honestly with england traditionally not known for aggressive cricket i would think that maybe in hindsite they should have been part of the world XI and australia being traditionally more aggressive cricketers could have had their own XI with bradman in it! i would still take bradman over anyother pre 1970's batsman for the very reason the price of his wicket eclipses any other. give him a big kahuna kookaburra bat aswell as a nice hard flat wicket of the current era im pretty sure he could score 10+ and over if the situation required it!

I would think Bapu Nadkarni would atleast be worth a mention for his legendary economy. I haven't seen him or Tayfield bowl to know who's the better bowler, but Nadkarni surpasses Tayfield in economy and was a better bat.

Please read up more about the Don before you decide that he won't play shots in the air.
Any man who can hit 300 in a day...

No Gilbert Jessop?

[Mike: I think you'll find he was an England player. How about reading my previous post?]

How can the author describe so much on the innings and the batting style of cricketers, in 1920s era. I wonder if he was around that time, but his description is as if he has seen them playing live :)

[Mike: I have read a large amount about that period.]

Agree with victoria above. The Don cannot be left out of any World XI ever and I dont think a Twenty20 World XI should be an exception. He might not have hit too many sixes in his career, but then its not all about sixes, is it? I'm sure he would've scored as quick as any of the gentlemen above without taking even half the risk! I've heard stories about how he used conduct a round-up towards the end of the day's play in first-class matches, that is, hit each successive delivery progressively from third man to fine leg, irrespective of where the ball was pitched! Imagine what such a man would've done in a Twenty20 game!

There's never an excuse for leaving Bradman out of a team. My grandfather recalls watching him play on a number of occasions and saying he would have scored a lot faster had there been any need to.
Also, surely a guy with a nickname of "Slasher" McCabe should be selected if only for name alone.

Just pick an Aussie side, forget the rest.
Trumper, McCabe, Neil Harvey,Hassett, Warwick Armstrong, McCartney, Miller, Benaud, Davidson, Lindwall, Tallon.
And that still follows your flimsy excuse to leave the Don out.

I must disagree with you on Bradman - didn't he score a 22-ball hundred once? (not a first class match, but still a jaw-dropping achievement)
Your side's bowling seems to have all bowling options covered - leg and off spin, Macartney's left arm orthodox, right and left arm pacemen - well done!
But sadly, your team, and the team I picked in the comments on your previous post, lacks left handed batsmen apart from Davidson - perhaps Bert Sutcliffe or Jack Gregory instead of Weekes or Nayudu?

I love the two teams you have picked. Guess, Bradman would have been wasted in Twenty20, given his class of batsmanship. That said, if you see Rahul Dravid's batting in IPL 2009, he didn't need to take the aerial route to be productive. Given that Bradman had a greater range of strokes than ‘The Wall’, he would have improvised to spectators' delight. People from any era will come to see Bradman go “slam, bang”! Nevertheless, nicely-selected teams! And I wish a certain HG Wells book could be realised technologically to enjoy these two teams play each other. Cheers!

Also, wouldn't Benaud have been missed in the commentary box if he had to captain this side? :-P

nice to see c k nayudu comin in the team.vijay hazare should also have made it.

there is no mention of Garfield Sobers in your eleven. He would be superior in any position.

[Mike: Sobers played after 1970 and is therefore ineligible.]

I'm not sure if Dennis Lindsay meets your 1970 criterion but it's hard to think of a 'keeper/batsman more suited to Twenty20.

I've always thought you should pick your best keeper for 20/20 matches, regardless of batting ability.

The runs he saves through standing up to the medium pacers and the wickets he saves through catches/stumpings more than make up for any potential lost runs - how often do the tail bat in 20/20 matches? Not often i'd say.

James Foster in the last 20/20 World Cup and Ben Scott for Middx in recent years have shown this tactic can work well.

Therefore, I would pick Godfrey Evans for the England team and Don Tallon for the ROW XI.

And one player I thought was missing and who could play for either England or ROW is Albert Trott (he represented both England & Australia in tests) - the only man to hit the ball over the pavillion at Lords and a good fast medium bowler - a player ideally suited to 20/20 i'd say.

my wish i can watch all these playing but...... lol,anyways a good team nice to see Uncle Fazal's name in world 11 , thankssss

Weekes,like Bradman,was not known as a hitter of sixes.Reputedly his first six in a Test match came in the last one he played.So Bradman should not be discounted in that regard.Also support the inclusion of the miserly Bapu Nadkarni.

Where is John Reid (the 1st) of NZ. He was the world's best allrounder at one stage and a huge 6 hitter (I think he hit 15 in a innings of 290 odd for Wellington once). His bowling would also be useful in 2020s and

he left out hanif muhammad which is bad

[Mike: Hanif, as holder of several records for incredibly slow scoring, was never a contender in a million years.]

An excellent pair of articles, Mike. They are of the best kind - you don't necessarily agree with them, but bettering them is not that easy. Personally I think Bradman would have done the job, but it's a lot of fun seeing a "best" XI that doesn't include him.

I seem to recall that when Bradman decided to hit the ball in the air, he was rather good at that, too. Not sure how many other batsmen have scored a century in three overs. Give him, say, the first ten overs to settle in at 10 an over, and then watch him really have a go - a double century would be distinct possibility.

If Bradman is not included just because he doesnot give away his wicket easily, how does Hugh Tayfield makes it into the team. He seems to be a bowler to bowl maidens after maidens after maidens, which is similar to Bradman's batting. One has to give away some runs to get wickets in T20. But yes, T20 is too trivial a game for Bradman.

Bradman didn't need to hit the ball in the air to score quickly. I'd say any captain would be happy for his star batsman to only ever hit the ball along the ground in T20, as long as it reached the boundary 3 or 4 times per over. Bradman would have obliged, I'm sure (especially with flat wickets, modern bats and fielding restrictions).

But then, I guess you've only left him out of the team as a bet to see how many comments you can generate! You must be a bit disappointed so far ...

Dear Mike by reading through the comments post by everyone FOR "DON" I came up with the conclusion you realy wanted to get everyone involved to have a say to your ROW XI. SIR DON will make the Team any day of the week I can bet you that. doesnt matter if its 20/20, test or ODI, or any other format of cricket to come. He has a class of its own and very unique. put you hands up if anyone aggrees to what I have jst mentioned.

i think barry richards should feature in that side... he was one of the most prolific strokemaker in his time and world could not see much of him in international cricket.. for me he holds a position in that t20 team as an opener.

[Mike: Except that he played international cricket in 1970 and is therefore ineligible.]

Vivek, that name again!
Mike, and what a lot of it too ...

I have to put my hand up for John Reid too, I think. To quote from this site's bio on him: "A super allrounder, John Reid was born a generation too soon, for he retired in 1965 before one-day international matches were started. Reid would have been a one-day team on his own." A big hitter, a versatile bowler, a sharp fielder - would be like having Symonds minus the attitude problem.

What about the T20 team of 70's and 80's??

" What about the T20 team of 70's and 80's?? "

Here they are :

01. G.Greenidge
02. G.Gooch
03. V.Richards
04. G.Pollock
05. C.Lloyd(c)
06. I.Botham
07. R.Marsh (w)
08. Imran Khan(vc)
09. Abdul Qadir
10. D.Lillee
11. B.Bedi

Here's my Indian T20 XI, comprising of players who played mainly before 1970 (although a few might have played in early 70s)

01. CK Nayadu
02. Vijay Merchant
03. Vijay Hazare
04. Polly Umrigar
05. Vinoo Mankad
06. Lala Amarnath
07. Dattu Phadkar
08. Ramakant Desai
09. Naren Tamhane
10. Bapu Nadkarni
11. Amar Singh

They bat right to no. 11. Have 3 seamers, 1 off spinner and 1 left arm spinner + Umrigar & Amarnath. Good fielding unit too!

What era was gary sobers from?

But Sobers played well before 1970. In fact he started when Hugh Tayfield was still playing.You really can't omit him with a straight face. I did see him play in the JPL at the end of his career. No idea about Bradman, Why not George Headley?
I know you excluded India and Pakistan but what about Hanif?
Surely 20/20 shows us that a class batsman can adpat to score quick runs in good numbers?

i agree with you about the don and all the arguments out there you have to consider different fielding strategys and restrictions.that is my thoughts

rightly said by some people above that bradman should be in this team and also rightly said abt sobers he was prefect in every position and greatest allrounder of cricket history. one think more match should be between australia and world XI not england, since australia has produced some of the greatest strokeplayers than england .

no Don no game. No Don no team. No Don no dawn. No Don rest gone. No Don no cricket. No Don what a shame !! We want Don DOn DoN DOn dON ...its the way to go~~~sorry, but we cannot do without the Son.

no bradman, a disputable decision but why not the forgotten star of pre war cricket, archie jackson. he wasnt the most defensive minded of cricketers by any stretch and considered to be better then the Don before his untimely death.

another suggestion would be to pick an all tym XI for every nation if you have the tym, covering the time before T20 cricket started.
Think, Sobers, Richards, Lillee, Wasim Akram etc.
mouthwathering.

Echo Reynold O'Neal's comment, as a West Indian and a fan of Everton even I couldn't include him in a 2020 game if you use the same logic as you applied to Bradman. He is famously proud of never having to hit 6s because he didn't need to take the risk as he was always able to pierce the field. Not sure that would hold true with modern fielders and the need to score at at 2020 pace. If you wanted another "W" I would have thought Worrell was a better choice?

This is ridiculous!! Bradman would make even 10-10 cricket!! He scored Hundreds in a single session which todays batsman find hard to do!!

A fibe side, i thawt myabe Fred Spofforth or Terror Turner as the quickies with their changes of pace and accuracy, if anyone id leave out Fazal Mahmood and replace him with Spofforth

what about three pakistanies great mudassar nazar with a golden arm, wasim hassan raja left arm batsman and a good leg spin bowler ans Asif iqbal all in the late seventees and early eightees. all the three were good alrounders with both bat and bowling. so they must be considered because wasim hassan raja scored two consectives centuries against the great west indian attack in 1976 in carribiean in their home under the captaincy of mushtaq and also bowled very wel in port of spain. same is the case of asif iqbal as wel as mudassar nazar. mudassar was a genuine opening batsman as wel a great swing bowler especially of reverse swing. who can for get his spell of 1982 Lords cricket ground in the second innings.Asif iqbal always batted wel with tale enders. such was his class that he saved a certain defeat against England with partnership with Intikhab Alam.

How u think a t/20 team of old mens beside Sir Don if he decide to play the game at retirment age he hit all current bowlers for six four in a over

It's cute that England get their own XI, but Australia don't, despite the fact that I'd back the Australian XI to do it in a canter.

Oh, and Bradman wouldn't be able to do T20? A nice piece of bait there.

[Mike: I'm English. I was bound to start by thinking of an England XI. If I were an Aussie, no doubt I'd have done Aus v RoW, but I'm not.]

An Indian team without the hard-hitting Salim Durrani?

I can't believe 2 people have put Hanif forward - did I misread the brief - I thought it was for a T20 match, does T20 stand for a 20-day Test?

Why no love for Tiger O'Reilly - a medium pace leggie, with tons of variety - lets have him in as spinner for Tayfield (who was only a good bowler on 50s wickets against 50s batsmen - yawn - in T20 I reckon it will take a one ball look before batsmen start to tee-off against him)

[Mike: I strongly considered Bill O'Reilly, but since I was committed to either Benaud or Faulkner, I couldn't find the room.]

Regardless of Mr Holman's list, surely the Don wouldn't have wanted to smear his reputation by playing hit-and-giggle cricket?

Any regular cricinfo reader will know that you loathe Bradman for all the pounding you Poms had to take from him.

Despite your claims of being an ardent admirer of cricket history, I doubt you'd know that Bradman's strike rate (runs scored per 100 balls) was over 70 during that remarkable bodyline series and it was 80 against Larwood (arguably the finest fast bowler England ever produced).

There are million other facts and stats to suggest that Bradman was amongst the most aggressive batsmen of his era. If you think that hitting in the air is the only way to score quickly, I’ve got two words for you: “seek help”!