great list i wonder why, and Miandad a proven match winner never came into consideration... Same goes to dennis lilee a person who can't bowl in subcontinent always find himself the world eleven... I guess if this world eleven is playing with the indian side of 2005 they can beat them easily... since only wasim and marhall were bowling...

  • Nayeem_Kohir on October 25, 2010, 12:53 GMT

    LARA is superior batsman than Tendulkar. Miandad was much better batsman under crisis than Tendulkar. Tendulkar played only for records and that is what jury seems to have seen while picking up the players. The jury does not seem to consider different aspects of the game while picking up players. Very few of Tendulkar's hundreds have come under crisis. Moreover a players performance also depends upon the performance of the players around him. Tendulkar is not even the best batsman in the current Indian team, leave alone world. Now he is picked ahead of some of the great batsmen throughout the history of the game to be in the World XI. Such a shame. Tendulkar always played for records throughout his life, and this is what he has played for and he succeeded in getting in such useless exercise like cricinfo's all time XI. Leave alone World XI, Tendulkar will not make to the list of best 10 batsmen of all time. Sehwag & Imran Khan should have been picked. LARA SHOULD REPLACE TENDULKAR.

  • Farhan020328 on October 25, 2010, 12:53 GMT

    I'm happy with the 1st eleven. The 2nd eleven was, well, as they said, by bunch of Englishmen, who r not sorry to ignore the real greats. About the Readers one? It was made by the people of my age, who never saw the greats in play, neither wanted to admit their true capabilities over the modern time heroes.

  • on October 25, 2010, 12:52 GMT

    Exclusion of Murali???????????? MrGarreth....it's good that you showed that attitude infront of all........what it shows is not a weakness of the great Murali, it's the ignorance of Aussies to not to give opportunities to those poor nations (Zim & Ban)...

  • on October 25, 2010, 12:51 GMT

    For MrGarreth, (Murali's 800 wickets minus the 176 wickets he got against Zim and Bangladesh collectively = 624 Warnes 708 wickets minus the 17 wickets he got against Zim and Bagladesh collectively = 691 Nows stop complaining that the highest wicket taker is not in the world XI because he clearly is)

    Murali played 133 test and Warne palyed 145, Stop advocating wrong....... Legend is Legend..... n Murali is Legend..... Murali per match 6 wickets, Warne per match 5 wickets.......

  • Arun14 on October 25, 2010, 12:51 GMT

    WHAT, No Hadlee in either XI? PREPOSTEROUS !!!!

  • suhailkctech on October 25, 2010, 12:50 GMT

    @MrGarreth -

    Let me ask you one thing. Warne has taken 17 wickets from how many matches? Both Bangladesh and zimbabwe are test playing nations and not a gully team from any part of a city. So if warne is greatest then he should have taken all the wickets of bangladesh and zimbabwe considering by your point that they are very weak.

  • CricFan24 on October 25, 2010, 12:49 GMT

    The ignoramuses whining about Tendulkar (esp. trying to replace him with a 200, followed by 10 flop show player like Lara) need to actually watch some cricket at LEAST from the beginning of the 90s first. A World XI without Tendulkar is impossible.

  • rudranethra on October 25, 2010, 12:46 GMT

    It is really strange that none of the members selected Murali in first list!!!!! Warne may be better than Murali, but his inclusion cant be unanimous.

  • TheOnlyEmperor on October 25, 2010, 12:46 GMT

    In tests...

    Murali took 67 = 5 wkt hauls and 22 = 10 wkt hauls. Warne took 37 = 5 wkt hauls and 10 = 10 wkt hauls. Murali is definitely far better than Warne, and that's clear to anybody who understands bowling and the figures put up.

  • avis1001 on October 25, 2010, 12:45 GMT

    Well, who cares - anyway they can't play together. So, better leave these legends first XI or second XI alone and concentrate on the future generation so that they can become best as these great cricketers.

  • Paulk on October 25, 2010, 12:44 GMT

    It is a good selection. Congratulations to the selectors for what is an almost impossible job for making the selections that make sense. My only quibble would be Glenn Mcgrath not featuring in either the 1st or 2nd eleven, which seems a little harsh. Another minor point is that I believe and remember Ian Botham to be a better match-winning allrounder than Imran Khan even though the stats may suggest otherwise. Especially at his peak.

  • on October 25, 2010, 12:41 GMT

    Its a joke if Jack Hobbs is picked up over Sunil Gavaskar and Brian Lara. Sounds like this is "English+Australian 11" including few exceptions.

  • CricketIndiaFanatic on October 25, 2010, 12:40 GMT

    @Kurt Brand - Ponting has played on these flat tracks and his average is in twenties. I think that by calculation it will take him 30 years to make 16000 runs. Please see data and then speak. Why are subcontinent pitches called flat track by the way? Its because only subcontinent players are able to make runs and not Aussies or Brits.

  • maztermine on October 25, 2010, 12:38 GMT

    &MrGarreth, Nice stats however, there is a considerable difference between the matches Warne Played to get his 708 wickets and the matches Murali played to get up to his 708 wickets. Ia m not sure exatcly how many matches Murali took to get 708 wickets and I dont have time right now to check. However, judging from there end career stats, I see that Murali has taken only 133 matches to get 800 wickets while Warne has taken 145 matches to get 708. Now, the number of matches Murali got 708 wickets at, to the number of matches to meet Warne matches, exemplifies that he could have gotten a higher percentage of wickets against top teams. Also, when Murali made his debut, Sri Lanka was not that recognized on the international scene thus they were facing weaker teams. I hope I made clear my point.

  • on October 25, 2010, 12:34 GMT

    Picking top 11 from the so many greats of all time is difficult. Seems to be a balanced side. Selectors have done a tremendous job.

  • on October 25, 2010, 12:34 GMT

    imran khan who is the great player of the world he mist be kept in X1

  • philsil on October 25, 2010, 12:33 GMT

    Great debate. My personal watching team would be different to my winning team would be different to my "going gets tough, the team gets going" team.

    A Gower drive, a Marshall delivery, a young Clive Lloyd fielding, Waughs' tenacity and Mark Taylor's respect for the history of the game

  • on October 25, 2010, 12:32 GMT

    pleaseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee tell me in what way Shane Warne better than Muttiah Muralitharan...point me out a one reason ??????????????????????????????

  • on October 25, 2010, 12:31 GMT

    pleaseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee tell me in what way Shane Warne better than Muttiah Muralitharan...point me out a one reason ??????????????????????????????

  • asaduzzaman-khan on October 25, 2010, 12:31 GMT

    The selection has made by some of intellectuals of cricket!! But, no, never, I agree with this selection..... in 1st XI-- 3 changes: Add IMRAN, MURALI, BARNES/McGRATH... delete Wasim, Warne, Lillee.... from any angle these 3 cannot be selected over Imran, Murali, Barnes................ Its a biased selection....did not expected this from cricinfo- a funny drama!!

  • BRNUGGET on October 25, 2010, 12:31 GMT

    99% Thumbs up for jury's choice though readers choice is too biased in favor of the last two decades. 1% I would have had Holding or Lindwall (though his name was not there in choices) or Ambrose instead of Wasim. Agreed Wasim is all time great, a super left arm quick, but then we already have Sir Gary who was no mean left arm quick, there is no need for another leftie. Glad to see KING Sir Viv and Macko in jury's XI, they were super greats, entertainers of all times. Cannot make out how the READERS choice could leave out both especially King Viv, the most destructive and devastating batsman of all times, destroyer of bowlers especially quicks, the ideal No 3 followed by Sir Don ..

  • samuditha on October 25, 2010, 12:29 GMT

    wtf....murali is better than warne.

  • EverybodylovesSachin on October 25, 2010, 12:28 GMT

    Very good elevens......Love it.....Great selection by ESPSN jury....No Complains...

  • Baton100 on October 25, 2010, 12:28 GMT

    What! You don't have the highest run scorer of a test innings and in first class game or any innings......Brian Lara! Where is he? He is the holder of 2 of the most prestigious records in the game of cricket! And analyze the conditions he played and analyze the team he is on during his time. Put Tendulkar in a team like recent West Indies team and see what will happen.

  • on October 25, 2010, 12:23 GMT

    Well, If Lara was in place of Tendulkar and Kallis was in the team somewhere I could agree. Those who would have Botham or Imran ahead of Kallis are having a laugh. And wait till India arrive in South Africa and then see if Sehwag will score.

  • allanalex7 on October 25, 2010, 12:22 GMT

    On the panel that picked the World 11, were there any West indians, Indians and Pakistanis? It must have been Englishmen and Australians intent on giving their people representation they do not deserve. I say Murali before Shane but the omission of Lara was what really gave away the scam.

  • KingOwl on October 25, 2010, 12:21 GMT

    So the selection panel consisted of 4 cricket historians too - I guess they are 4 old Anglo guys. Not surprised about the list!

  • on October 25, 2010, 12:20 GMT

    how come Muttiah Muralitharan goes to The Second XI ...he is the only bowler who took 800 test wik and highest odi wicket holder ....come onnnnnnnnnnnnn

  • MrGarreth on October 25, 2010, 12:18 GMT

    Murali's 800 wickets minus the 176 wickets he got against Zim and Bangladesh collectively = 624

    Warnes 708 wickets minus the 17 wickets he got against Zim and Bagladesh collectively = 691

    Nows stop complaining that the highest wicket taker is not in the world XI because he clearly is.

  • UNIVERSAL_CRICKETER on October 25, 2010, 12:14 GMT

    W H E R E.........I S ..................R I C H A R D....H A D L E E ........................


  • on October 25, 2010, 12:13 GMT

    Its a good team,a few changes depending upon our nationality and generation is inevitable.. and there have been too many great players,so its really tough to choose 11 among them..but still i feel ricky ponting has done enough to atleast be in that list of 88 players. . would have loved to see ambrose in this list, a personal favourite.

  • narenvs on October 25, 2010, 12:13 GMT

    The national XI's had choices that I disagreed with strongly, such as Petersen in the English team and McGrath in the Australian team. The `selectors' seemed to have their heads screwed on right when it came to the world XI though. Nobody was chosen who clearly didn't belong in the team, though I didn't agree with three of the choices.

  • loung_singh on October 25, 2010, 12:09 GMT

    if sachin s dere so shud be murali nd evn mcgrath...hw cn d jury pick d highest run getter nd forget d highest wickettaker.....why not murali d highest wickettaker and most no of 5 fors in career...? why dis discrimination....?perhaps quality over quantity in bowling dept...why nt quality in batting..lara has played more quality innings dan tendulkar....

  • on October 25, 2010, 12:09 GMT

    Pathetic, Glenn Mcgrath should be in First World XI and is not even in second XI.

  • Mr.Fox on October 25, 2010, 12:08 GMT

    Oh a sad day for New Zealand indeed! Daniel Vettori, who has pioneered a new position in cricket, namely the coaching and selecting all-rounder, most certainly should have been on the selection panel or in some position specially created for someone who is essentially a team unto himself. But more to the point, how Richard Hadlee's absence signifies that Cricinfo lacks NZ readership. If not Vettori for coach doubling as twelfth man, I would put forward Richie Benaud for coach, just because he's so strange in such a nice kind of way. Or maybe W.G. Grace, who I think deserves a spot somewhere.

  • on October 25, 2010, 12:08 GMT

    a good selection... How abt Kallis..??

  • mikey76 on October 25, 2010, 12:04 GMT

    I would have picked Sutcliffe ahead of Hutton, he averaged 60 after all and played some important innings on sticky wickets..he was also Hobbs partner for many years.People who complain about Warne over Murali miss the bigger picture. Warne had the far superiorcricket brain, one of the finest slip fielders of the modern era and a useful batsman.Maybe I am biased but I would have Trueman over Lillee, Fred took wickets all over the world against some of the game's greatest batsman, almost all of Lillee's wickets came in England or Australia, I would even have McGrath over Lillee. But the biggest upset for me is Tendulkar over Lara, Tendulkar has had the luxury of batting in a strong line up for most of his career, Lara had to almost single handedly carry windies batting through many years.He has scores of 500,400 and 375, he made runs against Australia regularly,whereas Sachin often failed against Warne/McGrath.

  • on October 25, 2010, 12:02 GMT

    @Vijay Singh Thakur. How is kapil dev a better batsman than imran khan!? imran averages over 37.5, whilst kapil dev averages 31.05. And nothing needs to be said about the bowling...STATS SHOW IT ALL

  • on October 25, 2010, 12:02 GMT

    guess the reader IX can kick the other two teams ass. Period.

  • on October 25, 2010, 12:00 GMT

    I am surprised to see too few indians in readers XI considering this is an indian website and most of the audience is indian

  • Bollo on October 25, 2010, 11:57 GMT

    Finally, from what I can gather, George Headley received 40 votes - probably 5 votes in the 1st XI and 5 in the 2nds - 8 straight votes for the 1sts seems less likely.

    Sorry I just missed A.Knott by a couple of years, because he must have been really something. Certainly a strong case to be made for picking the best ever pure keeper in this team. But if you`re going for a keeper/batsman Gilchrist has to be the man - a fine keeper in his own right.Not sure if Sanga is a test standard keeper - wonderful player/captain though he`s been.Gilchrist obviously better than Dhoni in both departments.

  • the_sherminator on October 25, 2010, 11:55 GMT

    Where am I? - haven't the judges noticed my sub-15 bowling average for 13 of the last 15 years for my club 2nd-XI? Seriously - we all have personal favourites we would like to see in there (SF Barnes - come on judges, hello, he's only the greatest bowler ever!) but I think the judges have got it just about right. I especialy agree with them on Murali - he is a great bowler but he took an awful lot of wickets againts hapless Zimbabwe and Bangladeshi teams. Remember this is an ALL TIME team - the standard is the highest and he doesn't make the cut, just.

  • on October 25, 2010, 11:53 GMT

    who is SF Barnes? I've never even heard of him :P

  • on October 25, 2010, 11:52 GMT

    This is a great combination. However, I would like to see two allrounders instaed. I will pick imran and sobbers both in the team for no 6 and 7. The best bowling and batting allrounders. I will definately pick sunil as an opener for his technique and great records against lily,thomson, marshal,garner, holding, roberts,imran , hadlie, botham, willis, truman. In middle order bradman and sachin are unanimous choices. No 5 spot will go 2 graem pollock . alan knott is my kepper. Warne is fine for attack. marshal is best for aggresive test bowler and i will also pick pick wasim for variety. My team is: Len hutton, Gavaskar, Bradman, Tendulkar, Graem Pollock, G Sobbers, Imran Khan, Allan Knott, Wasim Akram, Warne and Malcom Marshal.

  • Bollo on October 25, 2010, 11:50 GMT

    Viv selected in the 1st XI by only 3 selectors (15pts), but 2nd XI by the other 9 (27pts) for a total of 42. (Was 3pts for a 2nd XI selection too high?). Glichrist 1st XI for 6 selectors, 2nd XI for 5, omitted by 1 (45pts). Knott selected 1st XI by 5, 2nd XI by 4, total 37pts.Sanga picked in the 2nd XI by 3 selectors, total 9pts. Lara either 1st XI by 2 and 2nd XI by 6, or 1st XI by 5 and 2nd XI by 1 - the former probably more likely. Imran, 1st XI by 2 and 2nd XI by 3. Murali on 26pts, either 1st XI for 4, and 2nd XI for 2, or 1st XI for 1 and 2nd XI for 7.

    Wonder when/if we`ll get the full rundown?

  • Wharfeseamer on October 25, 2010, 11:50 GMT

    A couple of things many posters have forgotten to take into consideration. 1. This is not a pick of the best 11 cricketers of all time. It is a selection of the best team, with players batting in position etc. So, no point saying Lara should play ahead of Hutton as they batted in different positions, with openers being a really specialist position. Dravid is another player people are clamoring for inclusion. He bats at 3.. can anyone seriously consider anyone before Bradman in that position? ... and there is only room for one all rounder really so that's why no Imran, as Sobers got more votes

    2. When looking at stats remember that players before about 1985 played MUCH LESS test cricket, so you need to consider averages and strike rates before total runs and wickets

    3. and the likes of Hobbs, Hutton, Bradman etc played on a lot of uncovered wickets which, in England especially, meant very difficult batting conditions... An average of 50 in the 1920 and 30s is probably worth 60+ now

  • on October 25, 2010, 11:50 GMT

    no murali in the side ?? rubbish

  • AssendedSaiyan on October 25, 2010, 11:50 GMT

    I think RAhul Dravid might be missing on the second XI

  • KelvinLTR on October 25, 2010, 11:49 GMT

    warne over murali... wtf!!! just shows there is rasicm evn in the so called modern society

  • sachin_vvsfan on October 25, 2010, 11:49 GMT

    Whats all this fuss about great players being missed? Every now and then there will be some readers 11, that 11, this 11 and i wouldn't have cared even if sachin had not made it to any 11. He will always be in our hearts. But look at some of the comments from PAK(KiwiRocker, btw why did u keep that name?) and SL fans. We all know LARA,MURALI,IMRAN are all great players and it is just stupidity to compare players across generations. @KiwiRocker i wish u had verified the same stats for LARA against the same opponents. Last time i checked one indian(a fanatic like you )had posted those records and they were much worse than Sachin.But that will not make LARA an avg cricketer He ruled the world with his class. We don't need to know his avg or any analysis made bu stupid fans like you. Now go and vent your frustration on your own IJazz Butt who keeps entertaining us.

    BTW Where is the great Sir Ravindra Jadeja? He should have made it to all 11's :)

  • on October 25, 2010, 11:48 GMT

    out of the xi I chose 8 were in the side the two of the other players I chose Murali and Wally Hammond (replacing Malcom Marshall and Viv Richards respectively) were in the second xi, I chose Richard Hadlee as out of all bowlers with over 200 wickets he is second only to Murali in terms of major records, I guess the jury chose Wasim Akram as he is a left arm fast bowler (altho Sobers is always there) and he is lethal with BOTH the new ball and the old (arguably the best with the old). Always thought Murali and Shane Warne together would be the best spin pair an xi could have, guess the panel think differently

  • AmmarRajar on October 25, 2010, 11:48 GMT

    there could be many haters for imran khan in the jury thats y he is the not the 1st world X1..he was far better then Malcolm Marshal & denis Lilee..thats unfair.. i think sharne warne better then Murli... totally unfair not picking Javed Miadad n Lara in the 1st world...its totally ridiculous..shit jury decision.. Wasim Akram deserve to be the world X1... ohhh indian would be cheering up...tendulkar in the team...i think unfair with dravid

  • V.GOMES on October 25, 2010, 11:43 GMT

    If you were to ask all the batsmen in the 1st eleven who the bowler they would hate to face, the honest answer would be "Muttiah Muralitharan". It's a shame and a farce to not have Murali (the highest wicket taker in BOTH forms of the game) a spot in the 1st eleven. If he was the highest wicket taker in just one form of the game, one can have doubt. But being the highest wicket taker in both forms of the game confirms that he is the best bowler ever (just as Sachin is for batting, with one exception - unlike Sachin Murali has also won the big one, a "World Cup". Might even be best player ever as far as accomplishments are concerned.

  • loung_singh on October 25, 2010, 11:40 GMT

    if sachin s chosen, murali n mcgrath shud also be there...simply bcoz sachin s dere bcoz of most runs and 100s..murali is d highest wickettaker in cricketing history nd d most 5 fors...same wid mcgrath..he s d highest wickettaker among pacemen..d jury shud follow d same criteria 4 evry1......perhaps in bowling d jury opted 4 quality over quantity..why not that in batting? lara over sachin....

  • ashishkumar36 on October 25, 2010, 11:39 GMT

    Why lot of people are making noise that some players are missing in the list....There are only 11 players to be chosen. So its quite obvious that some greats were missed out....someone is saying that Kallis should be there :-) in place of Sobers? its the joke of the century...some one is saying, Murali should be there. I know that Murali is the greatest offie in history of cricket. But If we choose Murali then I am damn sure, some of the guys will cry for Warne. This is the best team the jury have chosen. Hobbs and Hutton as openers, Bradman, Tendulkar and Richards will provide the solidity in middle order and can attack as required. Sobers is the greatest all rounder ever in history....Sorry for Kallis lovers :-). Gilchrist has got the advantage because of his batting. And comes on bowling...Lot of variety in Fast Bowling in form of Lillee, Marshall and Akram. In spin, only Murali can equalls Warne but we have to choose only one, and a leg spinner is required in the team so Warny...

  • Bollo on October 25, 2010, 11:38 GMT

    Apologies, obviously the scoring system was 5pts for 1st XI, 3pts for 2nd XI, (not 2pts as I originally suggested). So Tendulkar was selected in the 1st XI by 9 selectors, 2nd XI by 2 and omitted by 1 (51pts) Hutton selected in the 1st XI by 7, 2nd XI by 4 and also omitted by 1 (47pts) Lillee 1st XI by 9, 2nd XI by 1 and omitted by 2 (48pts).

  • VettiPayyan on October 25, 2010, 11:37 GMT

    Hmm! Somehow I never buy this idea of picking ppl like Jack Hobbs and others, who played very few intl matches and even that too against 2-3 countries, over more touring players like Lara and Sachin.

    I feel ppl who have travelled and played more than 6-7 teams and travelled as many countries and still proved to be consistent shud make it into XI.

    Just gawking over skewed averages and folklore stories dont qualify for World XI.

    As a cricket fan, I would never accept someone like Jack Hobbs was better than Sachin, Lara. Also for me McGrath,Waqar,Murali are faar better than some archaic bowler :-) Since these ppl have proved their worth against n no. of oppositions and n no of grounds/pitches/countries.

    Now one may argue uncovered pitches, bowler friendly rules/pitches, poor transport system, absence of visual media in those days.

    Hence solution is, there shud be a period based XI. Something like World XI 1900-1950 and World XI 1950-2010. This wud be fair.

    What do u say :)

  • on October 25, 2010, 11:36 GMT

    Absolutely forgettable list...where is Sunil Gavaskar, Virender Sehwag...in fact both of them should be opening. One has the best technique and the other the best offence tactics because Sehwag does not attack each and every bowler, he knows when to attack and reads the bowlers mind. Where is Muralitharan, the greatest spinner of all time. Even Indian batsmen could not play him well....then one should realize how great a bowler he is. Dhoni should be the captain of this XI even though Adam is there because one.. he is the shrewdest and and sharpest man in world cricket ever...he knows what are the oppositions tactics before hand and knows exactly the typical way they will play. If you know Hindi you will understand because when he talks to his bowlers about the tactics you will come to know what a sharp guy he is. Well what else can you expect from Cricinfo a pro Australian cricket website. I am wondering how these guys claim Cricinfo as an international website.

  • MasoodMughal on October 25, 2010, 11:36 GMT

    this world X1 hv to play with who............with moon or sun eleven!!!!!!!!!!!!! make two teams of thm ........n yes the guy winning most test matches as a player is nt in the team.....ricky pointing

  • malik461 on October 25, 2010, 11:30 GMT

    Where is Shrinath lols :P He was shortlisted

  • on October 25, 2010, 11:28 GMT

    how stupid is this muralidharan scoring less than half points than warne. also no player who spent the most time on pitch in his career facing most deliveries.

  • jmi.sharaf on October 25, 2010, 11:26 GMT

    Where is Ian botham ? who can change the game single handley.

  • on October 25, 2010, 11:25 GMT

    Can't really argue much against the side picked. I would of picked Lara instead of Tendulker probably as Lara was more entertaining to watch (especially against spin).

    Does make me laugh though about the reader's XI: 8 of them are of 90's era. I suppose they will be similar bias in ten years time when - ineviatbly - another of these greatest ever teams gets picked and half the players are from the noughties.

  • novem on October 25, 2010, 11:25 GMT

    I would like to say that Imran Khan could have easily made it to the cricinfo all-time eleven test team.A she he could have come in place of Dennis Lillee. The reason is that he was a captain and all-rounder as well. He delivered superbly with the bat and the ball.

  • on October 25, 2010, 11:25 GMT

    Agree with all but the fact that Gavaskar is not in the first XI. He is one of the few openers that could survive the WI fast bowlers. Would replace Hutton or Hobbs with Gavaskar.

  • on October 25, 2010, 11:25 GMT

    People might call muralitharan a better spinner than Shane warne but Shane Warne got wickets everywhere and against everybody. Muralitharan got most of his wickets in the sub continent and people should also consider his bowling action. Numbers do not always speak for themselves. Murali would always come second to Warnie, also considering the fact that bowling leg spin is way tougher than off-spin. The only surprise is the election of Gilchrist over Sangakarra and sure Gillie is one of my all time favourite batsmen, Sangakarra as a batsmen is better than Gilchrist, although gilchrist might arguably be a slightly better keeper.

  • on October 25, 2010, 11:24 GMT

    Imran Khan deserves place in world's all teams

  • Bollo on October 25, 2010, 11:23 GMT

    Just re. the scoring system. It appears that a selection in the 1st team was worth 5pts (Bradman, Sobers, Warne all gaining the maximum 60pts) and selection in the 2nds worth 2pts. Thus Tendulkar`s 51pts means he was selected in the 1st team by 9 of the panel and in the 2nds by the other 3,( not in all but 1 of the 1st X1s as some have suggested). I presume Hutton`s 47pts means he was selected in 9 1st XIs, 1 2nd XI, and omitted by 2 selectors...

  • NALINWIJ on October 25, 2010, 11:18 GMT

    There were many AT XIs that were not well balanced but this is a well balanced side and the judges need to be congragulated for this choice. There is no alteration to this side that could make this side significantly better. let me reiterate what I have said previously when I picked 10 out of 11 of this side that the 2 easiest picks were BRADMAN and SOBERS. Sobers as the 5th bowler bowls off spin and medium pace and this gives Warne the edge over Murali. Lillee and Marshall are as good as any pace pair and Wasim Akram as the greatest left arm swing bowler and reverse swing with old ball specialist perfectly complements the attack.Gilchrist is a genuine keeper with batting average 20+ better. !00 years ago the greatest batsman was Trumper and the sequence of greatest batsman in each era is HOBBS-BRADMAN-SOBERS-V.RICHARDS-TENDULKAR. That only leaves another opener and TRUMPER would complete 6 greatest in a row. I picked Gavaskar but there is not much between them hutton or B.Richards.

  • on October 25, 2010, 11:17 GMT

    NO SOUTH AFRICAN'S-too many chiefs-not enough indians-jonty rhodes-best fielder ever and great middle-lower order batsman. jaques kallis-the best all rounder in the world ever. gary kirsten, sean pollock, graham pollock???? the team you named is like real madrid-all the "best players" on paper that can be beaten if you get under their skin.

  • on October 25, 2010, 11:12 GMT

    According to me Dennis Lillee is the only person who don't deserves to be there.

  • on October 25, 2010, 11:10 GMT

    Most underrated XI: Slater,Anwar,Desilva,M Waugh,Laxman,C cairns,Latif,Gillespie,Saqlain,Devillers,AqibJavd

  • LiamJurrah on October 25, 2010, 11:10 GMT

    With Sobers offering an extra pace option, perhaps a more balanced team would include both Warne and Murali - an elite level leggie and offie would offer great variety. Furthermore I must query why McGrath was not chosen; Lillee is obviously a champion but McGrath is backed up by the statistics, particularly in an age dominated by batsmen. Also, in a batting lineup oozing class I cannot find a position for Tendulkar - he owns almost every record of course, but I can't ecape the feeling that in this modern age he has only acheived what many other batsman have (albeit more consistently and at a slightly {in relative terms} higher level). Finally, the converse is true for Sehwag; no doubt there have been more skilful and technically sound openers, but his ability to dominate and to take matches away from opponents so quickly is unparalleled; why add one more brilliant batsman too an already overloaded lineup, when you can add a very good one with this exceptionally rare attribute?

  • harshthakor on October 25, 2010, 11:07 GMT

    Imran Khan I select in the 1st team considering he was the best match-winner of his era at his peak.Wasim Akram was more talented but apart from not being as responsible a batsman,was not as great a match-winner as Imran with the ball.Ian Botham was a more complete all-rounder but Sobers is already there as a batting allrounder.

    Sehwag has not proved himself on all types of wickets and is often exposed on bouncy,fast,tracks.He is devastating, but inconsistent .

    Barry Richards just misses out as he hardly played International Cricket.I think he was more talented than any opening batsman in history.In Packer Cricket he gave phenomenal performances and statistically outshone Viv Richards. Wasim Akram makes the 2nd 11 ,being the greatest left arm bowler of all and a competent batsman.Headley deserves mention as he bore the brunt of a team mote than any batsman ever and overshadowed the Don on wet tracks.So does Walter Hammond who is just edged by Viv Richards and Ponting.

  • Clive_Dunn on October 25, 2010, 11:06 GMT

    I can't believe you are all overlooking Englands 1990's answers to Wasim Akram and Shane Warne - Alan Mullally and Ian Salisbury.

    No leggie in history ever mastered the mysterious "4 ball" like Salisbury, and he was so consistent you would be guaranteed at least 1 or 2 on over. Unplayable. And Mullally spearheaded the England attack by spearing the new ball so far down leg side the Aussies couldn't hit him for 4 every ball as they did every other England bowler at the time.

  • on October 25, 2010, 11:06 GMT

    i expected sunil gavasker in the 1st 11.however its not bad that murli is not in the 1st 11.i think warne is better than murli though he is the highest wicket taker in test.and i like mcgrat.i expected him in the second 11.

  • on October 25, 2010, 11:02 GMT

    if u look at the readers 11 compared to the actual 11... u will see that most players in the readers 11 are from the last 30-40 years if that...

  • cricket_fan_1 on October 25, 2010, 11:01 GMT

    The debate and the XIs show the abundance of Fast bowlers, Batsmen and allrounders and tough competition among them but only 2 spinners in all the 3 lists (Murali and Warne). Of course there were other spin bowling greats, such as Bishan bedi, Kumble. Murali and Warne clear winners there. With both not active current players, what's the future of spin ? Can Ajmal, Swann or Harbhajan make spin a fearsome and respected form of bowling once again. Yet to be seen..

  • jopa on October 25, 2010, 11:01 GMT

    What is the purpose of doing this? Any side that is picked will be debated, I think these panel judges should use their cricket expertise to do more for development of cricket than sit and discuss these futlie excercises...

  • jmi.sharaf on October 25, 2010, 11:00 GMT

    regarding captian issue shane warne is perfect gury for No. 1 team

  • on October 25, 2010, 10:59 GMT

    I Dont agree with ths World 11.Its totally biased towards Australians.Murali is way better than Warne.All time highest wicket taker is not in the list.Its Absurd........

  • on October 25, 2010, 10:58 GMT

    @safwan123... lara instead of sir don bradman?.... do u really follow cricket?...he averages almost 100... and u r saying he is not good.... if the standard of bowling was poor in that era then why dont other batsmen in his era have such averages... and th e thing about bodyline series.. he averages 56.57 in that series... and this is very low according 2 bradman's standard....but i dont think any of the modern day batsmen even with all the protective equipments could score at that rate against such a hostile bowling.. http://www.cricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/474951.html

  • M_Hasan on October 25, 2010, 10:57 GMT

    Hard to digest Lillee in the eleven... Glen Mcgrath was the best bowler from ENG/ AUS/NZ/ SA. He and Donald had the guts to drop into subcontinent and other placid places and succeed. Lillee, Botham & Headlee avoided these places to protect their records. Please note Lillee only played 6 matches outside Aus/ Eng/ NZ and averaged close to over 60 per wicket in them. Now thats what I mean... Imran on the other hand succeeded across the Globe, please refer his record. May be a case for having him as a bowler alone. Gavasker not opening is also unbelievable. Cant believe Chappel not mentioning Qadir even in back up bowlers. Greatness is largely associated with players who changed the game apart from excelling over a period of time. Qadir reinvented legspin before Warne mastered a part of leg spin as he never had the full range of deliveries. But he deserves his place slighty ahead of Murli... Anyways, most of the players in the elevens were self selections ....

  • Fast_Track_Bully on October 25, 2010, 10:57 GMT

    its very funny to see Gilchrist in the list!.

  • on October 25, 2010, 10:56 GMT

    Never seen more foolishness than that! How do you come up with "11's" like this when players are from different eras, played for different teams where the requirements from each player would be different. Each era had it's different challenges and certain players warmed up to the challenges. So when I see quite a few names missing that I figure should be there, and agree that most of the names on there merit mentioning, then I really can't agree the these "11's" serve any purpose. Between 1980 and 2010 there were so many great players... before that, I have heard some of the names, did not see them play, but based on what I've heard, these selections don't make too much sense.

  • Indus11 on October 25, 2010, 10:54 GMT

    Imran in the second II ? Wow !

  • on October 25, 2010, 10:54 GMT

    One generation wasted all their resources for the Sachin and they are compelling the next generations to do in their way..Next generation is wasting their money and time and following Sachin blindly..Its a sheer waste of time..Me living in a society..Their acting towards life affecting everyone including myself..That is why..

  • doublesshalinda on October 25, 2010, 10:52 GMT

    Where is Murali..?? he is not in the World XI. isnt he better than Warn??

  • Aussie_Mike on October 25, 2010, 10:52 GMT

    Steve Waugh's XI beat all ICC world XI anyday, anywhere...

  • Aussie_Mike on October 25, 2010, 10:52 GMT

    Steve Waugh's XI beat all ICC world XI anyday, anywhere...

  • Bollo on October 25, 2010, 10:51 GMT

    Pretty good team all in all. Not sure why there`s all the consternation about the captain though. I`m sure if you asked the players selected in the World XI the unanimous pick would be The Don. Simple.

  • CricketPissek on October 25, 2010, 10:50 GMT

    @rraja - where do u think Hobbs and Hutton are from? Kazakhstan?

  • on October 25, 2010, 10:49 GMT

    I like the Readers XI as it seems quite balanced and more from my generation as I cant relate it to some yester year players who I have to check Cricinfo player page to know more.

  • on October 25, 2010, 10:47 GMT

    In the World XI I have witnessed the talent of all the players apart from the first three who were all GREAT players. Unfortunately there can only be eleven players in the team and such players such as Gavaskar, Alan Knott, Brian Lara, Imran Khan miss out who are in the second XI. I am very surprised though that the two other great Pakistani players of Javed Miandad and Waqar Yunus and Shewag of India did not make either the first or second XI. I also think Imran Khan should have been in the World XI possibly instead of Malcolm Marshall given his overall talent. Inclusion of Imran would make batting stronger and would not have so much of an impact on the bowling. Imran also possessed leadership quality and played to win. It is very difficult for me to comment on the first three in the World XI as I never saw them playing but no doubt Gavaskar was an exceptional talent as an opener and he is also unlucky not to be in the World XI.

  • on October 25, 2010, 10:47 GMT

    Agree with most of the selections, infact my own XI has 8 out of the 11 selected by cricinfo. Tactically, i would have gone with 2 allrounders Sobers and Imran. However, I've heard Chappell's interviews and would agree with him on all counts--just that tactical difference over Imran and Marshall!

  • harshthakor on October 25, 2010, 10:45 GMT

    I put Viv Richards in the all-time 11 because he was the most devastating player of pure fast bowling as he displayed in Packer Cricket against Lillee,Imran etc.No batsman in the modern era could change the complexion of a a match to a greater extent as Viv.Had test cricket been the mere criteria Lara may win against Viv because of his brilliance in a crisis playing for such a weak team and ability to compile mammoth scores .However Viv faced better bowling than Lara or Tendulkarand was more prolific against them.In the modern era Viv would have averaged around 60.

    Dennis Lillee is the most complete fast blwler of all with Marshall.Although Glen Mcgrath had more control and greater accuracy,Lillee was more lethal with his agression ,pace, versatality and never-say die approach.Jack Hobbs was the greatest opener of all with his phenomenal performances on wet wickets .Sunil Gavaskar's record has to put him in,considering he faced the greatest bowling and scored 34 centuries.

  • on October 25, 2010, 10:43 GMT

    No Jaques Kallis... you got to be kidding me

  • talktohari2002 on October 25, 2010, 10:42 GMT

    @nitrixx.. Because Dhoni & srikkanth were not in the jury!!!!

  • B.HARISH on October 25, 2010, 10:39 GMT

    i am hurt due to the exclution of SIR Ravindra Jadeja

  • on October 25, 2010, 10:38 GMT

    Barring Jack Hobbs the cricinfo XI is good. Ponting, Lara or Gavaskar should have been in his place..

  • rjPrz on October 25, 2010, 10:33 GMT

    Lara and Murali isn't on first XI, hehe, This is the most funniest joke i ever heard :D :D :P

  • on October 25, 2010, 10:30 GMT

    No mention of Ian Botham? Kapil Dev, Graham Pollock, WG Grace, Jim Laker, Fred Truman, Curtly Ambrose Allan Donald? So many great names not included! Ravindra Jadeja - are you serious?!

  • Cricket_sl on October 25, 2010, 10:27 GMT

    I do not undestand, How come all time world most test wicket taker (Murali) not included in the all time world XI?

  • on October 25, 2010, 10:27 GMT

    I was born in '88 and this is my XI from the guys I have seen in action- Sehwag,Hayden,Ponting,Sachin,Waugh,Kallis,Gilcrisht,Kumble,Warne,Akram, McGrath. I was a little biased in picking Kumble ahead of Muralitharan but Kumble's fighting spirt justifies it and I have never believed Murali's action. Steve Waugh is ahead of Lara as I needed a Captain. And Kallis is ahead of Flintoff coz of his stats although Flintoff is a better impact player.

  • mk49_van on October 25, 2010, 10:27 GMT

    Most of all I was happy to see Malcolm Marshall in the Greatest XI. He truly was the best.

  • on October 25, 2010, 10:25 GMT

    All ancient players termed as legend have not played test against other then Australia so they should be kicked out from list. Jack Hobbs,Len Hutton and Bradman should not be here on that basis

  • Chestnutgrey on October 25, 2010, 10:24 GMT

    Warne might be a legendary bowler in this era. However, he has struggled against the best batsmen of his time, Tendulkar and Lara. And also has got less success against those who play spin well. In which case, he would have been hammered by any of the previous generation greats like Viv, Sobers, Miandad etc. Hence his selection is a joke. Gilchrist has problems against good pacers. Alan Knott, Godfrey Evans and Rod Marsh would have been better.

  • --.-- on October 25, 2010, 10:23 GMT

    I was expecting Gavaskar and Muttiah Muralitharan in World XI !

  • anur8g on October 25, 2010, 10:22 GMT

    why Sehwag in reader's XI???

  • BulBul_Pak on October 25, 2010, 10:21 GMT

    I think kumar sangakara is better option than adam gilchrist.

  • on October 25, 2010, 10:19 GMT

    i have different view as the world Xi lack an allrounder so Imran Khan should have been in the team

  • Swisssam on October 25, 2010, 10:17 GMT

    Here is my XI: Barry Richards, Sunil Gavaskar, Brian Lara, Graeme Pollock, Sir Donald Bradman, Sir Garry Sobers, Adam Gilchrist, Allan Donald, Michael Holding, Muttiah Muralitharan, Shaun Pollock

  • on October 25, 2010, 10:17 GMT

    I agree with almost all of them...don't know about Sir Lenord Hutton.

  • TheGecko on October 25, 2010, 10:16 GMT

    Kallis doesn't even have a single double century to his name, how can they include him? Even Jason Gillespie has scored a double! Also, the allrounder's spot unanimously belongs to Sobers, there is no question about that!

  • on October 25, 2010, 10:15 GMT


  • usman_nile1994 on October 25, 2010, 10:15 GMT

    Gavaskar is better than Len Hutton. Len Hutton only deserves a place in pre-world war XI. And also Murali is better than Warne. Injustice to 2 Asians. Also I though Lara would be a better choice than Richards but its all right he has made to the second list.

  • Swisssam on October 25, 2010, 10:15 GMT

    South Africa's player of the 20th century, and perhaps the finest left-hand batsman the game has ever produced, Graeme Pollock played only 23 Tests, but those were enough to rank him among the game's all-time greats.

    This what any reader reads when he types for Graeme Pollock on www.cricinfo.com. How can a Player of such High Class be Omitted???????

  • vishal_pintoo on October 25, 2010, 10:13 GMT

    Really difficult job. Nicely done though. Sachin was to be there in the final 11. But I think Sehwag coul easily compete with some of the picked. We r still not understanding Sehwag's unmatchable batting ability to distruct fresh first line bowling attack of all class of all teams on the very first innings against a brand new ball which usuly help conditions suitable for bolwers to pick solid initial batsmen's wicket. Sehwag has done a different job than others by hitting the new ball consistently so hard that while his big innings in the first innings helped other batsmen of his team and they could take important time to settle and brought Indian team in a strong condition. If you have seen carefully, his batting helped Indian Team reach important milestones in International test cricket in the last few years. Even if Tendulkar was there, it was Sehwag whose presense helped Indian batting side to pace its innings superbly in test matches in the last seven yrs. This is a fact.

  • on October 25, 2010, 10:11 GMT

    yuppie.. all my 11 are in the two teams you selected. 8 in the first and 3 in the second. the three in the second r gavaskar, barry and marshall. rest 8 from the top. i patted my self to get 8/11 in the top team. except lille every one in the top team are fine with me. he did not bowl (for no fault of his) in subcontinent conditions while Marshall did so and got lot of wickets.. hence for me Marshall is better than lille. as per openers are concerned.. i know Jackhobbs only frm slumdogmillionarie question! and len hutton from here and there! so have no opinion.. but will go with the experts!

  • SriRudd on October 25, 2010, 10:10 GMT

    This is how statistics and hypothetical exercises can paint a completely wrong picture. Clearly the jury has a generation bias. Does this say that the world XI is way better than the current (or immediate past) band of cricketers? Yet most of the records held by these World XI members have been beaten (except Don's record of beating the poms of course. YES..even Warne's record of baboosling the hapless poms). ALL FOR THE READERS' XI. Balanced and complement each other. So it has the potential to be a TEAM. Remember...Cricket is a TEAM SPORT in some ways...

  • Swisssam on October 25, 2010, 10:09 GMT

    No World XI can be with the Great Robert Graeme Pollock, the South African Player of the Century. His contribution to World Cricket more than even to South Africa, The Experts have made a grave mistake by Omitting this Great Cricketer

  • Krishan_cricket on October 25, 2010, 10:08 GMT

    I am not agree to the selection panel as they were bias to some Asian cricketers especially Indian cricketers. Shewag was one of the prominent contender of the opening slot but could not recognized. He is the test opner who has hit two 300s along with 5 200s. Wasn't bias???

  • salildixit67 on October 25, 2010, 10:08 GMT

    gavaskar, george headley, & imran kham should be in world eleven insted of hutton, richards & lilee . i think, there are 5 points for first eleven & 3 points for second eleven, so here are some intresting conclusion; 1- tendulkar selected in first eleven by 9 members & in second eleven by 2 members . 2- murli is selected in first by 5 & in second by three . 3- hutton is selected by 7 in first & by 4 in second . 4- imran by 2 in first & by 3 in second . 5- lille by 9 in first & by 1 in second . 6- sangakara is selected only in second eleven by three member . 7- richards by 6 in first & by 3 in second . 8- george headley by 5 in first & by 5 in second . 9- lara by 2 in first & by by 6 in second .

  • cricket_fan_1 on October 25, 2010, 10:06 GMT

    Why should lara replace tendulkar ? Lara should replace Viv richards. Viv richards had the luxury of the pace attack in his side that was missed by Gavaskar, Lara and tendulkar and hence he was able to play freely without inhibitions. any total on the scorecard was big enough was the WI at that time.

  • on October 25, 2010, 10:05 GMT

    I think Jack Hobbs doesn't deserve to be included in First World-XI. He faced the bowlers in an era of toothlessness and the only thing you needed was to hit a straight coming ball. If he were to play a bowler of post 70s, I would be surprised if he could ever score a 50. My choice would have been to play Jack Kallis (if a shuffling betwen class was allowed) or Sunil Gavaskar (who has faced bowlers like Lillee, Marshall and Imran. Thumbs up to rest of the team.

  • GClove on October 25, 2010, 10:05 GMT

    A fan of SRT yes i am, still i am wondering has everyone forgot about Brian Charles Lara... remember guys now long ago there used to discussions about who the better batsman is????

  • chad_reid on October 25, 2010, 10:05 GMT


  • Simmy567 on October 25, 2010, 10:04 GMT

    How can Waqar Younis not be in any of the teams???

  • on October 25, 2010, 10:01 GMT

    Ya the w11. I is I think strong one but other two is also good. I agreed that steve waugh should included in third 11 intead of sunil gavakar and u can not compare between dhoni and adam Gilchrist. adam is far better than dhoni, not even closer.

  • BRNUGGET on October 25, 2010, 10:00 GMT

    99% Thumbs up for jury's choice though readers choice is too biased in favor of the last two decades. 1% I would have had Holding or Lindwall (though his name was not there in choices) or Ambrose instead of Wasim. Agreed Wasim is all time great, a super left arm quick, but then we already have Sir Gary who was no mean left arm quick, there is no need for another leftie. Glad to see KING Sir Viv and Macko in jury's XI, they were super greats, entertainers of all times. Cannot make out how the READERS choice could leave out both especially King Viv, the most destructive and devastating batsman of all times, destroyer of bowlers especially quicks, the ideal No 3 followed by Sir Don ..

  • ksm1996 on October 25, 2010, 9:56 GMT

    the biggest joke is world leading wicket taker in any format, murali has been dropped from world XI. if he is an australian or english player defenetly he will get the place..

  • on October 25, 2010, 9:54 GMT

    imran khan shudve been the captain of THE WORLD XI ian bothan and waqar younis shudve been picked aswell

  • Overdrive on October 25, 2010, 9:49 GMT

    Murali not the first XI is indeed surprising. But if u wanna accommodate only one spinner in the world XI i can understand the rationale between Warne and Murali. Warne can captain and his wits would play an huge role. But quite a few amazing players missed out in the XI.. just out of pure respect, courtney walsh & ambrose should atleast get a mention. They were warhorses and always up for a challenge. so must Jayasurya, Steve Waugh etc.. but considering everything i find the final XI indeed very intimidating and a rich team..given a match between first X1 and second XI.. u never know.. second XI might prevail much stronger than the first one.. lol

  • Farhan_Khan on October 25, 2010, 9:48 GMT

    This really is a World XI. Great selection though few of them were obvious. A great exercise by Cricinfo.....The only question is who will be the skipper of this side

  • 2929paul on October 25, 2010, 9:47 GMT

    Interesting that Warne was a unanimous choice and Murali's not there. That despite the presence of Mendis and Roebuck, who once wrote an article in defence of Murali and decrying Warne for his comments about Murali. Regarding prejudice on the jury, I see that the only Englishman there is Roebuck, who turned his back on the country years ago and now lives in SA. Greig is a Saffer who played for England and now resides in Oz. Botham never had a hope of getting near either team, as two of the jury are in long standing feuds with him. (Not that he would have got past Sobers of course.) Overall, the only real problem I have with the team if the keeper, who I feel should be Knott. Personally, I would have had Gavaskar opening but I can live with this selection. It's all a bit of fun really.

  • cricketfan09 on October 25, 2010, 9:46 GMT

    can we please have a third XI and fourth XI please? Want to see Botham, Miandad, Ponting, Dravid, Holding, Hadlee, Kapil - all of them at least by the sixth XI. And of course, need a Zaltzman follow up to this, starting with 'Whilst...'

  • WilliamFranklin on October 25, 2010, 9:45 GMT

    @Icyman Hobbs in second eleven; I don't think so.

  • pranksters on October 25, 2010, 9:42 GMT

    its a more diplomatic xi i think i guessed barry richards should have been in place of len hutton but anyways from the xi i choosed seven players are in the playing xi & the other two are in the second xi

  • jithujose on October 25, 2010, 9:39 GMT

    The ESPN World XI shows that people still like to bask in past glory and excellence than be in awe of current or recent unmatched brilliance. Where is Lara, people? Where Is Murali? Was he omitted because taking more wickets that anyone else at a brisk rate not a prerequisite for selection? What about McGrath and Sewag? Is longevity not a good enough criterion? Are the selectors trying to prove that the yesteryear's of cricket, their playing days, was more superior or is old simply the latest fad? What ever the case may be, the readers proved to be wiser. My 11 is the Readers X1. Just that I will have Viv Richards for Garry Sobers, if am to go with 4 ballers and 7 batsmen.

  • maqk on October 25, 2010, 9:38 GMT

    Waqar Younis deserves a spot for sure, so does Wasim and that is why he is there. Miandad should be considered as well I believe

  • Dannov747 on October 25, 2010, 9:37 GMT

    Good list but..

    George Headley > Viv and Sachin And Warne is so overrated, Murali is way better. And im surprised Mcgrath didn't make either list.

  • on October 25, 2010, 9:36 GMT

    This is a very good team though!.. Imran Khan is someone who should hv bn there though.. !!

  • klgcnd on October 25, 2010, 9:35 GMT


  • on October 25, 2010, 9:34 GMT

    My only hope is that in the future, our generation will be able to see players worth a little better than your generation. I saw murali and warne with my own eyes, and I know which I'd rather face. Aside from winning more tests (because he was with far superior team mates) there is nothing you can say Warne achieved that murali didn't.

  • manibiswas on October 25, 2010, 9:20 GMT

    Gavaskar not in first XI, that's just absurd!

  • cricketfan09 on October 25, 2010, 9:19 GMT

    Richie Benaud's team from a few years ago - Hobbs, Gavaskar, Bradman, Tendulkar, Richards, Sobers, Imran, Gilchrist, Warne, Barnes, Lillee. 12th man- Keith Miller. Probably better than cricinfo XI. My choice for XI - almost same as Benaud's - but replace Lillee with Marshall and have Marshall bat at #9 with Warne and Barnes to follow. Feel sorry for Kallis- great player but no charisma at all - that's why he is missing out on anyone's world XI. To a lesser extent - feel sorry for Ponting - not even in Australia XI.

  • rudranethra on October 25, 2010, 9:18 GMT

    I know Sachin will lose some points, because there is a mirror in the panel!!!!! :D

  • nitrixx on October 25, 2010, 9:18 GMT

    Where is the great Sir Ravindra Jadeja?

  • on October 25, 2010, 9:16 GMT

    To be frank, i didn't watch any of the games of sir gary sobers and sir donald bradman but i must say the fact that Sachin indeed have beaten crap out of shane warne, not once but on numerous occassions...... sir don brad bradman do have an average of 99.96 but technically i'm afraid of the quality of his contemporary bowlers at that time..... sachin have proved to be a sole 'Maestro' in all forms of the game without losing quintessential essence of cricketing shots.... no batsman in this universe i might suggest,who might even shake the mighty status of sachin.... given the ample time sachin will shatter the longstanding record of brian lara.... his record of having runs close to 15000 runs in both forms of the game, he is the best and will stay best for a long time to come.... his most accomplished feat is the double hundred that he hit in ODI against south africa that is yet to be equalised by any batsman.... yet he is still a child when it comes to cheer about the cricket....

  • Cricket_4_Blood on October 25, 2010, 9:15 GMT

    @Adeel Shehzad who commented 'you cant rate adam gilchrist over MS DHONI at any level..------------ Bro. perhaps you watch only India play & I suppose you like fashion. Are you trying to compare Dhoni's looks with Gilly since that is the only way Dhoni is better than Gilly??? Don't understand why guys like you're watching Cricket. If you don't have proper knowledge in Cricket, stop browsing cricinfo & go find some other webs related to Bollywood & comment there about Dhoni.

  • Hammad.Fayyaz on October 25, 2010, 9:12 GMT

    I dont think Tendulkar is a good choice in world XI as his defence against quality fast/spin bowling outside India is still a question mark (remember the times of McGrath, Warne, Donald, Pollack, Wasim & Waqar in 1990s and early 2000s). I respect him as a player but he is less potent on supporting wickets. I would prefer IMRAN KHAN as a captain over G. Sobers as this XI lacks the captaincy plus Imran adds the bowling venum and batting power.

  • nitrixx on October 25, 2010, 9:11 GMT

    Where is the great Sir Ravindra Jadeja?

  • on October 25, 2010, 9:10 GMT

    Lillee over Imran? wonder how hard Chappell pushed for that.

  • Websterbooth on October 25, 2010, 9:09 GMT

    Where is Wilfred Rhodes???

  • rraja on October 25, 2010, 9:09 GMT

    So what happens to england players????? none of them are/were good enough...they are oldest in game along with aussies....

  • otters6 on October 25, 2010, 9:05 GMT

    Picking an all time 11 will always create controversy. So many players so few spots!But one thing u can be assured of though is the choice of who will carry the drinks... Jonty Rhodes!!!! Greatest fielder and hand clapper of the game. BTW How about doing a series on World XI of the decade?

  • Gazillion on October 25, 2010, 9:05 GMT

    @Adeel-Shehzad Unfortunately this is world Xi , not the sub continent XI

  • on October 25, 2010, 9:04 GMT

    how many of the 11/22 are brilliant fielders...hardly few are slip specialists.....not even outfielders let go 30 yard specialists most of them are and were nonsense fielders... wouldn't bend even if the ball was near and the selectors are also from the same era when fielding was not important....result of the game didnt matter...idiots only played for status and not for country pre 50s or 60s players should not be considered as cricket was yet to evolve and being from the present era i am still saying span of 60 years to be considered....u cannot compare ppl playing earlier....and players playing now(performance/peer/country all sorts of pressures) all the selectors are idiots who didnt know the concept of fielding....STUPID SELECTORS......

  • Theeba on October 25, 2010, 9:01 GMT

    One of the Legend in the history of Cricket, most lethal exponent of spin the world has ever seen, is in the Second XI. It is really funny...

  • nitrixx on October 25, 2010, 9:00 GMT

    Utterly flawed exercise. You have people like Ranatunga in the shortlist but not Ponting??! Ponting would have definitely made it to the second X1. Instead, he doesn't even feature in the 88 shortlisted people. Utter nonsense.

  • QingdaoXI on October 25, 2010, 9:00 GMT

    Shame on jury to dominate the XI with Australian, england and west indies player in playing XI. If that would be the case i would have prefer my asian players from india and pakistan in the squad because on any day they would have beat the top australian and west indian team nad no need to talk about england. My XI Gavaskar, Sehwag, Dravid, Tendulkar, Laxman, Sangakkara, Kapil, Imran, Wassim, Waqar, Murali. 12. Bedi 13.Miadad 14. Aravinda 15. Saqlain

  • jonesy2 on October 25, 2010, 8:57 GMT

    this is the biggest joke ever! mcgrath? ponting? hayden? waugh? border? vettori? lee? hadlee? akram, marshall shouldnt be there

  • Balumekka on October 25, 2010, 8:57 GMT

    Warne getting 34 points more than Murali and unanimously picked up by the Jury!!!!!! That tells lot about the Jury and how biased it was considering the fact that Murali with nearly 100 wickets more than Warne in tests!!!!!

  • on October 25, 2010, 8:56 GMT

    haha!some crazy selections! more traditional approach!! why were murali, Lara & Sanga removed from the ESPNcricinfo all-time World XI squad?? Warnez better than Murali?Gilli z better than Sanga??

  • ultrasnow on October 25, 2010, 8:56 GMT

    Make the world XI play in India in Indian conditions against a strong Indian batting. Their fast bowlers would look average and Warne would get trashed as usual

  • jackiethepen on October 25, 2010, 8:56 GMT

    Who chose the jury? Is Tony Grieg meant to represent England as a captain? What a joke. If this is meant to be an ALL TIME Great XI then it is a feeble excuse to say that players of the past are underrepresented because few will have seen them!!!! Why not just say Post war or in our lifetime? I fear for the game if the jury did not pick someone for captaincy.

  • on October 25, 2010, 8:56 GMT

    I think First XI will beat World XI on most of the surfaces .. and imran would luv the challenge to lead an underdog team to vicotry!

  • mmshahpe on October 25, 2010, 8:54 GMT

    Sehwag is the greatest test batsmen after Bradman. There is a crowd of batsmen with averages in the fifties. Their strike rates range from forties to fifties. Sehwag's strike rate is in the eighties. This strike rate is important in winning matches.As far as opening batsmen are concerned, Sehwag is easily the best due to his strike rate.

  • Paki_Moon on October 25, 2010, 8:49 GMT

    I think, Murli is far better spinner than shane warn,, i shocked there is no Brian Lara in 1st world XI,and there is no waqar yunis,, in any world eleven,, lolz,,,

  • on October 25, 2010, 8:38 GMT

    Ian Botham was the greatest allrounder or may be the one after Sobers.It is surprising to see tat there was nothing mentioned about Kapil or Hadlee.I think ,Kapil should have been the part or second X1 , if not the first.He was much better batsman and fielder than Imran.

  • on October 25, 2010, 8:38 GMT

    Where is Sir Richard Hadlee?

  • vincing on October 25, 2010, 8:35 GMT

    Very flawed selection!

    The world XI should have one right arm legspinner or left arm spinner, one offspinner, one swing bowler, one pace (seam) bowler and one allrounder.

    Lillee, I haven't seen him play but is overrated cricketer. The matter of fact is that Allan Donald, McGrath, Ambrose, Marshall, Waqar, Larwood had much better averages and strike rate. The jury is biased towards Lilee. It should be Marshall - Ambrose/McGrath/Larwood or Wasim - Ambrose/McGrath/Larwood combination. Having both MArshall and Wasim is not correct either.Also, Sir Hadlee's reacord as a bowler is better than that of Lilee and many others. If three pacemen and a spinner combination has to be kept, I would really exclude Mc grath for Hadlee.

  • on October 25, 2010, 8:35 GMT

    They'll play against NZ of course, no Kiwis on any list :(

  • on October 25, 2010, 8:31 GMT

    rahul dravid is undoubtedly the best batsman at no.3...how come he isnt selected?

  • Lion_of_Lanka on October 25, 2010, 8:31 GMT

    Let me see, the highest wickettaker in test match cricket, the guy who was called the greatest bowler ever by none other than Wisden- the bible of cricket is not in the world XI. But, overrated Warnie who gets whacked by Indians is in the line up. And Gilchrist is now the best test WK? This should go to page 2

  • on October 25, 2010, 8:30 GMT

    How did Hadlee not make it?

  • wall_lightning on October 25, 2010, 8:28 GMT

    what about Ambrose and Dravid?? Both deserve to be in the second XI atleast..instead of Trueman and Hammond..

  • Proteas123 on October 25, 2010, 8:26 GMT

    Kallis should be there. Tendulkar is in based on statistics and total runs and Kallis has done better than any all-rounder, should be in on same principle. Clearly alot of the choices are down to personal preferance. @Ravi Kiran C R - Bradman was a great captain, only lost something like 3 matches, he would definitely be captain of this team.

  • baronvonchickenpants on October 25, 2010, 8:25 GMT

    Warne for captain. Viv couldnt captain spinners, The Don was too cranky, and and the openers are..... English. Warney was the best captain never to captain (sadly this will be argued for eternity). But 1st XI v 2nd XI would be outstanding. Surely someone out there has a program they could run these names through and give us a mock up Five test series between these two sides....

  • on October 25, 2010, 8:25 GMT

    Whats the use of picking these sides...? Its imaginary and serves no purpose..

  • on October 25, 2010, 8:24 GMT

    How many of these 11/22 players are good outfielders or specialists in 30 yard circle.....new game demands great fielding side all the selectors are oldies and didnt play in the "fielding is very important" era only few slip specialists i can see....others dont even know fielding....STUPID SELECTORS....

  • uglyhunK on October 25, 2010, 8:24 GMT

    @Taylz13 - Either you flip 180 degress or flip the figures 180 before analyzing. Murali had to deal with the best batsmen against spin. Most of the wickets Warne took are english, WI, NZ and SA. Murali's total wickets outside subcontinent are obivously less because he did not play as many test outside sub-cont. But in the matches he played outside sub-cont, he outclassed Warne. Peace out..........

  • Hutchinson on October 25, 2010, 8:24 GMT

    Ricky Ponting is a such an Ordinary player,that he was not even picked in any of the Squads..

  • MaruthuDelft on October 25, 2010, 8:23 GMT

    Its unfortunate someone questions Viv Richards inclusion in the WorlX1 and he is not in the ReaersX1. Before getting married and going relatively bored in 1981 his average stood at 62 with 4000 runs when the cricket world had the greatset bowling attacks in swing, spin and pace and when when cricket was not lagging too much behind soccer. Now the best athletes go to soccer. Watch Youtube; his cuts, drives, pulls, glances and slogging were the most compact; by comparison Tendulkars onside flicks are ugly. Viv could handle any imaginable situations in cricket; Tendular would flop if quick runs are required; he ducks against bouncers and once got out in shame when the ball kept low; Viv never wore helmet. It was Viv not the pace quartet who gave the impetus for the Lloyd's team to become the greatest ever test team in the world and it never relinquished the position until he played. Only Don Bradman can be considered greater than Viv because of impossible accomplishments.

  • on October 25, 2010, 8:23 GMT

    I don't understand how Len Hutton garnered more votes than Jack Hobbs? Hobbs walked into my team, with Sunil Gavaskar making the second spot ahead of Hutton.

  • sanjaycrickfan on October 25, 2010, 8:23 GMT

    Sunil Gavaskar should have made it to the first X1. He made more than 10,000 runs as an opener and played against some of the top fast bowlers from West Indies, England, Australia without helmets or other proper protection. Also back then, wickets were much more quicker because they were not made flat to help batsmen. Bowlers could bowl as many bouncers as they could. Imagine facing Lillee, Garner, Malcolm Marshall on those pitches bowling straight as your throat. He was also the only batsman in the Indian top order who could hold his fort and there was a lot of pressure on him whenever he went to bat. Also, he grew up playing and played most of his cricket in India where pitches are slow and dont offer swing or bounce, which makes it doubly difficult to adjust to fast pacy conditions overseas. Gavaskar could have easily made it into the top X1 of most people.

  • on October 25, 2010, 8:23 GMT

    this whole world xi thing did nothing than anger cricinfo readers from around the world [except austrailia which cricinfo seems to adore] ... how can you say warne is better than murali? take the economy, s/r, wickets, endurance, and sheer guts murali is far superior..as to the no ball claim ausies made it when murali came close to warnes wicket total ..coincidence?? what about this gilchrist worship? so many better batsmen/keepers than that in the world at least ones who don't sledge others and stick balls in their gloves to score cheat centuries. cricinfo should have stopped at making elevens for the different countries..the world xi thing has ruined the whole thing!

  • on October 25, 2010, 8:22 GMT

    very good effort by the jury but I'm shocked to see that they have not included javed miandad in the xi, he should have included insted of s.tendulker or g.sobers, but i do'nt understand the criteria whether it is most runs/records or the ability to play in the difficult situations.......

  • Venkatb on October 25, 2010, 8:20 GMT

    About 8 of the 11 are consistent with what I selected and submitted - ones I would not select: 1. Dennis Lillee: Over 75% of his wickets on home grounds + one successful England tour in 72 - clearly a NO 2. Wasim Akram: Earned several brownie points against the bunnies, Bangladesh and Zimwabwe 3. Viv Richards: I picked Wally Hammond over Richards - I have seen Richards from 1974 - he had a swagger, he had flair, but so did Srikkanth - Hammond averaged over 60 for much of his career - but for an ill-advised post-War tour of Australia, he would have been next after Bradman, not Pollock or Headley 4. Warne: Flourished against the bunnies (England included) - struggled when other spin bowlers flourished - I selected Murali For 1 and 2, I had Imran Khan (part-time player in the 70s and then averaged 50+ with the bat and <22 with the ball taking over 300 wkts) + Keith Miller or Lindwall

  • on October 25, 2010, 8:20 GMT

    hey why is ravindra jadeja missing from that team???

  • on October 25, 2010, 8:19 GMT

    Bradman, Sobers and Tendulkar all rated Muttiah Muralitharan above Warne; Glenn McGrath, Warne and Gavaskar back Tendulkar over Lara, Murali and Barry Richards go the other way - and Wasim reckons Martin Crowe better than both

  • ygkd on October 25, 2010, 8:18 GMT

    No Imran, Headley or SF Barnes?

  • on October 25, 2010, 8:15 GMT

    How can any one pick racies like lan chappell to pick All time 11.Can not accept this.

  • greatkhan on October 25, 2010, 8:14 GMT

    Dear Respected Sir, Could anyone from all the readers answer my simple question, how can a world XI be selected without Imran Khan???? Secondly, could someone reply me how come Sobers is a better allrounder Than Imran khan, anytime of the day Imran is better bowler & Captain than sobers, without doubt Sober was far better batsman than Imran but again, Imran as a captain was Phenomenal. Secondly look at the career of Imran khan in his last 10 years batting average of 50 & Bowling average of 19. His bowling average would have been a lot better had he not palyed in sevral matches only as abatsman after he came back from injury, i have only one comment in the World XI selected, remove sobers from there and insert Imran instead for the sake of the game. The world XI needs a dynamic captain like Imran. Sobers should be in the second list. Everybody who loves cricket should request that this list should be changed. Because as an asian i feel dejected.

  • on October 25, 2010, 8:13 GMT

    Kallis over Sobers for sure!!!

  • on October 25, 2010, 8:11 GMT


  • on October 25, 2010, 8:09 GMT

    As quite of them already pointed out, Kallis was a Major Omission. IMO, Sobers and Kallis are two of the Greatest Cricketers of all time. A player who scores 1000s of runs and taking 100s of wickets, both for a long time is not a one to be overlooked so easily. Kallis has never got what he deserved. He's never compared to the likes of Sachin, Dravid and Ponting. But easily he is better of them all IMO, or at least deserves to be talked on the same lines.

  • impartial_guy on October 25, 2010, 8:09 GMT

    It was really disappointing to see that Murali is missed out from the World XI. For those who argue that Warne is better than Murali (of course without denying that both are legends of all time) here are some stats. Warne played 191 innings against countries (who are known to be vulnerable to spin) other than subcontinental teams and got 499 wkts at an average 2.61 wkts per innings. Murali played against the same teams in 151 innings and got 526 wkts at an average of 3.48 wkts per innings. Warne against subcontinental teams has played 80 innings and got 203 wkts at an average of 2.53 wkts per innings. Murali against the same teams played 79 innings and got 274 wkts at an average of 3.46 wkts per innings. So the stats speak for themselves. Warne is surely more charismatic than the silent assassin Murali. But that doesn't mean Warne is better than Murali. Murali is and has been better than Murali all the time and all the way. Stats don't lie. So the proposed list is highly biased.

  • Octa on October 25, 2010, 8:09 GMT

    Hobbs Gavaskar bradman Headley tendulkar V.Richards Sobers Gilchrist Hadlee warne Marshall

    bat deep and bowl well.

  • kantipur on October 25, 2010, 8:07 GMT

    I don't know why people are getting excited about world 11. Last time ICC chose world eleven which was demolished by Australian side.

  • mak102480 on October 25, 2010, 8:06 GMT

    Not to start a controversy or anything, but I wonder who left of Tendulkar, Hutton, and Marshall from even the second XI? It says that these players were in 11 of the 12 voters first XI or the second XI...meaning somebody left them off in BOTH. Hmmm...Tendulkar, Hutton, and Marshall??? So based on that information and based on the fact that Tendulkar got 51 points, it seems that 9 judges voted him in the first XI, 2 in the second XI, and 1 in neither (9x5=45 points + 2x3=6 points; 45+6=51). That sounds about fair except the one voter who didn't vote at all...no grudges but it's interesting that somebody doesn't consider him in the top 6 MIDDLE ORDER batsman (3 middle order slots in each team).

  • prashant.315 on October 25, 2010, 8:06 GMT

    glad to see that ponting's name is no where mentioned....

  • SyedArbabAhmed on October 25, 2010, 8:04 GMT

    Give me a break, Garry Sobers was great batsman who could bowl ok, he was not an allrounder to beat King Khan the great Imran Khan.

  • Vilander on October 25, 2010, 8:03 GMT

    second 11's bowling is a bit too week for the world 11's batting i suppose...that if you can ever get to gilly..i thnk world 11 team will beat any team 100 times out of hundred.

  • Tigg on October 25, 2010, 8:02 GMT

    My only real disagreement with the picks are the exclusion of Hadlee. I'd have him instead of either Lillee or Marshall.

  • India_boy on October 25, 2010, 8:00 GMT

    booohahahahhaha....if nothing this World XI list will put to rest one major doubt...that Cricinfo is controlled by Indians and mostly tries to appease Indians :D but srsly, murali and Gavaskar cant be missed out !!

  • kaggarwal on October 25, 2010, 7:58 GMT


  • jmi.sharaf on October 25, 2010, 7:56 GMT

    ok.. who is the captin for this first 11? i cannot find good captain in the side . if Imran Khan replaced one of the fast bowlers in the squad he can lead the side also.

  • deanj on October 25, 2010, 7:56 GMT

    Very surprised to see Wasim in before Imran Khan. Actually, would have been surprised to see Wasim in the second XI (not that he wasn't fantastic, just not the greatest). And stunning omission to leave Hadlee out, he should be in second XI at the very least.

  • AhmadSaleem on October 25, 2010, 7:54 GMT

    Richard Headley and Imran Khan were better bowlers than over rated Lillee. Its foolish that they were specified for all rounder spot in spite of the fact that both were great fast bowlers and their batting abilities make them far superior cricketer than the likes of Lillee, Truman etc.

  • bhaloniaz on October 25, 2010, 7:53 GMT

    Kallis skipped my radar too. I have to admit that if I have to pick one player out of modern era, it has to be Kallis. He is the best cricketer of the modern era. Gavasker,Hobbs, Bradman, Viv, Kallis,Sobers, Imran,Knot, Hadlee,Marshall, Warne

  • on October 25, 2010, 7:52 GMT

    Sachin Tendulkar rocks ................

    He is GOD of Cricket . No one can beat him . I bet.

  • on October 25, 2010, 7:51 GMT

    A little late but ...

    Don Bradman, Sunil Gavaskar, Sachin Tendulkar, Javed Miandad (debatable vs. Virender Sehwag / Sakib Al-Hasan if both manage to keep their current form), Brian Lara, Adam Gilcrhist, Viv Richards , Shane Warne , Muralitharan, Wasim Akram, Imran Khan

  • on October 25, 2010, 7:50 GMT

    According to me Murali should have been in place of Warne .A Wasim Akram should have beenreplaced by Imran Khan.11 players seems to be less to pick up all time XI ,because we can see some legends missing out in the list like Wally Hammond , the 3 Ws of West Indies ,SF Barnes ,George Lohmann ,Ray Lindwall ,Richard Hadlee

  • budhial on October 25, 2010, 7:50 GMT


  • rockyiamtheone on October 25, 2010, 7:46 GMT

    A pj is going on these conversations ... A team that hav captain of invincibles is in need of imran or any other to lead the side:-S:-S ... Before write a comment think wat u r commenting ...n ppl who talking abt Sachin does kno wat s meant by expectations of 1.1 billion ppl... N money's role (he s d richest cricketer of the world)...he s great not only for his batting but also for his superhuman nature ...n those b****es argue Sachin play for himself had ever see his face after india lost any match... ::: proud to be a Sachinist

  • Meety on October 25, 2010, 7:44 GMT

    I do enjoy these Fantasy XI selections , more so the rationale that goes with the selections, which is sad to see in this article just a mere list & some selection statistics. The only change I would have (& this is my bias), is I would swap Sobers for K Miller, I personally feel that with Miller/Sobers/Khan there is not much between them in terms of quality. The readers XI - I think is quite ordinary. I would like to see a computer programme create some "Tests" between the Country All-Time XIs, it would make for interesting reading. I am also a bit tired of some comments about "bias" in the selection process, the selection panel was fairly well mixed, and the fact that the Aussies & Poms got 6 players between them is more about the length of time and amount of tests these countries have played. The most unlucky players I think are Hadlee, McGrath, Ambrose & Murali - shows how hard it would of been to select the bowling. Maybe with the Don in the side the XI could of had 5 bowlers?

  • on October 25, 2010, 7:41 GMT

    Brain CHarles Lara should b in World Xi

    and ricky pointing to b in readers xi

  • MaruthuDelft on October 25, 2010, 7:39 GMT

    It is said Wally Hammond actually scored most of runs in easier circumstances but was found lacking in creativity when faced quality bowling except for one or two brilliant knocks. However a fundamental error in the selections are allotment of places to opening batsman. That is why Hutton, Hobbs, Gavaskar and Sehwag are in; How come are they better than Gream Pollock, Greg Chappel and Martin Crowe? Despite the Hooplah Gavaskar never did well against high quality pace attacks in WI and Oz and he was a very slow scorer; a great player must score at over 30 an hour. Finally how in the world any selector can leave Hadlee and Botham? Insane. Worldx1; Lara, Gilchrist, Bradman, Viv Richards, Gream Pollock, Sachin Tendulkar, Sobers, Akram, Warne, Marsha, Lillee. The Second Eleven: Barry Richards, Sangakara, Wally Hammond, Greg Chappel, Martin Crowe, Botham, Hadlee, Imran, McGrath, OReilly and Truem. Murali left out for he chucks; Kumble lacks Charisma.

  • on October 25, 2010, 7:39 GMT

    WASIM AKram and Imran khan is great players of Pakistan...........Well done Pakistani.......Proud to be an Pakistani.....i think jury missed another 2 great players ok Pakistan MR javed Miandad and MR Inzamam Ul Haq.............

  • Truecricketbuff on October 25, 2010, 7:38 GMT

    As was the case before his injuries Tendulkar is uniformly regarded as the best batsman after Bradman by the vast majority of experts, players and fans...Of course, a complete unanimity in these cases is next to impossible. However, in another 5 years of so- Tendulkar may actually pip Bradman.

  • AltafPatel on October 25, 2010, 7:38 GMT

    Wasim Akram and Dennis Lillee should have been replaced by Sir Richard Hadley and Glenn McGrath respectively. McGrath for being pace attack of one of all time great Steve's Australian team, and Hadley for being the attack of an under estimated team, NewZealand.

  • chaithan on October 25, 2010, 7:37 GMT

    Only one spinner? That's risky if not ridiculous, especially seeing how spectacularly Warne could fail. And how on earth is there such a big gap between Murali and Warne? I'm not going to comment on whether Warne or Murali was better. Lets just say equal. And Gilchrist keeping??!! He was a great batsman but not a great keeper. Healy and Marsh were both better than him and I would have picked Knott over him. Like Cricinfo's player profile for Gilchrist says "As a wicketkeeper he he clutched few screamers".

  • srikeshi on October 25, 2010, 7:36 GMT

    I am surprised allan donald is not in any of the elevens.His average is similar to mcgrath,lillee,hadlee etc. But his strike is far better than others, he has taken a wicket every 47 balls compared to a strike rate of over 50 of mcgrath,hadlee,lillee.

  • ROLAYH on October 25, 2010, 7:35 GMT

    I think it would be even better even both the XIs have a 12th man, you know situation arises in cricket when you need a 12th man.

  • on October 25, 2010, 7:35 GMT

    "Someone who is called great from today's game is Shane Warne, but I have got my reservations about Shane," Sobers wrote in the book's foreword. "I think he is a great bowler, but I'm not sure how well he compares with spinners overall. I think people get carried away with this man's ability as he hardly ever bowled a good googly.

    "To me, Shane Warne is a great turner of the ball. I like his aggressive attitude, I love the way he attacks batsmen and I give him 100% for that as not enough spinners bowl with that approach, but in my estimation Subhash Gupte was a better legspinner."

    - Sir Garry Sobers

  • TeeJ on October 25, 2010, 7:35 GMT

    This is the biggest soap opera's out there. A test XI without featuring Muralitharan is a joke. Shane Warne averaged less than him and picked up fewer wickets than him. For those who whinge about the Bangladeshi wickets; Shane Warne fared worse than Murali aginst the spinner dominating INDIANS at home. Jack Hobbs, Len Hutton, Don Bradman are the three most overrated players in the history, well they were history. No quality opposition, similar conditions and repetitive exercise of playing the same team before and after the war. Biggest JOKE.

  • on October 25, 2010, 7:31 GMT

    Am looking forward to comments from any and all SRT baiters here who possibly wrote his cricketing obituary in "GURU" Greg Stephen Chappell era of Indian cricket ..... needless to say all SRT fans are celebrating

  • bks123 on October 25, 2010, 7:30 GMT

    This is a very good selection. I selected gavaskar and sehwag as openers. Rest are same as the jury's. For people talking about ponting..He was not even selected for aus all time XI. The world XI is selected from the pool of 88 players from the 8 countries' all time XI. So there is no question of ponting in any of the world XI teams. Be it 1st 2nd or 3rd..I was in a dilema whether to select viv over lara. lara provides a good left-right combination with sachin and bradman. But to ignore viv because of that is unfair. May be lara for sachin...But then you cannot just ignore near 100 international 100's and the rebirth of sachin after 2007. To be honest, there is no indication that this is a purely test XI. Sachin wins hands down in ODI performances. Had it been only a test XI, I would have considered lara ahead of sachin...But then also its very very tough...I really feel sad that imran and murli missed out.

  • on October 25, 2010, 7:28 GMT

    WASIM AKram and Imran khan is great players of Pakistan...........Well done Pakistani.......Proud to be an Pakistani.....i think jury missed another 2 great players ok Pakistan MR javed Miandad and MR Inzamam Ul Haq.............

  • on October 25, 2010, 7:28 GMT

    Hadlee was a far better bowler than Lillie. So was McGrath.

  • Neil_Clarke on October 25, 2010, 7:27 GMT

    too much of an Aussie bias here. Top 5 hard to argue with. Sobers only a 5th bowler - I'd prefer Imran as a genuine all rounder. How you missed off the guy who is clearly the best keeper-batsmen of all time - Andy Flower, I'll never know. Lillee - great but not great enough - only got wickets in Australasia and England. Marshall was vastly superior in every measure. Same for Murali v Warne debate - Murali is better in every single dept. Warne was great but Murali greater (I'd have both in myself though!!). My XI - Hobbs, Hutton, Don, Sachin, Viv, Flower, Imran, Warne, Marshall, McGrath, Murali. Barnes 12th man to give bowlling options. That's a very balance team, although arguably missing a left arm bowler, but that can't be helped...

  • P.J.T. on October 25, 2010, 7:27 GMT

    How can Lillee, who could hardly take a wicket out of Australia get in ahead of SF Barnes? Another devastating bowler who would surely have made it if he played more Test cricket is Mike Procter - I'd have him in the 2nd XI at least, with Lillee dropping out altogether.

  • TheOnlyEmperor on October 25, 2010, 7:24 GMT

    The criteria for choosing the World-11 is that they should be able to face ( bat and bowl to) any opposition effortlessly, on any ground. Players who are all game winners in their own right and can blow away the best of opposition on their day. Assuming that the opposition is the No2 - World-11, then you would need bowlers to bowl top quality for 90 overs a day. 4 bowlers and a spinner, doesn't make the spinner potent. Spinners hunt in pairs. So it needs to be Murali and Warnie. The 3 pace bowlers need to be Lillee and Marshall ( 2 right arm) and Wasim ( 1 left arm) bowling about 45 overs and the spinners the other 45 overs between them. The openers have to be 2, who can get the team to a good start, with good technique, because they are facing the very best pace bowlers at the best. ( For those who run down Sehwag - he's got a great 150+ conversion rate and 2 triples in his bag) That leaves Don, SRT, Sobers in the middle, followed by Gilly the wkt keeper. The espn-11 is beatable.

  • dodddy on October 25, 2010, 7:24 GMT

    Hey Cricket lovers pls see below stats;

    Test Matches Wickets Wkt Per Match Strike Rate Warne : 145 708 4.88 57.6 Murai : 133 800 6.01 55.1

    who is the best?????

  • SugarFoot on October 25, 2010, 7:23 GMT

    Hehe... Readers 11 should not be taken seriously ANY time! Afterall, what do the general public really know being merely spectators of the game. I would change Lillie for Mcgrath. McGrath was far more experienced on all pitch conditions and statistically has taken far more wickets than most of the world's quicker bowlers. Warne over Murali is EXACTLY the correct choice.If you remove Murali's wickets against a pathetic Bangladesh and weak Zimbabwe - his total wickets gets reduced down to 691.If you look at Murali's stats out-side of the sub continent - where it is not so spin friendly - he had a harder time troubling the scorers compared to Warne. The most disturbing fact about Murali -his action will always be under scutiny , even if the ICC relaxed the laws and conditions of a bowler - we all know that the rules got changed to allow Murali to play in MODERN day cricket. Murali simply would have NOT been allowed to play in ANY era except our modern day era of politics and fixing!

  • Jaggadaaku on October 25, 2010, 7:23 GMT

    Why everyone forgot about South African star players such as Alan Donald(Bowler), Shaun Pollock(Alrounder), and Mark Boucher(Wicket Keeper)? Why no-one could find Mark Boucher is a better wicket keeper than Sangakkara, Bill 'O' Reilly and Andrew Flower and Alan Donald is a better bowler than Fred Trueman or SF Barnes? Why Ponting is not in any XI? When anyone going to pick "WORLD XI', he must think about whole world's cricketers, not only Australia, England and West Indies . I am sure these teams are picked by the selectors like Ian Chapple, Andrew Flintoff, and Mike Slater.The real World XI for Test Matches is: 1) Virendra Sehwag 2) Ken Barrington 3) Vivian Richards 4) Sachin Tendulkar(Step-Father of Cricket) 5) Brian Lara 6) Donald Bradman(Father of Cricket) 7) Adam Gilchrist(WK) 8) Garry Sobers(Captain) 9) Alan Donald/Wasim Akram 10) M Muralitharan 11) Dennis Leelie. You cannot pick 50% of the players from just one country. There are many talented players all over the world

  • zetano on October 25, 2010, 7:22 GMT

    A peculiar habit of mine is to run my eyes over a few classic dummy spits from our friends on the subcontinent before I go to bed, I find I have the deepest and most rejuvenating sleep afterwards. Thankyou cricinfo, with this World XI announcement you have furnished me with enough material to keep the dark rings at bay until at least Easter.

  • Biggus on October 25, 2010, 7:20 GMT

    I don't see a problem for the captaincy. Bradman was a fine captain as his contemporaries attest. Sobers or Warne possibly. I would go for Sobers in the end for his charisma, level headedness, and personal integrity.

  • on October 25, 2010, 7:19 GMT

    where the heck is Waqar Younis ???

  • vrghosh on October 25, 2010, 7:18 GMT

    Tough work for Cricinfo team... but Sunil Gavaskar n Brian Lara should be there instead of Len Hutton and Viv Richards... anyhow in Cricket even God can't select the perfect all 11... from here Cricinfo should start a All-timer Teams in troup of 16 player... so that they sortout the real problem of selection... because in Test Cricket of exhastive five days play n one or two months tour u can't bet on single player... So.. Keep the exercise on....

  • on October 25, 2010, 7:16 GMT

    Sachin Tundulkar over Jacques Kallis and Javed Miandad is ridiculous. Tundulkar is a great batsman but he's only been test match winner for last few years. Please tell us how many match winning centuries he hold. I think Inzimam scored more match winning centuries then him. If they want to pick up someone because of their high average or amounts of run then they should also choose Brian Lara.

  • on October 25, 2010, 7:15 GMT

    This was always being a tough task in making such a team which would ultimately create a lot of debate. But WOW! ... 09 out of 11 from my views have been finally selected for the all-time BEST XI. But i still think otherwise and would have preferred another spinner to compete in all conditions - and that is why I went for the inclusion of Muralitharan along with Shane Warne. Now, the point is for either Ian Botham or Wasim Akram. To my reckoning, no one can forget the monumental effort of Botham what he did in 1981 at Leeds. Dominant and domineering, Ian Botham was not merely the top English cricketer of the 1980s but the leading sports personality, while, Wasim Akram was a little bit overrated at the later part of his career. Malcolm Marshall's inclusion may better the pace attack of the team, but; i reckon Lillee-Botham-Sobers (as i consider Sobers Left-arm fast-medium capability) combination is fairly strong enough to challenge the opponent. Anyway, overall it was a great selection.

  • on October 25, 2010, 7:15 GMT

    Why are there no South Africans and most Importantly Jonty Rhodes........ who revolutionised Fielding .......

    Congrads for Our Dear Sachin Tendulkar....... and May God Bless him.......

    And Love Adam Gilchrist too..... But, I dont know who will take the great catches in the backward point... or may be the Judges thought Test Cricket is not about fielding...

  • Rooboy on October 25, 2010, 7:14 GMT

    @Adeel-Shehzad - ummm ... with regard to your comment 'you cant rate adam gilchrist over MS DHONI at any level' ... this is a Test XI and in test matches, Gilchrist averages about 7 runs more per innings than Dhoni and scores more than 20 more runs per 100 balls than Dhoni. It's hard enough compiling a team like this even if you base it only on fact and reality, don't make it harder by bringing ridiculously inaccurate opinion into it!

  • on October 25, 2010, 7:13 GMT

    No Kallis , No G.Pollock .. Joke

  • raj_g on October 25, 2010, 7:12 GMT

    how can lara missed in 1st leven.replace bradman with lara.that would be a better team.

  • VirajSam on October 25, 2010, 7:10 GMT

    sangakkara far better than pinch hitter gilchrist in test cricket .

  • ravi_hari on October 25, 2010, 7:10 GMT

    Congrats Cricinfo! Finally you got it 99% right. I know every country fan will feel their stars should have been there. However, if you look at the long history of cricket this is possible the best XI. For us missing Gavaskar and Kapil in the list is disappointing. I always rate Kapil above any Asian bowler and hence Akram's inclusion is a little surprising. I feel the selections for the positions are perfect. You dont get better openers than Hutton and Hobbs, middle order is perfect with Don, Viv and Sach. Sobers is the best all-rounder and the fast bowlers, barring Akram fit the bill perfectly. I dont think anyone should argue on Warne. I think he is the greatest. Murali and Kumble come from a natural spinner's paradise. Warne is from a spinners' alien land. He bowled on no-asian wickets more than helpful Asian wickets. To get 700+ wickets is a magnificient effort. Gilly is apt, though Knott should have come in for his brilliance behind the stumps. Congrats Cricinfo. - Hari Ravi

  • on October 25, 2010, 7:09 GMT

    A nice looking team, but Murli shoud've been preffered to Warne, given his records.

  • on October 25, 2010, 7:07 GMT

    It was always going to be interesting between Murali and Warne. Warne hasn't done well only in India, whereas Murali has probably struggled in many countries abroad. So I think it's fair to pick Warne. I would have actually gone for one of the more modern openers like Sehwag instead of Hobbs/Hutton. Otherwise, can't really argue with that.

    I really think it's a stupid exercise to pick a World XI to be honest. You're bound to get criticized no matter what.

  • on October 25, 2010, 7:07 GMT

    Gavaskar , Tendulkar, Don Bradman, Lara, Viv Richards, Garry Sobers, Adam Gilchrist, Malcolm Marshall, Shane Warne, Wasim Akram, Murli.

    Either Richards or Gavaskar should lead the side. we cant get a player to captain the side. cant pick two all rounders. so kaliis will miss out. But when you have two world clss spinners, you should play both of them.

  • on October 25, 2010, 7:06 GMT

    can't believe sunil gavaskar is not in the XI .. who scored 13 hundreds against the mightiest WI bowling attack as an opener !

  • sdharma on October 25, 2010, 7:05 GMT

    Can you believe that SW was picked over MM? MM has shown that he is the greatest in the history of spinners. SW was good choice but MM would have been in the X1 ahead of SW due to the true facts. this still shows how rigid the thinking pattern of so called writers/historians and cricket 'greasts' on MM.

  • on October 25, 2010, 7:04 GMT

    Imran Khan, Shane Warne, Wasim Akram, Curtly Ambrose, Malcolm Marshall : should read the bottom 5 of the strongest world XI.

  • on October 25, 2010, 7:04 GMT

    Tendulkar got less than warne?????? Give me a break! Sachin and Don should be the only two automatic choices.

  • mak102480 on October 25, 2010, 7:04 GMT

    @Adlus - who would you replace to include Kallis in the first XI? Bradman, Tendulkar, Richards, and Sobers are quite possibly the four GREATEST batsman of ALL TIME in no particular order. These four batsman all represent different era's of the game. We are talking about players across more than 100 years...it is extremely hard to pick this XI and extremely easy to say "why isn't player x in the team?" There isn't much to choose from between the all-world first XI and, say, the all-world tenth XI - the all-world tenth XI would also be a great, great team.

  • gochargers999 on October 25, 2010, 7:04 GMT

    i can't comment on the openers because i frankly don't have much idea about them...but rest looks ok except that we need to replace lillee with Imran..i am from india..and i wud put imran in the team for 3 reasons..1. great fast bowler 2.very good batsman...and 3. exceptional captain

  • on October 25, 2010, 7:03 GMT

    Great pick! But I can't believe that Sehwag missed out on both world XIs. He is the most effective test player at the moment. Gavaskar faced the best bowling line-up...lillee, thompson, Imran, Sarfaraz, Qadir, Marshall, Holding, Garner, Croft, Roberts, Hadlee, Botham, etc...and averaged 51 when others were averaging 40s odd...and no opener made as many runs against the all time great west indian attack and so that's a tricky one, but I haven't seen Hobb and Hutton. Also, Lara not in 1st XI feels weird but I don't know who else to leave out!

  • Rajitha88 on October 25, 2010, 7:02 GMT

    HIGHEST RUNs TAKER (Sachin) in the first XI but HIGHEST WICKET TAKER(sir muttaiah Muralideran) not in the sqad....this is a real joke....so ESPN please dont post articles and votes like this....lolz

  • emile70 on October 25, 2010, 7:02 GMT

    How can anyone jutifiably complain about Warne over Murali, no doubt Warne is a much better bowler, and you can't compare stats eg: Murali on the turning sub continent tracks as well as many games against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe.. Ask any batsmen... Warne is a much better/feared bowler

  • Jaggadaaku on October 25, 2010, 7:01 GMT

    Why everyone forgot about South African star players such as Alan Donald(Bowler), Shaun Pollock(Alrounder), and Mark Boucher(Wicket Keeper)? Why no-one could find Mark Boucher is a better wicket keeper than Sangakkara, Bill 'O' Reilly and Andrew Flower and Alan Donald is a better bowler than Fred Trueman or SF Barnes? Why Ponting is not in any XI? When anyone going to pick "WORLD XI', he must think about whole world's cricketers, not only Australia, England and West Indies . I am sure these teams are picked by the selectors like Ian Chapple, Andrew Flintoff, and Mike Slater.The real World XI for Test Matches is: 1) Virender Sehwag 2) Ken Barrington 3) Vivian Richards 4) Sachin Tendulkar(Step-Father of Cricket) 5) Brian Lara 6) Donald Bradman(Father of Cricket) 7) Adam Gilchrist(WK) 8) Garry Sobers(Captain) 9) Alan Donald/Wasim Akram 10) M Muralitharan 11) Dennis Leelie. You cannot pick 50% of the players from just one country. There are many talented players all over the world

  • on October 25, 2010, 7:01 GMT

    This was always being a tough task in making such a team which ultimately would create a lot of debate. But WOW! .... 09 out of 11 from my views have been finally selected for the all-time BEST XI. But still i think otherwise, and i would have preferred another spinner to compete in all conditions - and that is why, I went for the inclusion of Muralitharan along with Shane Warne. Now, the point is for either Ian Botham or Wasim Akram. To my reckoning, no one can forget the monumental effort what Botham did in 1981 at Leeds. Dominant and domineering, Ian Botham was not merely the top English cricketer of the 1980s but the leading sports personality, while, Wasim Akram was a little bit overrated at the later part of his career. Malcolm Marshall's inclusion may better the pace attack of the team, but; i reckon Lillee-Botham-Sobers (as i consider Sobers Left-arm fast-medium capability) combination is fairly strong enough to challenge the opponent. Anyway, overall it was a great selection.

  • Runster1 on October 25, 2010, 6:59 GMT

    LOL ponting didnt make it...serves him right. Hope that in a few years time Ms Dhoni may get in. and lol Warne over muralitharun. Very good decision; warne had more leadership and skill {did not chuck the ball}.

  • Sulaimaan91 on October 25, 2010, 6:59 GMT


  • mak102480 on October 25, 2010, 6:57 GMT

    And people, please know how these teams are voted before making baseless accusations. Ponting was not voted into either of the XI because he wasn't even in the nominees and that was because he was not even in the all-time australia XI - bradman, border and greg chappel made it before Ponting. and one can't really argue there.

  • vaibhav90 on October 25, 2010, 6:53 GMT

    Where is suresh raina?? He has a career average of around 70 in test matches. And I strongly believe that sangakkara should be preferred over gilchrist and zaheer khan should be preferred over wasim akram.

  • emile70 on October 25, 2010, 6:53 GMT

    Readers 11... Are you kidding with Sehwag.... I wonder where all his votes came from....

  • Prasado on October 25, 2010, 6:50 GMT

    @ Kurt...Ponting isn't there because the World XI was picked from each country's all-time XI. Ponting didn't make it to the Australian All-time XI

  • Yorker_ToeCrusher on October 25, 2010, 6:50 GMT

    The selectors of World 11 should be ashamed of themselves by not selecting Gavaskar in the List and so do the guy who hs voted against Tendulkar.I hope Chapell has not voted against him.

  • sirabuwa on October 25, 2010, 6:49 GMT

    Is this World best test team?????????????cric info is useless because World Test XI is rubbish without Brian Lara and Murali.Brian Lara and Murali were match winners not like Tendulkar how can you win with this team.Plus Gilchrist is not a good test cricketer he is only good one days,either it should be Sanga or Dhoni.Bradman should be removed because he played most of the matches against England so he was used to play against same bowlers.

  • adi_the_punisher on October 25, 2010, 6:49 GMT

    If cricket were the religion, Imran would have been the GOD… 1st XI looks a team of athiests as there is no "GOD" in there

  • on October 25, 2010, 6:48 GMT

    what Gilchrist dose in test? 96 matches 5570 runs 47.60 Avg only 17 hundreds. why he should be in The world X1... & check Kumar Sangakkara's record 91 matches 8016 runs 56.85 AVG (highest test Avg in current player) & 23 hundreds 7 double hundreds.... who should be in world X1...? & why no murali in first world X1 he is the highest wicket taker in test & one day format.. so please don't look only aussies players...

  • on October 25, 2010, 6:47 GMT

    A world XI without Sir Richard Hadlee is Absolute stupidity.. Crazy.. He is the Sultan of Swing and Cut.. and just check out his Career bowling average.. better than.. Akram.. Marshall...and Lillee... Akram is ok.. Marshal is Ok.. Lillee deserved only second XI.. All because of Aussie Mafia in voting.. Shame on you Aussies.. No one is better than Sir Richard...

  • on October 25, 2010, 6:47 GMT

    Well Well Well..............Gili is not a test player, we have (mr. perfect Sangakara).........warne is a good leg spinner but i must say murli must there in World XI......and pls some one tell me who is this guys denis lille, how many matches he played and wot about wkt and Is he better than McGrath,waqar,pollok, imran, flintoff, Kapil..........one more thing i would like to tell u guys one very important play is missing with more than 260 wkts and more than 11,000 runs in test......kallis...........................this World XI is bull shit................................................................

  • Hasso29 on October 25, 2010, 6:46 GMT

    wasim akram the best cricketer

  • Mannix16 on October 25, 2010, 6:46 GMT

    see a lot of problems with some people on the teams.... first of all how could you pick based on first class record? Should we pick pujara and rahane too? (average around 60).... also, if this truly is a TEST team, sangakkara definetely should replace gilchrist.... sangakkara averages higher than tendulkar at the moment and gilchrist is some 8-9 points below him. also, sangakkara would have better wicketkeeping record IF he actually took the place of test wicketkeeper instead of giving it to prasanna... also warne> murali? i know this is a heated debate, but warne mostly got tail enders out AND was not a good sportsman.... and len hutton - the man has played mostly only in australia and england... how can you judge someone if they played in only two places.... look at the youngsters in the Indian team... they average 60+ on the subcontinent, but elsewhere they're chickens for picking....

  • on October 25, 2010, 6:46 GMT

    Ever I seen live playing

    My best ___________________Players

    Batsman ___________________ Sachin tendulkar ODI bats___________________ Sachin Test bats___________________Brian Lara, Sachin ODI opener _________________Sachin Test Opener________________Virendra Sehwag Left handed bats_____________sanath Jaisurya All rounder in Test ____________Jack kallis All rounder in ODI ____________Lance klusner Fielder_____________________Johnty roods Wk test____________________Kumar sangkara WK odi_____________________Adam gilkhrist Pacer_____________________Glen Mcgrath Spiner_____________________Murlidharan Sixer King__________________Shahid Afridi Safest Player_______________Rahul Dravid Fastest on pitch_____________shoaib akhtar Best ODI Cap_______________Ricky Ponting Best Test Cap_______________Steve Waugh Best ODI team______________Austrelia Best Test team ______________India

    to be contd........

  • Truemans_Ghost on October 25, 2010, 6:45 GMT

    Interesting picks. I think the all rounders have suffered due to the format- Hadlee should be in one of the teams as a bowler- put him at 11 is you must. I'd have Imran over Wasim Akram. Keeping Ambrose and McGrath out is also tough- but I realise I am proposing lots of extra quicks without dropping anyone. I'm very entertained by the insensed, foam-mouthed rants of some of the other readers by the way.

  • Mark00 on October 25, 2010, 6:44 GMT

    Sachin over Lara?

    Perhaps they felt there was enough brilliance in the team and went for consistency instead. Or perhaps they just didn't want to tick off 1 billion people.

  • on October 25, 2010, 6:43 GMT


  • kirksland on October 25, 2010, 6:43 GMT

    The omission of Imran for Wasim is baffling, Lillee ahead of Mcgrath equally so. The second team is even more baffling as no Ambrose, Hadlee, Holding, Greg Chappell, Kallis or Pollock. Here are my first three teams. Len Hutton, Barry Richards, Don Bradman, Brian Lara, Sachin Tendulkar, Garry Sobers, Imran Khan, Allan Knott, Malcolm Marshall, Shane Warne, Glenn Mcgrath. Sunil Gavaskar, Jack Hobbs, Viv Richards, Greg Chappell, Wally Hammond, Adam Gilchrist, Keith Miller, Richard Hadlee, Curtly Ambrose, Dennis Lillee, Mutiah Muralitharan. Herbert Sutcliffe, Gordon Greenidge, Ricky Ponting, George Headley, Graeme Pollock, Jacques Kallis, Les Ames, Wasim Akram, Michael Holding, Allan Donald, Bill O'Reilly.

  • on October 25, 2010, 6:42 GMT

    My team has Sehwag in place of Sir Len Hutton. Not sure of any of the Jury has watched Sir Huttan play. Akram and Sobers are similar (left hand fast/swing) I have selected Murli instead of Akram. Who needs 4 fast bowlers!! Sanghakara in place of Gilchrist.

  • on October 25, 2010, 6:42 GMT

    Ridiculous ... Akram over Imran? Lillee over McGrath? Vivian Richards over Gary Sobers?

    Hobbs and Hutton ? Sure they were great in their time ... but they only played SA WI and AUS .. 2 of which were as good as Zim and Bangla of today.

    Please this list is a mockery of cricket.

  • mak102480 on October 25, 2010, 6:41 GMT

    All the people complaining about Imran Khan do not understand that there is NO WAY he could be picked ahead of THE BEST CRICKETER OF ALL TIME - Garry Sobers. Only one slot for an all rounder. McGrath? Are you kidding? He was a great bowler but unfortunately only so many slots available and he is not the top 5 or 6 fast bowlers of all time. Lillee, Marshal, Barnes, Akram, Larwood, the WI fast bowlers of 80s all could do the same thing McGrath could - bowl accurate - but at a MUCH faster pace. Who would you rather face? Sehwag? Well, the body of work is way too short...need more years under the belt. And people arguing against Tendulkar? On what basis? He has scored against the best (aussies), he has scored with the pressure of a billion people behind him, most runs, most centuries, 21+ years of Test Cricket, runs all over the world in all formats...enough said.

  • the_sherminator on October 25, 2010, 6:40 GMT

    I almost agree with this - I think there is a tendency to over-rate modern players on the grounds they have X-thousand runs or X-hundred wickets, just because they play a lot more. Better to consider who were considered to be outstanding players by their contemporaries. On that basis I might swap Barnes for Lillee (Lillee was a great bowler - but wasn't even the best in his own era) and would personally go for Lara over Tendulkar - also gives the team another leftie.

  • on October 25, 2010, 6:39 GMT

    All Time test XI cant be completed without rahul dravid.

  • sarith01 on October 25, 2010, 6:39 GMT

    if they've considered contribution to the team rather than stats Murali should be the 1st option for any world XI. if we considered all these players in the cricinfo XI they all make debuts when their respective countries were giants in world cricket & all of them have lot of support from the other world class players when they playing.But in case of Murali , he came in to the scene when sri lankans were considered as minnows of Test cricket. And he almost single handedly took lankans to top of the cricketing world. If they've considered Stats then Murali will be only second to great sir Don Bradman.

  • Icyman on October 25, 2010, 6:35 GMT

    Hobbs and Lillee should have been in the Second XI. Replaced by Barry Richards and Trueman. Reader's XI was more or less likely to feature current players cause the readers haven't seen the others in action. 20 years down the line, a World XI picked by the readers would again be biased towards the current crop of players only.

  • Christy1268 on October 25, 2010, 6:32 GMT

    Pray tell us, who this WORLD XI will play against ?

  • Adeel-Shehzad on October 25, 2010, 6:32 GMT

    i think WAQAR YOUNIS should join Wasim Akram instead of Denis Lillee to produce a thrilling bowling attack of all times.. & you cant rate adam gilchrist over MS DHONI at any level... & with Sunil Gavaskar in the opening department this world XI should be captained by IMRAN KHAN.....!!!!

  • on October 25, 2010, 6:32 GMT

    dats very true he is the best cricketer at moment at his age

  • bridget01 on October 25, 2010, 6:31 GMT

    The simple reason Murali wasn'y picked is becuase he chucks. Why would Warne be a unanimous decision? It seems it doesn't matter if the laws were changed for him....the jury still see him as a chucker. Very interesting

  • adlus on October 25, 2010, 6:31 GMT

    How can we have a World XI without Jacques Kallis? Quite ridiculous.....

  • bhaloniaz on October 25, 2010, 6:31 GMT

    players I have seen: Gavasker, Talyor, Miadad, Richards, Sachin/Ponting/Lara, Imran, Dujon, Hadlee, Marshall, Warne, Lilee. Even in india when you have Hadlee and Marshall,you do not need two spinners. I would even replace Warne with Croft, Garner or Waqar.

  • on October 25, 2010, 6:30 GMT

    @Taylz13 : The best players of spin have been the Indians. Contrast the records : Warne vs India in India : 9 matches , 43 wickets at 43.11 Warne vs India in Australia 5 matches , 9 wickets at 62.55

    Murali vs India in India : 11 matches , 40 wickets at 45.45 . Murali vs India in SRL : 11 matches , 65 wickets at 24.72 .

    Warne's ineffectiveness against great players of spin has been the reason India is the only country with a positive record against Australia in the last decade - beating them twice in their own back yard.

  • ravips99 on October 25, 2010, 6:29 GMT

    Ridiculous in terms of the pace attack. Sir Richard Hadlee gets punished for being listed as an all-rounder. It is a given that Sir Garry Sobers is THE allrounder but Sir Richard Hadlee not in the pace attack. Ridiculous I'd say any which way I see it man.

  • on October 25, 2010, 6:28 GMT

    where is RAVINDRA JADEJA.. he should make in this list only 4 his ODI Performance. without playing any test he should be in this team. :-)

  • srini1088 on October 25, 2010, 6:27 GMT

    any world X1 must have both sachin and lara..these are the 2 players who have virtually survived all the challenges of batting...they have succeeded in all conditions against all oppositions...So these 2 must be rated even higher than the don ....Grt to see sachin but sad to see lara miss out ....he deserves to be there in the middle order along with sachin

  • on October 25, 2010, 6:26 GMT

    I noticed one thing in the World XI....there is no good captain in that team.

  • on October 25, 2010, 6:26 GMT

    @ people saying murali should be picked ahead of warne. To suggest murali is better than warne is obserd..... warney took his wickets against quality opposition and mainly on hard wickets whereas murali has taken many against zimbabwe and bangladesh, and played far more matches on dry dusty spin-friendly wickets. Murali is all class but warney is legendary and the selectors have agreed with me.

  • on October 25, 2010, 6:25 GMT

    I like the World XI except couple of spots could have been better. I don't think Adam Gilchrist is the best wicket-keeper produced ever. I know Viv Richards was exploding batsman but don't think he was one of the best middle order batsman in last 100 years. Just my 2 cents :)

  • on October 25, 2010, 6:24 GMT

    This is a joke no lara in the first eleven, may be murali as well jokerz!!!

  • fahad_XpErT.18 on October 25, 2010, 6:23 GMT

    Imran Khan in second XI i guess this was pretty much unfair. A man of his calliber in second XI. I guess he was a far better cricketer then denis lillee and marshal. I feel XI was quite a baised one!

  • cricket_fan_1 on October 25, 2010, 6:23 GMT

    Its impossible to get all the greats in.. Gilly in place of Sanga is really baffling, sanga is better keeper and better batsman. @Senthil - Grow-up and have an open mind. Sehwag is in the readers choice because of his entertaining cricket. Don't start the excuse of flat pitches and all that.. in that case Kapil Dev and Kumble should have been in the world XI taking > 400 wickets (+5000 test runs) and > 600 wickets on flat pitches..

  • on October 25, 2010, 6:21 GMT

    why not sangakkara with average nearing 57,with 8000+ runs in 91 tests? why not kallis?

  • DINESHCC on October 25, 2010, 6:21 GMT

    In the 133 years of cricket history, you can't just pick up 11 greats. There are so many greats. There cannot be any number 1 or 2. You cannot just ignore the names of Richard Hadlee, Shaun Pollock, Allan Donald, Jac. Kallis, Abdul Qadir, Javed Miandad, Waqar Younis, Inzamam, Mathew Hayden, Justin Langer, David Boon, Craig Mcdermot, Martin Crowe, Stephen Flemming, Malcom Marshall, C.Ambrose, C. Walsh, C.Greenidge, Desmond Haynes, Ian Botham, G.Boycott, Bob Willis, Kapil Dev, B.Bedi, A.Kumble, R.Dravid, VVS.Laxman, K.Sangakara, M.Jayawardena, R.Ponting etc. etc. etc. All of them are / were star players in their era. Therefore the exercise of selecting XI players of 133 years of cricketing history is a wasteful exercise. You can do the exercise of selecting top 100 players and not XI alone.

  • OESHSHI on October 25, 2010, 6:21 GMT

    Where are Zaheer Abbas, Richard Headly, David Gower, Allan Donald, Glenn Mcgrath, jonty Rodes?

  • on October 25, 2010, 6:21 GMT

    lol. If the Indian opinion is biased in favour of Pakistani players, how come I see only one Pakistani in the reader's 11? By the way I was thinking that Wasim Akram is an amazingly talented player but if he didnt have the great Imran Khan to back him, he might have suffered the same fate as Mohammad Aamir. Wasim also suffered accusations but that was after he became a legend. Aamir isnt one yet though Im sure he can be the second Wasim Akram... Well this apparently unrelated discussion is leading on to the fact that Imran Khan could easily not only make the first XI but captain it. History might have seen captains as good but not better. Never better... @Nepcrick: Yeah Kallis is amazing, trust me I hate him everytime we face him :D @Adeel-Shehzad: Yeah it would be very very interesting to see Fazal Mehmood in this era, we would see more of his destructive capabilities :)

  • on October 25, 2010, 6:20 GMT

    No Murali,but Warne....crazy

  • Doogius on October 25, 2010, 6:18 GMT

    Great batting lineup. Maybe Pollock for Richards, the best LH I ever saw (and I only say him bat at the age of 60 and yes, I can't believe I'm saying drop King Viv but Pollock was THAT good :) Maybe Viv for Tendulkar (after all, the pitch isn't dead :) With that bowling lineup, I may even have gone with a speccy wk instead of Gilly (yes, I'm an aussie). Imagine the wk having to deal with the variations of marshall and wasim - awesome. Makes you wonder what respected cricket judges think of a certain bowlers action (how else do you explain his exclusion - although Warne definitely offers at least something with the bat). Funnily enough, with Sobers to bowl LH, Muttiah probably would offer more variation than a leggie - but so be it. DK vs Hadlee - hard call - i'd go with Hadlee for his batting (and after Marshall/Wasim - who needs more quickies :)

  • on October 25, 2010, 6:14 GMT

    Love to see Virender Sehwag at World XI

  • CricFan24 on October 25, 2010, 6:14 GMT

    YUP. Generally ok, just a few changes. Headley in place of Richards. Lara was basically too up and down- though his best was as good as anyone. Out of the 12 judges Ian Chappel went with lara- coz Chappel likes the flashy,attacking types. Chappel also went with Sehwag- over Gavaskar and others....so much for Chappel...Warne should be in- he was the greater bowler and competitor. Murali was more of a king at home - similar to Lara. Though both him and lara had a few good knocks and series away. ALL in ALL- Just about right team (just Headley in for Richards)

  • Mark00 on October 25, 2010, 6:14 GMT

    Warne instead of Murali?

    Perhaps they felt they needed a tail-ender specialists.

    Warne has taken more tail-ender wickets while Murali has captured more batsmen.

  • cricket_ftw on October 25, 2010, 6:13 GMT

    No Murali????? ... common cricinfo ... dont be biased ... murali is the greatest spinner of all times and ur not having him in the side...

  • on October 25, 2010, 6:13 GMT

    Hey KiwiRocker , you have a good bit of analysis there and you seem determined to get noticed. You posted the same analysis a few days ago on Gideon Heigh's article ; I have replied to it too. What's interesting is that against the same fast bowlers(excluding Ambrose of course) against which Tendulkar averaged 36.43 , Lara averaged 41. A difference , but not quite so significant as you are making it out to be. Lara remains the coldest-blooded destroyer of spin bowling there has probably ever been . But Bradman and Benaud , arguably cricket's two greatest personalities , rated Tendulkar higher than him , because of two reasons. Lara was essentially a prima-donna and prima-donnas are not really much use on a regular basis. Secondly , Lara has this ability to get out very early in the innings very often , in fact , in a staggering 62 innings out of his 232 (27%) , he has been dismissed for less than 10. Contrast that with Tendulkar's 65/280 .

  • on October 25, 2010, 6:13 GMT

    On Few Comments about English Players not being there & the once there not deserving to be... As there is no all rounder there must be inclusion of Sir Ian, As well as i feel not including either of the Great Compton, WG Grace or Jim Laker was unfair as well They were the revolutionaries of cricket!

  • bhaloniaz on October 25, 2010, 6:12 GMT

    Excellent pick. Specially the world 11. I would rather have Miadad instead of Sachin and Knot for GilChrist.Another guy who missed the radar is Hadlee. If you ask anyone to start a team by picking one player: between Imran, Hadlee, Botham, Kapil, Lilee; my pick would be Hadlee. I cannot see anyone picking either him or Imran. I am so glad to see Viv Richards and Malcolm Marshall in the team.

  • on October 25, 2010, 6:11 GMT

    A captain was required. mark taylor or steve waugh.

  • on October 25, 2010, 6:10 GMT

    there should be a mtch between first XI and second XI.Second XI is not that weak against first XI

  • on October 25, 2010, 6:10 GMT

    come on....lillee doesn't deserve...u have alot better choices..even waqar is better or may be some WI great. lillee was not even good at subcontinent pitches...this is shame...and how can u left Imran out...Pathetic...bad choice of Hobbs over Gavaskar...we are talking about test team not a first class team..!!!

  • Shane on October 25, 2010, 6:09 GMT

    These fantasy XI's are always interesting if impossible tasks for those selecting the teams and always spark controversy. Sure if I were to pick a side I would have some differences but by and large the team picked is pretty good, as is the 2nd XI and the readers team. So, the main thing that annoys me about these processes is when people get on the comment boards and rubbish great players - saying that they weren't any good or are over-rated. The facts are simple all the players are great and none of them are over-rated!!! Did some players best them when in competition - yes of course, did they play better in some countries over others - yep but over the course of their career were they generally at the top of their peers - yes they were.

  • on October 25, 2010, 6:09 GMT

    can they make real match with this X1 ? this will be great to watch

  • Bilal_Choudry on October 25, 2010, 6:05 GMT

    aint no world xi without imran khan ....secondly how can lillee the guy who doesnt have any wickets or performances to chear about outside his homeland and england be selected for a world team

  • on October 25, 2010, 6:05 GMT

    Where is Kallis, he is close to 11 000 runs and he has 264 wickets in tests alone, in his career he has more than 20 000 runs and 500 wickets. I certain he must be one of the best all rounders ever to play.

  • on October 25, 2010, 6:05 GMT

    Gavaskar, Sehwag, Bradman, Sachin, Richards, Sobers, Imran, Gilchrist, Akram, Liliee, Murli.

  • mayuri78 on October 25, 2010, 6:04 GMT

    Its a strange selection. Who is going to lead the side? I think Imran should have been in the team. He was a great all rounder as well as Best Captain. Similarly, Lara's omission was a big surprise. Last but not the least Warne over Murali? I think its injustice with Murali.

  • PGW81 on October 25, 2010, 6:03 GMT

    Sad to see Lara miss out. As was rightly pointed out the team needs a left hander and Lara should have replaced Sachin...At times I guess if cricinfo judges selected Sachin to save their skins or was he a genuine choice? Picking across eras is a ridiculous task - dunno why cricinfo and the fans alike make such a drama out of this futile exercise - Get Sachin or Ponting to bat without their helmets - get Dravid to get out of his war suit like protective gear and get someone fast and tall like Garner to bowl at them - I bet that they will not be the same as what they are - while some of the changes in cricket has been for the better, the quality of the pitches and the game in general has dwindled. So lets see and enjoy each of these eras while it lasts and remember the bygone era fondly for the wonderful memories that they have produced. This all time XI is nonsense - the staff have nothing better to do. Who selected the jury to decide on this.... let the arguments flow......

  • on October 25, 2010, 6:03 GMT

    @Kiwirocker... Don't agree with you on Sachin. He is the most complete player of our times. Agree with you on Imran Khan. He should be the captain of this team.

    @Rakesh... Lara's name should be in all 3 lists... It think if it is in the first then it should not be in the second and vice versa...

    @Subhajit... Hobbs has 199 first class centuries and an average of over 60 in international cricket. He was the superstar before Bradman. Hutton was like Tendulkar- Teenage prodigy... Look at their records and then comment...

  • Tamoor171 on October 25, 2010, 6:02 GMT

    Biased selection. Lara and Gavaskar are far better than Hutton in the first eleven while Miandad should replace Hammond in the second eleven.

  • Taylz13 on October 25, 2010, 6:01 GMT

    Statistically speaking, both are very good sides. I am a bit surprised with the amount of argument of Warne vs. Murali. Yes, Murali took more wickets, but subtract the wickets taken against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, then Warne's figures are much greater than Murali's (691 to Warne, 616 to Murali). Also if you compare both of their performances outside of the home countries, Warne also wins in this category (345 to Warne, 252 to Murali). Outside of the subcontinent, where the wickets aren't quite as spin-friendly, Warne humiliates Murali here (575 to Warne, 162 to Warne). I think all of these figures dismiss any credibility that Murali was the better spinner.

  • dishands on October 25, 2010, 6:01 GMT

    Murali 800 wickets.. the only bowler to take 800.. less matches than warne.... but still warne gets the nod.. ya the colour would hv been a reason... I think the readers are the best Jury!!!

  • on October 25, 2010, 6:00 GMT

    what!!!! no IMRAN KHAN????????

  • Jaggadaaku on October 25, 2010, 5:58 GMT

    The perfect World XI for Test Matches is as follows, which no-one can deny any player: 1) Virendra Sehwag 2) Ken Barrington 3) Vivian Richards 4) Sachin Tendulkar 5) Brian Lara 6) Donald Bradman 7) Adam Gilchrist(WK) 8) M Murlidharan 9) Alan Donald 10) Garry Sobers (Captain) 11) Dennis Leelie

  • anikbrad on October 25, 2010, 5:58 GMT


  • 114_in_final_Six_overs on October 25, 2010, 5:57 GMT

    Only two bad selections: Adam Gilchrist should be replaced with Alan Knott and Akram with Michael Holding. Marshal and Holding hunted in pair.

  • tiger9999 on October 25, 2010, 5:54 GMT

    wonder how this world XI (not seleted in 1st or 2nd teams) would have coped with a world side laden with great all rounders in the middle of solid me at the top and a couple of sharp bowlers... Jayasuriya, Sehwag, Kallis, Sangakara,Waugh, De Siilva, Botham, Dev,Hadlee, Miller, Qadir..would certainly have some serious bowling options and guile also be able to bat seriously to #10.... 5 Fast men: Miller, Botham, Dev,Hadlee and Kallis 1+3 Spinners: Qadir, Jayasuriya, De Silva and Sehwag and Waugh with the golden arm to get Bradman or Tendulakar when none of the above work on them...

  • on October 25, 2010, 5:53 GMT

    Totally agree that Malcolm Marshall should be in any World X1, miles ahead of anyone including Akram and McGrath. It's not even in doubt as far as I'm concerned. The Criciinfo team is hard to disagree with, this team would beat the readers X1 in my humble opinion..

    Barry Richards, Hutton, Hobbs, Viv Richards, Hammond, Imran Khan, Knott, Marshall, Laker, Holder, Lillee

  • Paris_VaiKelly on October 25, 2010, 5:52 GMT

    When I look at the jury their compilations, I console myself - these r players who have played the game, and I believe that nationality has NOT BEEN an issue for them. That is why CricInfo also had a Readers' XI here, so that fans could also vote, and not just the ex-veterans alone. Also, be mindful that almost all greats, bar a few, have been a shadow of themselves in their last years, and this compilation is based on their performances during their peak. A test century at the toughest time, whether by a top-order or a lower-order batsman, is equally commendable as the timely dismissal of a set/potentially dangerous batsman whether he may be a top-order or a low-order bat. It is the moment that changes a game that counts, the defines the course of a dull, dreary, tedious match into a match full of unexpected surprises. And by the way, Murali being in the second team is not AN INSULT! And remember, he is there in the Readers' XI, so that means that he is highly rated too.

  • alonsoe on October 25, 2010, 5:51 GMT

    I was just curious as to the batting order. It might be of small consequence, but I do not see Marshall and Warne batting ahead of Wasim. Other than that I do have a problem(but not much) picking Wasim ahead of Imran, Ambrose and Barnes.I do not know if being the rare combination of a great LEFT arm fast bowler who can bat helped his cause. Gasvaskar and Murali would be in my team. My 11 in order: Hobbs, Gavaskar, Bradman, Viv Richards, Sachin, Sobers, Gilchrist, Marshal, Lillee, Murali, Barnes.I would not knock the readers team so much, though some want to think it is pro Indian it does have merit. I would think Marshal would be automatic, but he was not one of the unanimous choices for the Windies team.

  • on October 25, 2010, 5:48 GMT

    Well, How come Jacques Kallis is not in the list, not even in 2nd team?? by Statistics. he is the greatest cricketer of the history of the world!!! has more than 11000 runs and 250 wickets!!! well, expected Brian Lara in the 1st team..Also inclusion of Dennis Lilee in the first team is the most SHOCKING!!! Glenn Mcgrath, Ambrose, Hadlee should be there..Ricky Ponting should in 2nd team..and except last 3 years..Rahul Dravid deserved a post too!!..actually confused about Ponting and Dravid..:)

    Wasim Akram should have been in the second team and Imraan in the first..that position should have been switched..

    No Comment about Readers XI!!!! Sehwag is in the all time XI!!! LOL!! LMAO!! haha!! that actually justify the acceptability of the XI!!..:P..And most of the modern players are in that list..that can be a list of last 30 years greatest tam..not alltime..:P..:)

  • on October 25, 2010, 5:48 GMT

    I have some other ideas in selecting All time world XI, as currently declared XI contains many greats from 70's, 80's and from late 90's, so we should select 25 years as a period and select XI on the basis of that period, as there is no mean of comparing great players from 80's to current and last decade.We should put 1970 1995 as one period, and 1980 to 2005(these are just example).As one can clearly see that Reader's XI is dominated by players from last 2 decade, as I am seeing main reason behind it was most of them rarely watch their performance, so how can they judge it only on the basis of match summary.That's it for now!!

  • Charindra on October 25, 2010, 5:46 GMT

    I agree with every selection but I can NOT understand how on earth Warne is a unanimous pick!!! Muralitharan, the greatest bowler to ever play the game is not in the list. Unbelievable!!! I also noted the absence of Lara, but then again the middle order is the hardest place to get in considering the remarkable talent cricket has seen in that area over the years.

  • on October 25, 2010, 5:46 GMT

    Totally agree that Malcolm Marshall should be in any World X1, miles ahead of anyone including Akram and McGrath. It's not even in doubt as far as I'm concerned. The Criciinfo team is hard to disagree with, this team would beat the readers X1 in my humble opinion..

    Barry Richards, Hutton, Hobbs, Viv Richards, Hammond, Imran Khan, Knott, Marshall, Laker, Holder, Lillee

  • ns_krishnan on October 25, 2010, 5:45 GMT

    Those who feel that their favourites merit a place have the right to tell their opinion ( I chose McGrath, Murali and Lara. They did not make it). But. calling this exercise "a joke" is a bit too much.

  • on October 25, 2010, 5:44 GMT

    compare with other XI " Readers XI is best one"who captain of the team and where is allrounder.

  • on October 25, 2010, 5:42 GMT

    No Murali in the World XI ... arguable but not controversial. Warne instead of Murali ... now thats just silly.

  • CSpiers on October 25, 2010, 5:40 GMT

    Um.. Adeel Shehzaad, in case you actually know nothing about Adam Ghilchrist (which you clearly don't) he averaged 47 in test cricket.. for a wicket keeper, that is extremely high.

  • late_tanim on October 25, 2010, 5:39 GMT

    Come on guys.. where is Brian Lara in 1st world XI .. its really not fare to lara.. One can make thousands of runs but at the end, match winning innings should be counted ..

  • on October 25, 2010, 5:39 GMT

    Lack Jobbs and Len Hutton? ? Ian Chappell says he hasn't seen Len Hutton, but trusts Richi Benaud on what he had to say about Hutton on his great technique. Now Benaud isn't the judge is he? Is Hutton included becoz someone from England had to be there, to make Tony Graig and English readers happy? About Hoggs Chappell says his longevity was most fascinating to him. Now on that count W Grace should be in the squad!!!!

    The rest of the squad is of course automatic choice and anyone who follow cricket, cannot rule out any of the player completely. In any case it's completely useless to compare players from two generations. The guys from past always argue they had to play in green top and without helmet, but playing in this millennium is tougher when everything about your game is open book by virtue of technology and with constant media attention, mental toughness and handling pressure is way more valuable than natural ability than in the ages of Bradman. So this list is useless to me.

  • anikbrad on October 25, 2010, 5:39 GMT

    Best 11 well done no problem with any of them onlty viv richards vs Hammond who is considered as the best in the era and only bradman is better and i dont know about other jurries probably since no one has seen him playing has not selected. look all in the pre 60 era is overlooked is a pure bias. hammond for naive readers has 58+ AVG in in 82 thest with 85 wickets and 100 catches is probably one of the even best alrounders pre sovers era. He was supposed to be the greatest player till Bradman arrived. viv is gretest player post 60 era but grater than HAMMOND??? if the readers agree with this data of richards with 50 avg I have no Words left: 1st XI: HOBBS: HAMMOND: BRADMAN: HAMMOND;TENDULKAR: SOBERS: GILCHRIST; AKRAM; MARSHAL; WARNE; LILLE 2ND XI: GAVASKAR; SURTCLIFF; HADLEE; LARA; HAMMOND; IMRAN; SANGAKARA; HADLEE; TRUMAN; MURALI: BARNES THE XI I HAVE SEEN: GAVASKAR; SHEWAG; LARA; TENDULKAR; RICHARDS; GILLY; IMRAN; MARSHAL; HADLIE; LILLE; WARNE

  • MrMMJ on October 25, 2010, 5:39 GMT

    Mr.MMJ's World XI.. Sunil Gavaskar, Virender Sehwag, J Kallis, Brian Lara, George Hadlee, Richard Hadlee, Waqar Younus, Jeff Dujon, George Lohman, M Muralitharan. I would love to have Don Bradman and Sachin in my team but since they are picked by these experts then I have no choice. I believe Mr.MMJ world XI has upper hand against cricinfo world XI. Murali and Waqar are much better then Warne and Akram. Richard Hadlee is way too better bowler then Dennis Lillee. My surprise bowler who will rip apart this Cricinfo World XI is Geoge Lohman.

  • Rosh1 on October 25, 2010, 5:38 GMT

    Well I got it almost right. I had 8 outta 11 correct. Sadly Sunil Gavasker, Kumar Sangakkara and Muttiah Muralitharan are left out from my list. I thought Sunil should have been in the list purely for his ability to face the windies and other pace attacks during the late 70s and in the 80s. If Gilly was selected as a batting wicket keeper i think they made a mistake and it should have been Kumar Sangakkara for his ability to keep against Murali and of course is a better batsman than Gilly. If it was purely WK skills then they should have picked Alan Knott. Murali missed out purely coz the jury decided with an extra pacie instead of an extra spinner. So Lillee gets the nod. Overall the list is ok but I guess there had been biasness towards the aussie with the picking of Gilly, Warne and Lillee.

  • jehangir76 on October 25, 2010, 5:36 GMT

    difficult to please every cricket nation in all time great.few things missed who the opposition would be where will they play(horses for courses),if in subcontinent need two spinners and most important a team without a good captain is useless dont see a good captain in eleven

  • on October 25, 2010, 5:35 GMT

    Jack Hobbs,Brian Lara,Don Bradman,Sachin Tendulkar,Viv Richards,Gary Sobers,Andy Flower,Jonty Roods,Wasim Akram,Dennis Lilee,Muttiah Muralitharan

  • noorialiasgar52 on October 25, 2010, 5:34 GMT

    murali far better than warne and also all time highest wick taker is not considered jury's first choice ...its rather surprising why a jury selects such an important team...it should be selected by the fans all round the world ...as it would be the best team because they are impartial to anyone....

  • on October 25, 2010, 5:33 GMT

    Why isnt Keith Miller in any of the lists?

  • on October 25, 2010, 5:33 GMT

    Well done guys you picked one hell of a team. For people thinking the Murali should be picked above Warne is a joke. Yes he is the leading wicket taker of all time, but in terms of contribution to the team he was well below par with Warne. He also didn't have to contend with Mcgrath taking a whole lot of wickets from the other end. Picking a team based on statistics is a rubbish approach as cricket is as much a team game as an individual one. These players all excelled in teams that excelled because of their contributions and rightly deserve their spots in an all time 11.

  • on October 25, 2010, 5:31 GMT

    LOL.. this is rubbish!! Warn is in top 11?? best joke. and murali is out. No Brian Lara in top 11. this is almost a ausi and england team. you must name this as best( as it says) 11. not world 11. because this dose not represent the best players in other parts of the world. I would say Don Bradman is over rated in world cricket. he is a guy who just play with ordinary teams. specially with england!!! so we cant take him as a best player.. there are so many good players in modern cricket.

  • on October 25, 2010, 5:30 GMT

    I don't understand that the second XI has two spinners when the first XI only has one. I would have thought that McGrath would have at least made the second XI and actually would rate him higher than Lillee. I also feel that if you pick Warne, you pick McGrath, much the same as Greenidge and Haynes, Hayden and Langer etc. So either Murali makes the first XI, or you get rid of O'Reilly from the second XI. Still, I don't think there's any doubting that the cricketers chosen are definately among the finest of the game so there's not really any complaints here.

  • thecardiacnerd on October 25, 2010, 5:30 GMT

    finally the suspense is over!!!! man what a prolific team cricinfo has picked out.. no doubt that this team is a world beater. gr8 work guys....!!!! however my team had gavaskar n barry richards at the top. i understand sir jack hobbs being selected but lenny hutton edging out gavaskar is surprising. also as per one of the readers view..."for sheer keeping talents one wud pick allan knott coz this team surely dosent need to strenghten its batting... " so i think gilchrist cud also b replaced.(though he was part of my original world XI)

  • madubashana on October 25, 2010, 5:30 GMT

    Gilchrist in world eleven? Prolly Howard picked it, LOL Murali and Warne is always a debate, All others are fine But Gilchrist!!!!!

  • on October 25, 2010, 5:29 GMT

    hi good to see all time eleven..superb work

  • on October 25, 2010, 5:29 GMT

    Bit dissapointed not even one south african made it into the world eleven... Thank you for all the years of isolation apartheid... Sigh

  • on October 25, 2010, 5:29 GMT

    Who selected this team anyway? Rubbish selection considering Murali was not selected at all. The greatest spinner of all time with more 5 wicket hauls in an innings and 10 wicket hauls in a match than anyone else in the history of the game is left out of the first XI?????? Are you serious???????

    Just as how important Tendulkar is for the batting Murali is important for the bowling in any test XI.

    Any world XI without Murali is rubbish and will lose against any other XI picked.

  • KAPIL_DEAR_IN on October 25, 2010, 5:28 GMT


  • on October 25, 2010, 5:27 GMT

    No Ponting? Seriously if he batted on the flat tracks around the world like these others batsmen day in day out, he would have made 16,000 runs easy by now. And the debate on whether Warne or Muralitharan should be in the 1st XI is a joke, Warne is clearly the best player to even play world cricket I don't care what anyone says.

  • ns_krishnan on October 25, 2010, 5:27 GMT

    It is a bit surprising that McGrath who has bowled unbelievably well on some falt pitches of the 2000s does not merit a place. IMO he was better than Akram in Tests.But, in ODIs Akram was king.

  • on October 25, 2010, 5:26 GMT

    Rubbish team....its not the best teanm ever !!!! No sehwag as an Opener there !!!

    Sehwag deserves to be there !00 %.

    Adam Gilchrist does not deserve to be in this team anywhere !! kumar sangakara is the best As a batsman and as a wicketkeeper he is good.Sangakara has also leaded Sri Lanka team..so i think he is the best !! Sangakara has made 200 runs in an innings 7 times its After then DOn bradman and LARA.....

  • Rahul_78 on October 25, 2010, 5:26 GMT

    Glad to see that my selected team 80% matched the one selected by jury. Being indian I chose sehwag and gavaskar for the openers choice. Only argument I have about the chosen XI is virender sehwag should most definitely make it to the team. Never has been in the history of test cricket a greater game breaker at the top. Only gilchrist did the same but in lower middle order. Also it is very strange to see no mention of jack kallis in 1st, 2nd or readers XI. Very underrated player kallis has been.

  • on October 25, 2010, 5:25 GMT

    Well, I'm bit surprized not to have Imran Khan, The best ever leading talent in the world. All time XI should be lead by the great Imran Khan. Rest is O.K.

  • Bikram.Singh on October 25, 2010, 5:25 GMT


    Why there is no dravid in the ReaderXI - given that about 75% of the voters were indians, still no dravid......

    I think in india first there is sachin then there is daylight then sehwag....no dravid...

  • ROLAYH on October 25, 2010, 5:25 GMT

    I agree with First XI, but a major question arises is "Who will lead this side?".

    Where is Waqar? He should've been in the second list, i think...

  • MrMMJ on October 25, 2010, 5:23 GMT

    Mr.MMJ's World XI.. Mr.MMJ's World XI.. Sunil Gavaskar, Virender Sehwag, J Kallis, Brian Lara, George Hadlee, Richard Hadlee, Waqar Younus, Jeff Dujon, George Lohman, M Muralitharan. I would love to have Don Bradman and Sachin in my team but since they are picked by these experts then I have no choice. I believe Mr.MMJ world XI has upper hand against cricinfo world XI. Murali and Waqar are much better then Warne and Akram. Richard Hadlee is way too better bowler then Dennis Lillee. My surprise bowler who will rip apart this Cricinfo World XI is Geoge Lohman. No doubt Cricinfo bowling attack has capacity to take my 20 wickets but my bowlers can take 30 wickets in same amount of overs.

  • _NEUTRAL_Fan_ on October 25, 2010, 5:23 GMT

    @Gajendra Sharma, why do u have to sound so Indian? Fair enough XI, also shows that standards in cricket have dropped these days. Surprised also that Warne made it over Murali, I guess leg spinners just command more respect.

  • SoftwareStar on October 25, 2010, 5:22 GMT

    nice team.. no complaints even though it isnt exactly the team that i would pick

    couple of odd things though.. 1. the points don't reflect their actual difference in ability. e.g. Warne clobbers Murali in points.. but are they really that far apart! 2. however, if 8 out of 12 people vote for Warne over Murali, then can we safely project that to 800000 people or 8 million people? 3. how can they vote for Hobbs or Hutton. Are they really that many footages of these players? or is it just hear-say from their parents or older cricketers? 4. Similarly, have the judges seen footages of Headley; for him to stand so close to being missed out? or is it hear-say again? 5. can the jury list out the players they have watched live and the players they have watched only footages of. That would give us a better insight. E.g. in the WI 11 some time ago, Jimmy Adams had left out Lara even though he had watched Lara compile 153* at the other end. So, what was the basis of his omission

  • on October 25, 2010, 5:21 GMT

    I would have Murali in the first 11! I mean what more do u want a bowler to do..! I would replace Wasim Akram with McGrath.. Wasim had 414 wickets in 104 tests.. less than 4 wickets a match.. I think every bowler in there whould be at least that effective.. sure he had greater batting skills.. but they are not needed here with the kind of batting line up we have here..

  • on October 25, 2010, 5:20 GMT

    Why isn't Andy Flower here ? He was far better than Gilchrist as a test batsman and played more tough oppositions than Gilchrist. His keeping was also world class.

  • Sadeeshbala on October 25, 2010, 5:20 GMT

    this was a great work. the readers choice is looks typically mine. Thanks a lot CRICINFO. Hope to see the ODI World XI

  • danithereddevil on October 25, 2010, 5:20 GMT

    no imran khan in world eleven ...how did u do that...its totally false.......

  • _Australian_ on October 25, 2010, 5:17 GMT

    Gajendra Sharma comment, Are you suggesting that Sri Lanka and Pakistan are not part of the sub-continent? Warne has a very good record there. I think they got this spot on except I would have McGrath and Andy Flower in the second 11.

  • on October 25, 2010, 5:17 GMT

    Seriously?????????? No Gavaskar, Lara & Murali. If there was anyone representing India at a Test Level it must be Gavaskar. Gavaskar over Sachin as far as quality of test runs made.

  • BillyCC on October 25, 2010, 5:16 GMT

    Excellent team chosen by the panel, who are we to argue. I called it half correctly in that I thought the unaminous choices would be Bradman and Sobers, didn't think Warne would also be one. But hey, I'm not arguing.

  • kapilesh23 on October 25, 2010, 5:16 GMT

    tendulkar is only current cricketer in the all time world eleven and the only current cricketer in the legends of cricket on cricinfo .

  • on October 25, 2010, 5:16 GMT

    Not bad really, I think it's a fairly balanced team. Although there's always gonna be contention on the results. And not everyone will be happy with the ultimate line-up.

    As for Gajendra Sharma comments that S.Warne wasn't the greatest spin bowler - please if you are going to say something like that back it up with who you think is the greatest spinner then! Also I doubt that Gajendra has ever seen Jack Hobbs or Len Hutton play nor footage of them playing otherwise I doubt he'd complain.

  • on October 25, 2010, 5:15 GMT

    Wow!!! Look at our GOD. even in Readers choice. No Ponting that is much better.

  • on October 25, 2010, 5:14 GMT

    I Prefer the Readers XI compared to the other two.

  • Roger.TheGOD.Federer on October 25, 2010, 5:13 GMT

    I'm absolutely surprised that SIR RICHARD HADLEE IS MISSING ALL THE THREE TEAMS WHERE OVERRATED BOWLERS LIKES W AKRAM IS IN BEST XI !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I will pick up Hadlee for Tests and Chaminda Vaas for ODIs rather than Akram....


  • on October 25, 2010, 5:13 GMT

    I think this is as good as it gets. Should Lara have made it? At whose expenses? Should Botham have had a look in. Surely Tallon was a better keeper but who is to grudge Gilchrist a place in the all time greats list. I think most significantly a number of these players have provided enormous entertainment and brought people to the cricket grounds. Remember, many of them played before TV had reached its hey day and in some cases, was not even there. I think exercises like these are useful because it helps us remember the gloriious game that we have all inherited and need to sustain for posterity sridhar

  • on October 25, 2010, 5:12 GMT

    I think Andy Flower is a better choice than Sangakara....Its a shame that he played for Zimbabwe.

  • on October 25, 2010, 5:12 GMT

    do this for ODI's as well. Obviously Warne is not in the ODI side.

  • on October 25, 2010, 5:10 GMT

    Great honor for Wasim Akram, especially since his mentor Imran Khan and fellow paceman Waqar Yunus did not make it into the World XI. But I agree, it is a well-deserved selection. Marshall, Lillee and Wasim have to be the 3 most talented and complete pacemen in history ...

    Readers XI just goes to show our ignorance about the past greats except for 2 names Bradman and Sobers ...

    Feel sorry for Gavaskar missing out by a point ... he is surely right up there esp. with his record (being a subcontinent batsman) against the best paceball combo the world has seen .. the WestIndian fearsome foursome ... :(

  • on October 25, 2010, 5:09 GMT

    Mind Blowing side :O OMG !!!! Except the openers (as i dont know them) i,ve always been impressed by nearly all , Missing Imran khan the best all rounder i,ve seen & gavasker surely can edge out any of the openers.

    Proud to be a loyal fan of sir waseem akram too :) Love u waseem bhai

  • TheOnlyEmperor on October 25, 2010, 5:08 GMT

    I would be very very interested in reading the "first 11" and "2nd 11" choices of all 12 members of the cricinfo jury. That would speak volumes of how each of the jury members thought of the greats. Publishing their choices shouldn't be too much of an issue - after all they shouldn't be ashamed of the choices they made. After all, they were in the panel as "experts" weren't they? ;)

  • guru1323 on October 25, 2010, 5:08 GMT

    @Jagan7, u have to see which all-rounder, lara had to replace...SOBERS .no way..no way on earth

  • on October 25, 2010, 5:07 GMT

    WHAT A JOKE!!! That world XI will be beaten by the present top 5 test teams...remove Tendulkar, then you'll have a no contest. What is the damn point in such a time wasting excercise? No Curtly Ambrose or Holding or McGrath in top XI. Adam Gilchrist is simply overrated and what is Jack Hobbs doing...Ian Botham should be in for Dennis Lillee...Lillee just got 6 test wickets in the sub-continent and played a mare 4 matches (3 in Pak, 1 in SL) never played in India, once played in West Indies...when you take up these matches and wickets it is....5 matches 6 wickets @ 90.33 average...now thats even worst than Nathan Hauritz....

  • nzcricket174 on October 25, 2010, 5:06 GMT

    I love how mr 800 wickets has been shoved into the 2nd XI.

  • khan_man on October 25, 2010, 5:05 GMT

    a pretty useless exercise this business of making XIs.

  • hatrick26 on October 25, 2010, 5:02 GMT

    Actually it is pretty surprising that Sunny who had a great record against the best team at that time (Windies) got a nod over Warne who had a poor record against the best players of spin(India) and suprisingly Warne was unanimous which is really a travesty. Btw, I had both Sunny & Warne in my team and to be democratic, I included all players from the major test playing nations. Sanga,Hadlee,Sunny,Kallis in for Gilly,Lillee,Hutton,Viv.

  • ksmani on October 25, 2010, 5:01 GMT

    I am a reader, my 11 went exactly like others, except that instead of Lillee it was Marshall. Because that will give opponent no respite AT ALL !! Lets give whats due to gavaskar and sehwag; the hobbs, huttons, greenidges, haynes and haydens are very good, but gavaskar and sehwag looks better than them as of now. Just use a adobe photoshop and make the picture of Gavaskar and Sehwag holding the bat into "black and white". U will them better than a lot of other names.

  • ssenthil on October 25, 2010, 5:01 GMT

    No Complaints about the First Choice and Second Choice XI. But Reader's Choice shows what? Lack of Knowledge from the Current Fans - This also a Indicator of Tests need a Attention and looks like Indian Fans Voted more - Sehwag case

  • siddharth14 on October 25, 2010, 5:00 GMT

    A great selection, given the list to work with (except for the genius that didn't pick Tendulkar. Are you kidding me?) A surprise to see Warne and Lillee ahead of Murali and Hadlee/Ambrose but its a toss up. But no Hadlee/Ambrose or any west indian quick in the 2nd team is disappointing. O'Reilly must have been some playa!

  • asaduzzaman-khan on October 25, 2010, 5:00 GMT

    Warne is not better than Murali. Imran, Hadlee, Barnes and Mcgrath are much more better than Lille. Imran is also better than Wasim. I do not like this funny selection. Readers selection!!! may be most of the readers watch cricket after 90s and know only about Bradman from the history. A lot of fun here-- only 2 fast bowler, 2 spinner and one one spin all rounder!!- may be good only in Indian pitch.. Whole thing is funny!!!

  • PGW81 on October 25, 2010, 4:56 GMT

    Who will be the captain of this world XI and the second XI???? For the Second XI I guess Imran Khan will get to lead. For the world XI and readers XI will it be Warne who was often dubbed as the Greatest captain that Australia never had? While the selection has been made well I dont see the World XI featuring a successful captain at the helm. I mean many of these people have led their teams but not on a full fledged basis.... Gilly led Australia but was not that successful with the bat when leading, same with Sachin, Warne never led Australia - to lead a XI as this would require special leadership qualities.....

  • Gupta.Ankur on October 25, 2010, 4:56 GMT

    Yes the greatest batsman of all time Sachin tendulkar has made it to worldXI.............great moment for the legend...

  • on October 25, 2010, 4:55 GMT

    I think Imran (from first XI) and Hadlee (from both XIs) missed out because cricinfo mysteriously chose to play one all-rounder per team when it allowed the flexibility of selecting 1 or 2 all-rounders in the selections. It's also surprising that Warne gets selected unanimously. I was expecting him to win though I will personally put Murali before him, but I didn't think he will walk in without any competition!

  • safwan_Umair on October 25, 2010, 4:53 GMT

    replace bradman with Lara and Marshall with Imran, n the team wud be perfect... i say this cause how many genuinely world class bowlers did bradman ever face? he only once came up against hostile fast bowling (larwood), and averaged a mortal 52! while the likes of lara have had to tackle wasim, waqar, mcgrath, warne, donald n murali .... just a week back murali said that lara was the best he bowled to! unbelievable that they dont have the most aesthetically pleasing batsman ever in this list.... stats dont mean everything, instead the substance to carry a nation's hope means everything, thats whats makes imran, lara and sachin the best amongst the best!

  • AtifButt on October 25, 2010, 4:51 GMT

    Don Bradman is like two batsman. So we can exclude Viv and add Murli.

  • on October 25, 2010, 4:51 GMT

    Can't Agree to include Shane Warne...Indian tailenders can bat confidentally against Shane's spin...This is overrated....There are many good bowlers who deserves this ahead of Shane....

  • on October 25, 2010, 4:51 GMT

    No body will accept this,shane warn sucksssss,He is over rates because he is a aussie. This must be australian playing eleven.No one will aceept this .

  • Atul on October 25, 2010, 4:50 GMT

    I also agree that the Readers XI is a joke! Virender Sehwag barely made it to the Indian all time XI, and that was primarily because he has a grand total of one competitor in Merchant. Murali and Warne both in an all time XI is an all time joke!

  • sachin09 on October 25, 2010, 4:49 GMT

    When voting, I kept in mind that there is a HUGE difference in the batting and bowling conditions between now and in the past. Based on that I came up with my team, and I would find very hard to believe that there would be a team in the world who can beat my team.On the second thought, only thing I would have changed in my original selection was to replace Muralitharan with McGrath. Anyway, here is my original selection:

    Batsman: Gavaskar, Sehwag, Miandad, Tendulkar, Richards . All Rounders: Imran Khan, Richard Hadlee . Wicketkeeper: Gilchrist . Bowlers: Dennis Lillee Muralitharan Akram

  • on October 25, 2010, 4:48 GMT

    this debate will never end..dont waste ur breath arguing this one :)

  • on October 25, 2010, 4:48 GMT

    @Saxo- Given the sheer amount of cricket fans here, of course no. of Indians will be high among voters, and though the choice of opening positions can be argued upon,its not totally irrational. Gavaskar was a great opener no doubt and Sehwag has a knack of scoring at a pace to give his side a good opportunity to win. And both of them complement each other. I doubt its only the Indian voters who voted for them. If the voters had been so irrational, you would have seen a Kapil Dev and also may be a Kumble in the side. Indian bowling has always been week, but the batting has been as strong. This reflects in all the three teams selected.

    Surprised to see ponting figuring nowhere, c'mon does bad behaviour cost so much??? Think he should have been in the second XI

  • Vroomfondel on October 25, 2010, 4:47 GMT

    An excellent team without doubt but I think that George Headley would have been a better choice than Tendulkar. Tendulkar is undoubtedly the finest batsman of our time, but Headley is one of the finest ever. Given the opportunity in the modern game, he would be peerless (bar, perhaps, Bradman)

  • Atul on October 25, 2010, 4:47 GMT

    The all time XI differs from my choice in only two places - Hutton for Gavaskar and Gilly for Knott, and I see both were close. Sigh!

    But I dont see a mention of the captain for this side?? Who is the captain? I vote for Warney, the best captain Australia never had (in Chappell's words)

  • on October 25, 2010, 4:47 GMT

    Great Selection of world 11...Wasim akram is in because he is left arm swing bowler..and also legend while marshal and lillee are right arm fast bowlers...so great combination of fast bowlers...while shane warne is genuine spinner and Murli is more controversial and chuker...he has more than 100 wickets against bangladesh which are not count here...so warne is all time great spinner...Gilchrist is always best wicket keeper batsman...no doubt and batsman choices are truly outstanding.. srilankan batsmen are good a home against weak team only...Don't forget all juries were best at cricket thoughts...so accept it...and cheers.....

  • Rakesh_Sharma on October 25, 2010, 4:46 GMT

    @CricFan78 . Exactly the issue here is out of sight is out of mind. Yes you are right. Richard is a great great bowler. He should have been there in place of Wasim. Wasim is an overrated bowler.Mcgrath is there as well better than Wasim. Just see the posters here (05% all Indian posters , so any opinion is heavily tilted and biased. And all are teens who are posting here.

  • on October 25, 2010, 4:45 GMT

    Don Bradman, Sobers and perhaps Warne and Tendulkar are the only ones who will make to the XI without much argument.

    So it is futile to argue on whether someone is deserving or not...

    Those who say that Warne's record in India is bad have to remember that he won series for Aussies in SL and Pakistan. India were lucky to have Tendulkar who played him who very well.

    Happy to see my personal favourites Sachin, Richards, Imran and Akram in atleast one of the XI's. So the list is not all that rubbish according to me.

  • TheOnlyEmperor on October 25, 2010, 4:45 GMT

    The readers apparently don't think too much of English cricketers, excluding them completely from their list. I'm not sure at all that Glenn and Wasim would be better than Lillee and Marshall at their best. Warne and Murali hunting together is the most sensible pick, far better than the approach of the "captains and historians". Alan Knott being nominated ahead of Sanga is simply ridiculous. I've seen both play. Between the "first 11" and the "2nd 11", I see only one WI fast bowler. Ridiculous! I smell a clear "english/white bias" in the cricinfo selection.

  • on October 25, 2010, 4:44 GMT

    Sunil Gavaskar was a better job than Len Hutton. It just goes to show the bias on the part of jury, im surprised that it was not all english eleven atleast, choosing Lille over the west indian barrage, is a mere mockery. Lille was good, but holding struck fear in the hearts.

  • Kunal-Talgeri on October 25, 2010, 4:44 GMT

    Very nice selection. My team was: Sir Jack Hobbs, Barry Richards, Sir Donald Bradman, Sir Vivian Richards, Sachin Tendulkar, Sir Garry Sobers, Alan Knott (w/k), Malcolm Marshall, Shane Warne, Wasim Akram, Curtly Ambrose. I perhaps underestimated the impact of Dennis Lillee, but also took into account the Australian's limited exposure to the sub-continent. I found Ambrose's height factor across conditions to be of higher value than Joel Garner (though even Curtly had limited experience in the sub-continent.) And he was fast. My XI had 4 Windies, 2 Aussies, 2 Pommies, 1 South African, Pakistani and Indian each. Knott nudged ahead of Gilchrist, and there is only one cricketer as Sobers (so, Imran has to wait). :-) What a fun exercise.

  • on October 25, 2010, 4:44 GMT

    I think it is a fair assumption that most of the reader's were Indians. That is pretty much the only way Sehwag is going to get in. There are also a few astonishing absentees, Richard Hadlee and apparently everyone forgot that Andy Flower was a wicketkeeper, there is no way Gilchrist is better than Flower and there is absolutely no way Allan Knott is better than Flower. Imran Khan not being in the World XI is fair enough I think, when you have 4 bowlers you don't need a bowling all-rounder.

  • Nadeem1976 on October 25, 2010, 4:43 GMT

    Hahhaaaa. I am so proud that my most favorite cricketer ever has made to world evlen. The one and only wasim akram the master genius of all time. Finaly the world has recognized the genius and greatness of greatest left arm bowler the world has ever seen. He can bowl 60 different dilveries in 60 balls. There are doubts about right handers but there is no doubt that there is only one left handed the world has seen the best ever and that was Wasim Akram.

  • inswing on October 25, 2010, 4:42 GMT

    It seems that you get the most credit by hammering the English. Warne took a lot of wickets against them, and he beats a better bowler, Murli, who hardly played against them. Viv Richards played hist best against the English, so he gets into the first XI in place of George Headly. The 4 Australians also made their living against the English. If you cannot be English yourself, hammer the English to get into all time XIs.

  • Asif_Iqbal on October 25, 2010, 4:42 GMT

    Imran Khan is better than Lille and Marshal check the record Lille most of his cricket in bowling frendly codition and marshal is not an alrounder

  • on October 25, 2010, 4:42 GMT

    where is Jacques Kallis?? prolly the best no.3 ever!!! averaging 50 in South african conditions!! Get him in!!

  • Adeel-Shehzad on October 25, 2010, 4:42 GMT

    good efforts though.. but i am shocked that there is neither GREAT IMRAN KHAN nor MIANDAD in this side.. quite disappointed to see gilchrist as he is only a ODI player.. & Pakistani early legend fast bowler FAZAL MAHMOOD is far better choice than Dennis Lillee or it would be Sir Richard Hadlee... so im a bit nervous to see this world XI squad..

  • KiwiRocker- on October 25, 2010, 4:40 GMT

    What is a perfect cricketer? I define a perfect cricketer as someone who excels in every aspect of game. Is not it the same argument in every day to day world? Why is Imran Khan not there? Who is going to lead this team? Imran Khan is best ever all rounder. A complete cricketer of finest quality. He changed how the game was being played. He is better than Gary Sobers as Imran also was a very successful captain.He is head and shoulders above every other cricketer of any era. Why is Tendulkar there? He is not as good batsman as Lara. He saved himself continently facing best bowlers of his era. He has failed to score against Wasim, Waqar, McGrath and Donald. Where as Lara hammered everyone. Murali, Waqar, Wasim and Ambrose all said that Lara was the best.Does not their opinion count more than these average cricketers on the jury?Tendulkar should be lucky to be in second XI but it seems like like everything else BCCI also had their way with the world XI...Whole thing is a big fat joke!

  • Raktabh on October 25, 2010, 4:39 GMT

    Here is my XI: Barry Richards, Virender Sehwag, Jacques Kallis, Sachin Tendulkar, Sir Viv Richards, Kapil Dev, Sir Garry Sobers, Adam Gilchrist, Curtly Ambrose, Malcolm Marshall, Michael Holding. I cant imagine changing any of these players especially after looking at cricinfo's XI. personally for me if you have likes of marhsall, ambrose, holding, kapil dev on any ground in the world they will butcher you till u give away ur wicket...you dont need a spinner if u have a pace attack like the one mentioned in my list

  • sanathhs on October 25, 2010, 4:39 GMT

    How shane warne better than Murali..what a joke ?

  • DamithPathirana on October 25, 2010, 4:39 GMT

    Rubbish team, Warne was picked ahead of all time star Murali, this shows this is useless thing. I will never ever vote again for this CRICINFO maniac, surveys. Waste of time. No place for Murali, world greatest bowler of all time. Absolute joke. At least publish this post. I'm 100 % not agree with this team, even Bangladesh will beat them.

  • malik_Tahir on October 25, 2010, 4:38 GMT

    I think Imran khan , the greatest allrounder of all times deserve a place in World-XI so as waqar younis who posses the one of the best srtike rate in test cricket. In 1992 world cup when waqar missed it due to injury ,the captain of West Indies had said that 65% of the pressure is off as Waqar is not playing. he is the best exponent of When it comes to reverse swing with older ball. I think in place of shane warne, waqar should be in there.

  • on October 25, 2010, 4:37 GMT

    I find Richard Hadlee's omission very confusing. Among bowlers with more than 400 test wickets, he has the best economy rate and the second best average (after McGrath), yet neither he or McGrath make the first team. Very strange

  • AKG0479 on October 25, 2010, 4:36 GMT

    most ridiculous thing is what difference it makes by picking or not picking a particular player in world XI ! 100's of great test caps for more than 9 countries over 100 years and trying to select the best XI out of them.. & starting debates among the readers.. Ha.. tooo much. I have seen visual media going behind the so called TRP's... now cric info too.. please.. ! & every genrtn will hv their own greats, favorites n classy players.. making mess of their greatness, weakness thru such concepts is really a cheap act.

  • Ronita on October 25, 2010, 4:36 GMT

    My Selection: ALL TIME WORLD XI: B S BEDI (CAPTAIN), Don Bradman, Virender Sehwag, Gary Sobers, Brian Lara, Viv Richards, Adam Gilchrist, Malcolm Marshall, Shane Warne, Ian Botham, Denis Lillee 12th man Rahul Dravid

    Second Eleven: Imran Khan (Captain), Barry Richards, George Headley, Navjot Sidhu, Wally Hammond, Alan Knott, Bill O'Reilly, Fred Trueman, Derek Underwood SF Barnes, Bob Willis. 12th man Bob simpson

  • inswing on October 25, 2010, 4:35 GMT

    It is quite strange that Warne was unanimously picked, on the same level as Bradman and Sobers! He is not even the best spinner in his era. Any way you cut it. He belongs firmly in the second 11, and the strangest part is that there not not even a controversy about it.

  • SunilPotnis on October 25, 2010, 4:34 GMT

    The only change to world XI, replace Tendulkar with Gavaskar

  • narenvs on October 25, 2010, 4:33 GMT

    I like the jury's XI a lot, although I disagreed with three of their choices - picking Hammond, Knott and Imran instead of Viv Richards, Gilchrist and Wasim. With the jury's team, I'd go with Hutton as captain. I like the second XI as well, even if I would have chosen W.G.Grace and Miller over Barry Richards and Murali.

  • on October 25, 2010, 4:30 GMT

    Its immposible to fit in all greats.

  • rshn on October 25, 2010, 4:30 GMT

    awesome... great team selection. kudos! this is the best ever team!

  • yetigoat on October 25, 2010, 4:29 GMT

    The continual conclusion made by experts that Hadlee can't be considered as a just a bowler is frustrating. He is a better all round bowler than Lillee, maybe not quite as quick, but everything else is as good or better. And he's certainly better than Trueman

  • KiwiRocker- on October 25, 2010, 4:29 GMT

    Its a joke!How can Tendulkar be there? Imran Khan needs to be there.He was greatest cricket captain ever.Give us a break. Here is some hard cold facts about the most over rated batsman of world Tendulkar: In tests against Australia; Sachin averages a modest 36.77 against Australia when McGrath played. In test against SA; Sachin averages a pathetic 32 against South Africa whenever Allan Donald has played.Tendulkar was a failure against Wasim and Waqar and hardly played against them. He anyway averaged 32 runs against them. Interestingly he still averages around 40 against Pakistan. Against the 3 greatest fast bowlers of his era, whom he faced in more than one Test series, McGrath, Donald and Akram, Sachin has scored 1719 Test runs at a modest average of 34.3 (compared to his career average of 56). This is the very definition of being over-rated. You can not become best by scoring against Shane Warne. You need to score against the best to become the best.Just like Sir Viv Richards did!

  • Farce-Follower on October 25, 2010, 4:28 GMT

    Good selection...though a couple of names have sneaked in on the back of political correctness and demographic clout....

  • harshthakor on October 25, 2010, 4:27 GMT

    My teams are as follows

    1st team

    Jack Hobbs,Sunil Gavaskar,Don Bradman,Viv Richards,Sachin Tendulkar,Gary Sobers,Adam Gilchrist,Imran Khan,Malcolm Marshall,Shane Warne,Dennis Lillee.

    2nd team Barry Richards,Len Hutton,Ricky Ponting,Brian Lara,Graeme Pollock,Clyde Walcott,Ian Botham,Richard Hadlee,Wasim Akram,Glen Mcgrath,Muthiah Murlitharan.

    Ian Botham is a must inclusion in atleast the 2nd 11 ,being the best ever all-rounder after Gary Sobers in the period from 1977-1982,and at his peak the best match-winner amongst the all-rounders.Im a pure test match squad I would have replaced Viv Richards with Lara but with his brilliant one -day prowess Viv wins my vote.Considering he faced the greatest bowling ever and set records Gavaskar makes the 1st 11,ahead of Len Hutton.

  • 9ST9 on October 25, 2010, 4:27 GMT

    just imagine if SRT wasnt in this XI indian fans would locate cricinfos headquarters wherevere it is and burn it to the ground. While SRT is an obvious choice it is a life saving choice for Cricinfos staff as well.

  • smalishah84 on October 25, 2010, 4:25 GMT

    I am surprised that Wasim Akram is in and no place for Imran Khan???

  • Nepcrick on October 25, 2010, 4:25 GMT

    I wonder why Jaques Kallis is not there in the list. I think Jaques Kallis is the greatest allrounder that cricket has ever seen. I dont think any present national player can reach his milestone. And I am shocked to see Shewag there in the list. How come????

  • on October 25, 2010, 4:24 GMT

    It's a joke of the year.. world highest wicket-taker in all format not in the team...

  • on October 25, 2010, 4:23 GMT

    Well fire works have begin :D:D:D

    Grt that sachin is in team, else cricinfo waz for big flack,may be office of cricinfo waz in grave danger of been burnt down..haha..:D

  • on October 25, 2010, 4:23 GMT

    The readers' 11 had Lara in place of Richards? Strange

  • on October 25, 2010, 4:22 GMT

    Doesn't agree to any of this playing 11, I mean there is no point doing this excercise. Every Era, Every decade, every generation have some remarkable player and there is no comparision between them. E.g. any discussion if you compare Lara and Tendulkar has no meaning and seeing Lara not making to all time 11 is not acceptable. I am hardcore tendulkar fan but seeiing him malking over Lara when you have Sir Don in the samevteam is really asks for a world class left hander in your middle order. Going by the trend of Test cricket now a days Sehwag Missing as an opener for any time playing 11 is again not accpetable. Be it average, stike rate he has qualification critetia against all hundreds of opener in test cricket. I will suggest to have team made for every decade or twenty years rather then making a all time world 11. i will really want to have virual cricket match between choosen world 11 and reader's world 11..... so all great statistician and column writers are you ready for this

  • CricketkaFunda on October 25, 2010, 4:22 GMT

    I think they miss big time on Sunil Gavaskar and Virender sehwag as opener. This combination would hjave floored any bowling attack. Sunil Gavaskar, the greatest opener and most technical player of all time and Virender Sehwag most destructive opening batsman of all time. Poor jury.

  • on October 25, 2010, 4:21 GMT

    @ Gajendra Sharma : Gilchrist completely changed the role of the wicket keeper. Demolished sides in the one day arena, and could change a test match in an hour. After gilly paved the path for the rest of the world (a keeper can also be a batsmen) players like sangakara and dhoni emerged. So dont just say the first thing that comes to your mind, take a moment and think about it, before splurging it out. Its a sign of a wise man.

  • Ozcricketwriter on October 25, 2010, 4:20 GMT

    Good format. Good choices for who votes (though who exactly were the historians that picked teams?). Should be an annual event. See if we change our minds over time. Perhaps have a Current World XI and an All-Time World XI voted once per year in this manner. I don't 100% agree with the choices but they are close enough. I guess mainly I would have had Lara ahead of Viv Richards as my main change and probably Imran Khan instead of Wasim Akram. Oh and Murali ahead of Marshall. Not too bad though.

  • ravithecricbuff on October 25, 2010, 4:20 GMT

    And I do think Shane is little overrated...He was a toy when in India or playing against them..he was successful against everyone else..but against India he was murdered..always...And what to sau about GOD..may be for some reason unkown someone can keep Bradman away from this list..but you can not have a World XI without the GOD..he is the backbone the Father of ALL Greats..He is SACHIN TENDULKAR..Take A BOW!!

  • on October 25, 2010, 4:19 GMT

    Im sorry but no Richard Hadlee or Brian Lara in the 1st eleven is a HORRIBLE decision!! I guess the only guy to score 400 at Test level is just not good enough....

  • popcorn on October 25, 2010, 4:19 GMT

    Ricky Ponting isd the world's best no.3 batsman.He should have figured in the World XI or the Second XI.

  • on October 25, 2010, 4:17 GMT

    Well fire works have begun, I just cant imagine what would have happened if sachin was left out. cricinfo's office would have been burnt down ..hahaha.. :D

  • ravithecricbuff on October 25, 2010, 4:17 GMT

    can not make everyone happy...though sad that Sunil havaskar could be left out happy the Pointing did not make it...he is way way overrated!!

  • chandau on October 25, 2010, 4:16 GMT

    A world XI without the highest wicket taker in both forms of the game !!!! In ur dreams mate :)

  • chandanr on October 25, 2010, 4:16 GMT

    The team selected is pretty good one. i would have preferred Murali over Shane warne in spin bowling. when it comes to the openers sewhag and Sunil Gavaskar would have done a better job. Sewhag is the most destructive batsman. He has the ability to score huge runs less than run a ball. Sunil Gavaskar is the best batsman against pace bowling. We can see his record against the west indies .They had the great 4 fast bowlers, but Sunny would and have dominated them. According to me he is arguabl the best opener. This is my opinion.

  • RanaJ on October 25, 2010, 4:16 GMT

    100% agree with the choice of first 11, no complain at all. I am little surprised that only 11 jury members choose Tendulkar in their team not all 12, i am very sure it would be Ian Chappel who didn't choose Sachin Tendulkar in his 11, he has some problem with Sachin, never mind.

  • on October 25, 2010, 4:14 GMT

    And how criminally Hadlee has been overlooked from even the second XI. What a disrespect to the man that I rate among the 5 greatest of the previous century.

  • on October 25, 2010, 4:14 GMT

    I would take Barry Richards over Jack Hobbs and maybe play Imran khan as a bowler over Malcom Marshall thats about it. Great team !

  • sammonkey on October 25, 2010, 4:14 GMT

    good job cricinfo team....great team

  • VirajSam on October 25, 2010, 4:13 GMT

    I strongly believe , murali should be in first XI

  • Youie on October 25, 2010, 4:13 GMT

    I'm sorry, Das, but i've got some gripes with the two XI teams and I question them and I have a right mind!

    1. I'd have Sir Richard Hadlee in the first XI ahead of Wasim Akram. Pakistan has never produced a truly great player. Some magical and some interesting ones, but never truly great. You could then bat Sir Richard Hadlee ahead of Malcolm Marshall. What a team! 2. In the second XI, there is absolutely no space for Virender Sehwag or Sunil Gavaskar. How can they be there above Gordon Greenidge, Desmond Haynes and even Mark Taylor? Remember, Greenidge and Haynes didn't play against the woeful Zimbabwe and Bangladesh teams too many times if at all.

    The judges selected one Indian in each team whereas the 'public' selected three in one team! Geez, I wonder what nationality holds ownership of Cricinfo and constitutes the majority of the readers? Let me think now....um...er...New Zealand?

    C'mon get real. These 'XIs' are not worth the screens they are typed on!

  • ashishkumar36 on October 25, 2010, 4:13 GMT

    Great Great Great choices......This is what we call All Time World XI. The only difference between ESPNCricinfo and My All Time XI is Sunil Gavaskar in place of Sir Len Hutton. But Len Hutton is also a very good choice.... I would pick Imran Khan as 12th man. Once again I congratulate to the jury to pick so nice World All time XI. Please start All Time XI for One Day International Cricket Too.

  • bridget01 on October 25, 2010, 4:13 GMT

    Good to see Murali not in there. It shows that the selectors took his 'chucking' into consideration - as his record is better than Warnes. I would not have picked Tendulkar - Pollock, Headley or Lara ahead of him. I would have picked Sehwag.....match winner, scores huge hundreds McGrath ahead of Akram

  • on October 25, 2010, 4:12 GMT

    Great mockery: I don know how warne came ahead of Murali(highest wicket taker), Gilchrist ahead of Sangakkara( Sanga is better than Gilchrist in test cricket.). Also Lara and McGrath deserve to be in XI

  • Rakesh_Sharma on October 25, 2010, 4:11 GMT

    Surprising that Sunil Gavaskar is in Second XI and not Matthew Hayden, Ponting, Kallis, Gavaskar is known for making games dull , boring draws.He was just an above average player who played for long periods of time. That's all.Infact Brian Lara's name shoild be there in all three lists and Gavaskars in none.

    What about Ambrose, Garner, Holding. These bowlers were way better than wasim Akram. It lo

    the selection policy here is " Out of sight is Out of mind".

    With regards to Readers XI is nothing surprising as basically 95 % hits are from Indian visitors that also below 25 years. Also Indian opinion is heavily biased in favour of Pakistani players historically. They have a wrong psychological feeling that they are deadly and good.

  • fouzan on October 25, 2010, 4:11 GMT

    I was expecting IMRAN KHAN

  • on October 25, 2010, 4:10 GMT

    Wasim Akram over Imran Khan is a travesty. Wasim had a disproportionately higher % of tail enders wickets, yet had a poorer average than Imran. Not to mention superior batting and leadership skills of Imran. Warne over Murali to a lesser extent is unfair too. And Lillee remains the most over-rated bowler ever. Hadlee, McGrath, Ambrose and Trueman should be there ahead of him.

  • Green-Beret on October 25, 2010, 4:09 GMT

    What about the captain ?

  • harshthakor on October 25, 2010, 4:08 GMT

    I agree with Tendulkar being in 1st 11 ,being the most complete batsman of all in both forms of the game.Imran Khan should had made the 1st 11,being such a great match-winning bowling allrounder,and posessing ability to swing an old and new ball with ferocious pace.Imran was a greater match-winner than Akram and an ideal accomplice to Sobers.Considering his brilliant consistency in a crisis and ability to compile mammoth scores Lara may have edged Viv Richards in the 1st 11.However that was neck to neck.Glen Mcgrath atleast has ro be in the 2nd 11 ,if not the 1st,with his brilliant record and control as a fast bowler.Graeme Pollock was my chice in the 2nd 11 with hos brilliant performances ,in the most testing conditions,averaging only 2nd to Bradman.Ricky Ponting should have made ot in the 2nd list,being statistically the closest to Tendulkar.

  • PGW81 on October 25, 2010, 4:08 GMT

    A very good selection. I would have had Holding instead of Lillee. Anyway this is a good team. even the second XI is formidable. But I have some reservations on the reader's XI - for a test team the openers must be reliable and capable of batting patiently and build up a formidable score - while Sehwag has scored runs a lot of times, he does not fit the bill of a test opener - with players like Haynes, Hayden, Gooch,Mark Taylor, G Kirsten etc, Sehwag should not have been picked up - a right left combination of Gavaskar and Hayden/Taylor would have been a better choice.

  • Kangon on October 25, 2010, 4:07 GMT

    Where is Srikar Dawan? Bradman is better than Srikar Dawan? Are you kidding? :P

  • sanathhs on October 25, 2010, 4:07 GMT

    How Shane warne go to The World XI and Murali go to The Second XI .Only reason is Warne is from Ausi and Murali came from small country like Sri lanaka. What a joke ?

  • on October 25, 2010, 4:06 GMT

    Sehwag in readers' XI. Lol! Overall very good list though

  • on October 25, 2010, 4:05 GMT

    Shocker to see no McGrath in the ESPN XI in first or second team. Otherwise awesome team. Close enuf to my team. I had McGrath for Lillie, Imran for Akram and Sehwag for Hutton. But, I can see Sehwags career hasn't played out yet. Akram over Imran as a pure bowler (esp Left Handed) is understandable. Lillie and McGrath are too close to call.

  • on October 25, 2010, 4:05 GMT

    Surprised to see the likes of Virender Sehwag in Reader's XI! No doubt Sehwag is a brilliant player and he is a modern day hero for India but he is not a legend yet! There were more deserving players for the opening spot.

  • dksimple on October 25, 2010, 4:05 GMT

    Sunil Gavaskar, Virender Sehwag, Don Bradman, Sachin Tendulkar, Brian Lara, Garry Sobers, Adam Gilchrist, Shane Warne, Wasim Akram, Muttiah Muralitharan, Glenn McGrath these is the team

  • on October 25, 2010, 4:04 GMT

    Excellent choices and wonderful idea. I would like to see the stats comparison of this XI with any of the national squads. Can the statsguru people do it???

  • Saxo on October 25, 2010, 4:04 GMT

    Hey CricInfo Staff,

    After the dust settles down on the Test XI, could you please do a One Day XI series?

  • on October 25, 2010, 4:03 GMT

    A good choice as it would be impossible to satisfy every one. But picking George Headley is somewhat perplexing as he did not play enough matches to prove that in the long run he would have continued in the same fashion, so this is more of conjecture by picking him ahead of some other greats.

  • rickeyre on October 25, 2010, 4:03 GMT

    Adam Gilchrist, the greatest wicket-keeper of all time? Sorry, no. Rest of the 11 looks great, even if the bowlers are all post-1970. Interesting, too, to see Barry Richards named in the second XI with little more than county cricket to show for his effort. Career aggregates, quite rightly, mean little.

  • nlambda on October 25, 2010, 4:02 GMT

    Let the bouquets and brickbats begin... I am somewhat disappointed by the selection of W. Akram. Surely he is not a better bowler than Ambrose? And on what grounds was he preferred to Barnes? If someone from Pak had to be included for "representation purposes" then why was Imran Khan not chosen ahead of Akram when Imran's Wkt/Match and Runs/Wkt are both superior to Akram's, plus he was a far superior batsman.

  • safwan_Umair on October 25, 2010, 4:00 GMT

    its atrocious that perhaps the most complete player in cricketing history didn't make it to the all-time eleven .... one of wisden's editors commented once : imran should captain an all time world eleven! alas, he doesnt even find a place in it as a player.....testimony to the fact that the world jury was infact a bunch of jokers!

  • Prashant007Geetam on October 25, 2010, 3:59 GMT

    Good One but no Victor Trumper is a bit surprising. And for the Readers XI I would like to say that majority of readers dont have knowledge about the Greats of cricket history, no need to pick Readers XI.

  • Saxo on October 25, 2010, 3:59 GMT

    Readers' choice XI without Marshall indicates the ignorance of the readers. There must be a lot of Indians who voted (going by Gavaskar and Sehwag) and it is surprising they don't remember Marshall's bowling wiping the floor with Indian batsmen in India!

    With Marshall in the team, you don't need spinners, let alone two of them:)

    My XI was pretty close to the jury selection, except I had Walter Hammond (in place of Viv Richards, who barely averages 50 in Tests) and SF Barnes (replacing Lillee) - 4 Englishmen, 3 Aussies, 2 Windies, 1 Indian and 1 Pak.

  • on October 25, 2010, 3:59 GMT

    well its the world eleven ......... no complaints folks excellent work !!!!!!!!

  • Biggus on October 25, 2010, 3:59 GMT

    Fine side with good balance. Now I'm getting out of here before the fireworks start.....Incoming!

  • on October 25, 2010, 3:56 GMT

    Jack Hobbs,Brian Lara,Don Bradman,Sachin Tendulkar,Viv Richards,Gary Sobers,Andy Flower,Wasim Akram,Dennis Lilee,Jeff Thompson,Muttiah Muralitharan

  • Jagan7 on October 25, 2010, 3:56 GMT

    The Best Team possible for a World XI.... Kudos to Cricinfo for this effort and more so for involving the readers. Loved each and part of this World XI series.. Especially the alternate ones like "On the Other Hand"...And Brian Lara deserves a place in any all time world XI for the sheer appetite for long innings and runs that he accumulated... Its hard to replace anyone in the published World-XI.. But One All rounder could have been sacrificed for Brian Lara..

  • knowledge_eater on October 25, 2010, 3:55 GMT

    Thats very solid teams. Great work Cricinfo. Now do this for ODI.

  • on October 25, 2010, 3:55 GMT

    Rubbish! Sunil Gavaskar is the greatest opener of all time. Shane warne is not the greatest spinner of all time, given his record in the subcontinent. Adam gilchrist is overrated.

  • on October 25, 2010, 3:55 GMT

    Big fan of the 1st 11, much more so than the readers 11, although that is understandably filled only with players from recent memory. @ arnabSA I completely agree - great choices, no McGrath is a little surprising but very good all the same

  • VirajSam on October 25, 2010, 3:54 GMT

    where d f is murali ? . lol , worlds highest wicket taker not in the squad .

  • CrazyDeepak on October 25, 2010, 3:53 GMT

    This is one perfect team picked up by the jury. But I would have preferred another spinner to compete in all conditions. People would argue that Garry Sobers could play that role, but a genuine spinner would have made it more balanced. 2 fast bowlers (Wasim and Malcolm), 2 spinners (Warne and Murali) and Sobers could bowl medium fast or spin depending on the conditions. But still this is a very good team. Cheers.

    Deepak Kothari

  • cricket__fan on October 25, 2010, 3:52 GMT

    Shane Warne has a miserable record against good players of spin bowling and yet he is in the XI, this is very surprising. Indian spinners of the 70s were far better than him. Also Lille's record outside of Australia and England is hardly worth even a mention and yet he finds a place in the all time XI. Some strange selections, in my view.

  • CricFan78 on October 25, 2010, 3:50 GMT

    This was always going to create lot of debate. However I must say as an Indian fan that omission of Richard Hadlee from either of XIs is a big joke and credibility of this whole jury has gone for big toss.

  • on October 25, 2010, 3:46 GMT

    what the hell test crickets leading wicket taker is not in the all time XI.it's got to be a joke of some kind.World XI without muraly is a joke.

  • on October 25, 2010, 3:42 GMT

    I'm very pleased with this list because it is the same as mine, bar 1. For the opening spots I had Victor Trumper and Sir Jack Hobbs, but that's the only difference! Woo!

  • on October 25, 2010, 3:40 GMT

    No complaints. I repeat, no complaints. No one in their right mind would question the first World XI. There, I said it.

  • thewayitwas on October 25, 2010, 3:40 GMT

    excellent choices! no mcgrath in either first or 2nd 11 is surprising, otherwise fair enough you cant include everyone!

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • thewayitwas on October 25, 2010, 3:40 GMT

    excellent choices! no mcgrath in either first or 2nd 11 is surprising, otherwise fair enough you cant include everyone!

  • on October 25, 2010, 3:40 GMT

    No complaints. I repeat, no complaints. No one in their right mind would question the first World XI. There, I said it.

  • on October 25, 2010, 3:42 GMT

    I'm very pleased with this list because it is the same as mine, bar 1. For the opening spots I had Victor Trumper and Sir Jack Hobbs, but that's the only difference! Woo!

  • on October 25, 2010, 3:46 GMT

    what the hell test crickets leading wicket taker is not in the all time XI.it's got to be a joke of some kind.World XI without muraly is a joke.

  • CricFan78 on October 25, 2010, 3:50 GMT

    This was always going to create lot of debate. However I must say as an Indian fan that omission of Richard Hadlee from either of XIs is a big joke and credibility of this whole jury has gone for big toss.

  • cricket__fan on October 25, 2010, 3:52 GMT

    Shane Warne has a miserable record against good players of spin bowling and yet he is in the XI, this is very surprising. Indian spinners of the 70s were far better than him. Also Lille's record outside of Australia and England is hardly worth even a mention and yet he finds a place in the all time XI. Some strange selections, in my view.

  • CrazyDeepak on October 25, 2010, 3:53 GMT

    This is one perfect team picked up by the jury. But I would have preferred another spinner to compete in all conditions. People would argue that Garry Sobers could play that role, but a genuine spinner would have made it more balanced. 2 fast bowlers (Wasim and Malcolm), 2 spinners (Warne and Murali) and Sobers could bowl medium fast or spin depending on the conditions. But still this is a very good team. Cheers.

    Deepak Kothari

  • VirajSam on October 25, 2010, 3:54 GMT

    where d f is murali ? . lol , worlds highest wicket taker not in the squad .

  • on October 25, 2010, 3:55 GMT

    Big fan of the 1st 11, much more so than the readers 11, although that is understandably filled only with players from recent memory. @ arnabSA I completely agree - great choices, no McGrath is a little surprising but very good all the same

  • on October 25, 2010, 3:55 GMT

    Rubbish! Sunil Gavaskar is the greatest opener of all time. Shane warne is not the greatest spinner of all time, given his record in the subcontinent. Adam gilchrist is overrated.