Richie Benaud's Fantasy XI... Opening Batsmen - Part 1 

Agree bro!!!

True. Totally agree.They took commentary to another level.

Ian Chappell as well...

They were the sounds of summer.. hadn't had anyone in that Ilk since they left the party..

paul murray try.

Bill Lawrry and Ian Chappell are best from Oz. Benaud is good too. Tony Greig is awful but somehow famous in india

@@firstal3799 awful at what? Commentary? You must be joking.

Yes commentary. He has hardly anything insightful to say, nor was he sophisticated or interesting in his delivery style. He had some pretty lame things to say which seemed to excite the gallery crowds in India for some reason. ( famous example is dancing in the aisles) He was also patronizing if not downright condescending ( towards Indian and other subcontinent teams)

@@firstal3799 well I'm not going to argue with you but I must say, you're the first person I've come across who has anything really negative to say about anyone on the great channel 9 panel.

Very well said my friend.

Completely agree. Well said.

What about all the rest that have been excellent for their Country?

Correct!!!!!

I think we now have to add Lillee and Warne.

Roger Kay I saw him in ja. Wen I was going school. With the likes of k Miller. Ron archer. Colin McDonald. That was a bad ads team lol

Sadly missed

absolutely !!

South Africa would have produced many all time greats if they were not banned from International cricket

Can’t disagree with you. Barry Richards was also brilliant in Packers WSC in 1977 and 1978. Averaged over 70 in both Test Cricket and WSC Packer cricket.

Grenidge and Barry Richards for me or Hayden and Langer.. Simple.

I would add Denis Compton to the team.

Rules say you can't have chuckers

J PL Also he was quicker to a thousand test match runs than Bradman, he made them in exactly 10 innings at an average of 100.

Sutcliffe was very very unlucky not to be classed as the all time best, not just as an opener, barring only Grace. I picked Hobbs as Grace's opening partner, but truth to tell it was a toss up between him and Sutcliffe. Bradman I think may have affected peoples perception of Sutcliffe by describing him as the luckiest player he ever played against. This was blatantly unfair and says more about Bradman than Sutcliffe. Bradman couldn't find a place in his world 11 for the likes of Hammond, Hutton or Hobbs, nor for S.F. Barnes, Jim Laker and most definitely not Larwood. He was clearly partisan and I think Bedser was the only Englishman I his 11. I would place Hobbs , Sutcliffe and Grace above Bradman as they were all openers whose abilities more often than not protected the rest of the order from the new ball in the hands of fresh bowlers. Bradman surely benefitted from coming in at 3 behind Woodfull and Ponsford.

@@robertcameron3709 You're embarassing yourself... Sutcliffe Hobbs had more ability than Bradman!? Gimme a break 😂

@@ThankYouGoogle4 not embarrassed at all. Great openers are worth their weight in gold . George Hedley, who knew a bit about batting, felt his average (62) suffered because the West Indian openers of his time were poor. He invariably faced the new ball when it was an over or two old. Bradman came in behind Posford and Woodful when the ball was softer and had lost its lateral movement. The strike bowlers would not have been at their freshest either. Bradman was truly great, but he couldn't open.

@@robertcameron3709 When you put out an absolute statement like "He couldn't open" even though you're speculating, you come out as a unilateral thinker. Woodford and Ponsford retired in 1934. Even before Bradman had hit the midway of his career. Bradman has a staggering average spread across 5 different batting positions and has staggering average on each individual position as well. 70% batting at number 3 and another 30% at other positions for various reasons. And in a career that spanned across 20 years (war deprived him of playing more tests), you're telling me his openers never gave him the unfortunate opportunity to be a virtual opener? Well since you were just speculating and I wanted to make sure I was backing the right guy, I actually went ahead and checked a lot of scorecards. Guess what, prior to 1934 there have been innings where openers got out cheaply and Bradman came in and scored big. After 1934 when Woodful and Ponsford retired, he still has innings where he scored coming in at early stage. I saw 7 random innings where opener got out in less than 10 balls and Bradman came and still scored big (1 triple ton, 2 doubles, 1 century, 3 50s); 4 times he failed (less than 50). Pardon me because I could only check random 15-20 scorecards... And I excluded matches from Jardine's bodyline since Australia as a whole struggled with that negative tactic (even in that Bradman as I recall averaged high but not by his standards). Really can't dig through all of them scorecards. But yeah just because he could capitalise a lot more and Australia could benefit a lot more from him with a slight softer ball, there is absolutely no concrete evidence that would suggest he couldn't be a successful opener if Australia needed him be. I checked for an article by CricketCountry which presented a narrative of how Bradman failed in the experiment of being an opener. But even they failed to realise that Bradman had infact played another test with him being an opener in a follow-on innings : "In a trial match to select the team that would tour England, he was last man out in the first innings for 124. As his team followed on, the skipper Bill Woodfull asked Bradman to keep the pads on and open the second innings. By the end of play, he was 205 not out, on his way to 225". Look I understand your personal regard towards openers and in my opinion they deserve much more credit than they get. But to say any cricketer, be at any position, had more ability than Bradman, then remember the words of great Richie Benaud. "I infact started my career when Bradman retired so I only had the fortune of witnessing him play. But the people who have played with or against him would tell you that there was no player that could remotely be put in same category as him. He was just in another bracket." And in my opinion number 3 is infact the toughest position to bat at because you have to play dual role and you have to be technically the best batsman. If the openers play their part, you have to score big because they have already laid foundation for you. If they get out cheaply then you to have come and act as opener and provide stability. A batsman coming in at number 3 actually posses the qualities of opener and number 4 batsman. And he marvelled at number 3 (Played and scored big even when opener got out really early). You can verify all the numbers I presented.

Refused to commentate on non terrestrial broadcast cricket mate. Sadly now r.i.p what a man

This is the bravest selection I have ever seen! M'Lord, you have guts! Only, I would replace that self-server at No.2 with Viv Richards, and Khan with Murali.

Always take your meds

@@Zed137 And remember your mother told you not to play in the traffic on your way to Centrelink.

Good team, but I'd have Hobbs at the top over Hayden, and you can throw a hat over the difference between Len Hutton and Sunny Gavaskar. Other than that, I'd take I. Khan over Wasim Akram, and McGrath over Ambrose. But your team is fantastic too.

World xi --- 1.gavaskar 2.lara 3.barry 4.ponting 5.kallies 6.sangakara 7.kapil 8.imran 9.kumble 10.holding 11.thompson .

I century in over 30 innings in Australia averaging 30.

Loved Tubby, I think you'd want him as captain and selector too, but then you'd have a problem: he's too humble to pick himself.

When and where did Richie Benaud has publish his Ashes XI?

@@Billie0708 i made this based on his 2004 All time XI shortlist

Yes, an absolute tragedy that his career was cut short by politics. He only went out once he got bored.

Barry Richards - South Africa.

For whatever reason Richie left him out. Possibly because due to circumstances beyond his control he didn't have that long test career. However a lot of experts (including Bradman) pick Barry in their greatest test team. Me personally I saw him play in World Series Cricket in Australia, smashing a West Indies attack (Roberts / Garner) everywhere. Barry was the real deal.

How about Grace and Shrewsbury. Grace will always stand head and shoulders above the rest. When asked who he would pick as the best he replied " give me Arthur "

@@robertcameron3709 The cold hard stats favour Hobbes and Sutcliffe, to this day. 3249 runs at an average of 87.81. And 15 century partnerships in 38 innings. To put that into context the second best pair are Bill Lawry and Bob Simpson with an average of 60.94. Hobbes and Sutcliffe are to opening partnerships what Don Bradman is to middle order batsmen. Which is to say, half as good again as the next best.

hahahahahaha. in what world would sobers be a 12th man?

Hayden was a flat track bully. Ponting can't play spin. And you can't spell for shit. WTF is Sobars

Who is Hanton, and where is no.5?

@@mikespearwood3914,must be Hutton I guess, and having such a good side they can afford to go in one man light 😳😉

Like dis team

Holding for MM

Ýt

Sehwag is a pussy

As long as it is flat track :-)

Virender was only starting his career when this was filmed

Why not Khan for Botham? He was the better bowler as well as the better batter.

@@srinathprakash882 Fair comment. I am in the same academic year as Imran Khan and played against him every year all through secondary school. He was good, but not as utterly brilliant as he later became in the professional game. Of course, I cannot forget Botham at Headingly in 1981, so am very possibly biased. Imran may very well be a better choice. As I said when you are looking at the very best of the very best, differences are minute. Would Botham's exemplary work at second slip come into the equation?

@@markcheckley3715 Wow! That's incredible. Well, one thing I noticed was, ever since 1983/84, Botham's performance went downhill. So, his effectiveness stops at the age of 28. Imran was a top AR till the age of 35. So, if this XI goes In, Imran gives you 7 extra years.

@@srinathprakash882 Yes but I only need 5 days 😀Actually, you could probably have both of them, with Sobers batting at 5, Gilchrist 6, then Botham, Kahn, Hadlee in almost any order and Marshall and Warne bringing up the rear. You would still have virtually endless batting, and world-class bowling that could keep up the pressure indefinitely, with 5 quicks.

@@markcheckley3715 Ahh... That works great.

Saraaf Sameen excellent

Paul EJ in the same way those who use modern bats are also likely to get out more easily because the ball taking the edges of the bat or slight mishit can carry the ball to the fielder rather than falling short of the fielder...

LOL! I've often wondered that about Greenidge. It's only after watching film of him after he retired I was able to fully appreciate just how brutal a batsman he was. He looked like he was punishing the ball and I can only imagine what he'd do with a modern bat.

@@paulmurray8922, he only averaged 30 in test matches in Australia with one century in 32 innings.

How old r u ?

why dont yu add yourself?

I can't believe you've only got Indians, and STILL you decided not to put Sachin Tendulkar on your list!

Dat india bess team

Rubbish 11 dude. ..learn cricket and comment later

Put them against the Invincibles of '48!

He rep is based on his performance in county cricket. Played only a single Test series. Imagine, had India been banned from international sport after Gavaskar's first series against West Indies, he would have been considered greater than Bradman! No, BA Rrichards never proved himself at the highest level, so we can dream on.

tryarunm Absolute rubbish. Barry Richards' rep was earned at the highest level when available - outscored Viv Richards when they batted together at Gloucester Park in Perth for the World IX against Australia in the Supertest in WSC better than 2 to 1 when Viv was in his prime & where Barry finished as not only the highest scoring batsman in WSC, but the one with the highest average - at a time when he had been out of International cricket for over 8 years! He scored double hundreds against touring MCC sides in Oz, broke all kinds of Sheffield Shield records when he played for SA in Oz in 71 where he scored 356 in 371 minutes against a near Australian test strength attack ... added to his 72+ Test average for admittedly a severely shortened test career & enforced sojourn due to no fault of his own. Added to that, Bradman's on-record assertion that if Apartheid hadn't stopped him from being excluded from Test cricket, that both he & Graeme Pollock would've likely been the greatest right-handed & left handed batsmen respectively the world had ever seen. Oh, and there was the small matter of his English county record to consider as well, where again, when tested at the highest level against national touring sides against Hampshire, he slaughtered the best attacks in the world. Seriously, do some research before making such a ridiculous and untrue statement about B.A. Richards - he was unbelievably good - and if he was Sir Don Bradman's first pick as opener for Bradman's All Time IX, then that will about do me as a measure of how highly regarded Barry Richards was amongst his peers.

o0Sandfly0o Can't agree more.Barry was technically very sound and fearless.It is very unfortunate that because of the ban on their country,we couldn't see much of players like B.Richards and G.Pollock.As my name suggests,Iam from Pakistan but I got great respect for these two greats.As for as this guy "tryarunm" is concerned,obviously he got no knowledge of cricket so he is very ignorable.

tahir ali he is not much better than Gavaskar

couldnt agree more

I would have somehow found room for Viv Richards and Michael holding

You've never made a slip?!?! The man was elderly. Show. Some. Respect.

It must have been his career span