@Aussieicon91 1. Five bowlers are needed because this Aus AT XI is going up against another AT XI and having just 4 bowlers risks exhaustion. An All-rounder is definitely needed. 2. Hayden bulked up on runs from inferior opponents. Not for nothing, he's known as The Bully. 3. Ponting never had to face the kind of attacks that Border and G.Chappell did. Just going on and on accumulating quantity of runs is not the same as quality of runs. Border went through a lean patch of Aus history and came through with flying colors. G.Chappell took on the rampaging W.Indian speedsters and triumphed. Glad to see both their places secure. The inclusion of 2 LBG spinners could hold advantage over an AT England or AT W.I, although less so against sub-continental teams. Methinks some sentimentality has preceded variety. Who could resist seeing Warne and O'Reilly in tandem ? And no Aus team is complete without Miller. All said a commendable effort.

@Aussieicon: "why would you need 5 bowlers when 4 of them are instant alltime greats?" Alternatively, why would you need 7 batsmen when at least 5 of them are alltime greats? When you have such prodigious batsmen to choose from and a wicketkeeper-batsman as good as any specialist batsmen, I would play one bowler extra. After all, you need to take 20 wickets to win a game. Scoring 700 instead of 600 will not win you a test. Therefore, for all time XIs I always like to pick 5 batsmen, 1 wicket keeper, 1 all-rounder and 4 bowlers. So I agree with the composition completely.

in response to the post by waspsting on (July 21 2009, 14:00 PM GMT) .... oh my god u think lillee was a tad overrated??!! DK Lillee was and is the greatest fast bowler australia has ever produced. I and many others would say that he is the greatest fast bowler the world has ever seen. can i get an amen?

And I have an international team that will beat them anyway. A team of all rounders (with the notable exception of Bradman, who counts as 2 batsmen!), in batting order: Wally Hammond, Garfield Sobers, Don Bradman, Frank Worrell, Jacques Kallis, Steve Waugh (c), Adam Gilchrist, Keith Miller, Imran Khan, Shaun Pollock, Richard Hadlee. Between them they made 183 centuries and took 2123 wickets. Average batting average for the whole team 49.94, bowling 27.85. Not sure how they'd get on in the sheds, but I think they'd win on the field.

I agree with narenvs. The selection I disagree with most is Mcgrath. Why select a bowler who by his own admission 'bored' batsmen out over the tall and quick Demon who could have done at least as much, if not more? I was inclined to Lindwall or Davidson, but one needs to cover all the periods where possible. Having Miller and Lillee followed by Spofforth would at least have been as good. I should have expected a better perspective from the Experts. Their claim to have covered all the important periods would have been better substantiated if the first two decades of test cricket were to have been included as a matter of historical fact.

My side was Ponsford, Hayden, Bradman, Ponting, Waugh, Miller, Gilchrist, Grimmett, McGrath, Lillee and Lindwall. I'd only have one spinner because I think that is plenty. And I'd have Grimmett over O'Reilly and Warne because I think he was craftier and hated batsmen more! And I think Warne was a destabilising influence. With a pace bowling attack of Lillee, McGrath, Lindwall and Miller, I might be a little pace-heavy, and I'd consider replacing Miller with Border and going with only 4 bowlers. Gillie is a lock for me - my favourite cricketer of all time. And I'd make Steve Waugh my captain - a more aggressive captain there has never been. Lots of attacking batsmen with Haydos, Bradman (of course), Punter and Gillie. Some defence with Ponsford, Waugh and possibly Border.

It's a shame that the best XI hasn't been selected and that the wrong dynamics have been used to select the side. Firstly, Bill O'Reilly shouldn't be in the side and only 4 bowlers should've been selected, why would you need 5 bowlers when 4 of them are instant alltime greats? Secondary, the Opening partnership has been completely screwed up. I can handle Trumper in the XI, but Hayden should've been the first opener down on the sheet. Hayden's one of the best Opening Batsman ever, let alone the best one that Australia has ever produced. You can say whatever you want about Hayden, but had he played in the same team as Bradman then he would've surely averaged more then 50 with the bat. When so many people vote over this sort've thing and one player wins by a landslide over the others, it obviously says something. Thirdly, no Ricky Ponting in the team means that the team can absolutley NOT be the best Aussie side of alltime. The guy is almost as good as Tendulkar for god sakes.

australia has the greatest all-time XI because it was among the top 2 teams much of the time since 1877. its bowling is better than that of the next best team, england - whose all-time team would have trueman, barnes, botham, rhodes, laker as bowlers in my view. and its batting compares with that of west indies & england solely because of bradman. otherwise, each the best 5 batsmen in the windies all-time team (headley, sobers, richards, weeks/ lara, walcott) were better than all austrialian batsmen except bradman. the same is true of the best 4 english batsmen (hammond, hutton, hobbs, grace). moreover, australia had 4 of the 5 best keepers (tallon, evans, oldfield, marsh, healy) and 3 of the 4 best spinners (warne, o'reilly, laker, grimmett). as a result, australia's bowling would even be better than that of the rest of the world XI (trueman, marshall, imran/ hadlee, sobers, laker) if we replace mcgrath with lindwall in the australian XI.

Just one two more comments are reading through all the ones before me: Trumper vs. Hayden is a non-issue. Hayden simply isn't head and shoulders above almost all his contemporaries like Trumper was. Effective and intimidating though he could be with a helmet and a heavy bat on batsman-friendly tracks, Hayden would probably only have averaged 25-30 in Trumper's days against Barnes, Rhodes and friends. As for Chappell vs. Pointing, all I can says is, imagine Pointing WITHOUT a helmet facing the likes of Holder, Daniel, Holding, Garner, Willis etc. on an uncovered pitch! Nuff said!

Interesting selection with which I cannot really disagree. Though I had Marsh for Gilchrist and Lindwall for O'Reilly. But Warne and O'Reilly bowling in tandem would be a terrifying sight for any batsmen but the very best against spin (for those it would only be very, very intimidating). Of course Trumper should be in the side. Hobbs abd Sutcliffe are the only batsmen who could edge him aside as the best opener ever! But I would still like to see the best keeper stand up to this bowling attack! With Trumper opening, Bradman, Chappell and Border in the middle order, Miller coming in at 6 and Warne at 8, this side doesn't need an intimidating batsman at 7. But the best keeper would get the most out of this attack.