Custom Bats Cricket Forum
General Cricket => Players => Topic started by: petehosk on November 24, 2011, 12:38:34 PM
-
Lots of discussions at present about best test batsmen.
So thought I would start a little topic so that people can list their top 15 TEST batsmen.
So don't worry about bowlers!!
-
Botham,
Wg grace ,
Pointing
Lara ,
Chaunderpaul ,
Pietersen ,
Langer ,
Cook ,
Trott ,
Strauss,
Hayden,
Bell ,
Trescothick ,
Clarke
-
Botham,
Wg grace ,
Pointing
Lara ,
Chaunderpaul ,
Pietersen ,
Langer ,
Cook ,
Trott ,
Strauss,
Hayden,
Bell ,
Trescothick ,
Clarke
No Tendulkar? Dravid?
-
Bradman
Hobbs
Dravid
Ponting
Kallis
Lara
Sachin
Viv Richards
Hammond
Border
Compton
-
That's his list, yours obviously will differ.
-
That's his list, yours obviously will differ.
Fair comment, But the first man to reach 15,000 test runs? How do you leave that man out?
-
with some help of the test rankings here are the all time best batsmen (note the very notible omissions of Lara and some short Indian bloke...)
1 961 D.G. Bradman AUS 961 v India, 06/02/1948
2 945 L. Hutton ENG 945 v West Indies, 30/03/1954
3 942 J.B. Hobbs ENG 942 v Australia, 19/08/1912
3 942 R.T. Ponting AUS 942 v England, 01/12/2006
5 941 P.B.H. May ENG 941 v Australia, 23/08/1956
6 938 C.L. Walcott WI 938 v Australia, 11/06/1955
6 938 I.V.A. Richards WI 938 v England, 27/03/1981
6 938 K.C. Sangakkara SL 938 v England, 01/12/2007
6 938 G.S. Sobers WI 938 v India, 13/01/1967
10 935 M.L. Hayden AUS 935 v England, 07/11/2002
10 935 J.H. Kallis SA 935 v New Zealand, 18/11/2007
12 933 Mohammad Yousuf PAK 933 v West Indies, 27/11/2006
13 927 E.D. Weekes WI 927 v New Zealand, 03/03/1956
13 927 R.G. Pollock SA 927 v Australia, 19/02/1970
15 922 A.D. Nourse SA 922 v England, 07/06/1951
15 922 K.D. Walters AUS 922 v South Africa, 19/02/1970
However if you look by best average (sachin is there at 16!)
DG Bradman (Aus)
RG Pollock (SA)
GA Headley (WI)
H Sutcliffe (Eng)
E Paynter (Eng)
KF Barrington (Eng)
ED Weekes (WI)
WR Hammond (Eng)
IJL Trott (Eng)
GS Sobers (WI)
JB Hobbs (Eng)
KC Sangakkara (SL)
JH Kallis (ICC/SA)
CL Walcott (WI)
L Hutton (Eng)
SR Tendulkar (India)
then by most hundreds
SR Tendulkar (India)
JH Kallis (ICC/SA)
RT Ponting (Aus)
R Dravid (ICC/India)
SM Gavaskar (India)
BC Lara (ICC/WI)
SR Waugh (Aus)
ML Hayden (Aus)
DG Bradman (Aus)
DPMD Jayawardene (SL)
KC Sangakkara (SL)
AR Border (Aus)
GS Sobers (WI)
Inzamam-ul-Haq (ICC/Pak)
GS Chappell (Aus)
Mohammad Yousuf (Pak)
IVA Richards (WI)
and finally by most runs
SR Tendulkar (India)
R Dravid (ICC/India)
RT Ponting (Aus)
JH Kallis (ICC/SA)
BC Lara (ICC/WI)
AR Border (Aus)
SR Waugh (Aus)
SM Gavaskar (India)
DPMD Jayawardene (SL)
S Chanderpaul (WI)
KC Sangakkara (SL)
GA Gooch (Eng)
Javed Miandad (Pak)
Inzamam-ul-Haq (ICC/Pak)
ML Hayden (Aus)
VVS Laxman (India)
IVA Richards (WI)
as a result of these lists... I have come up with my 15 names...
-
Bruce, you've missed the point. Test BATSMEN.
Take McGrath, Lee, Warne, Murali, Flintoff, Botham and Gayle out for starters. And Punter #1? You're having a laugh.
-
No Tendulkar? Dravid?
Notice I only have 14 hahah add tendulkar and that's my 15 lol
-
Glenn McGrath
Gerhardus Liebenberg
Aftab Habib
Andy Lloyd
Courtney Walsh
Phil Tufnell
Steve James
Peter George
Imran Farhat
Vikram Rathour
Doug Marillier
Mark Vermuelen
Gavin Hamilton
Chris Adams
Aakash Chopra
-
Bradman
Sachin
Richards
Lara
Jayasuria
Hobbs
Hutton
Dravid
Cook
Hammond
Ponting
Gilchrist
Kallis
Sangakkara
Hayden
-
Ok in order - based on the above numbers plus the fastest to 6000 test runs (bradman scored 6994) Ponting has the most wins so that should also be relevant...
but here is my 15. I can't believe who is at 1 - the only person in all 5 lists!!
KC Sangakkara
DG Bradman
IVA Richards
JH Kallis
ML Hayden
RT Ponting
SR Tendulkar
BC Lara
GS Sobers
R Dravid
SM Gavaskar
AR Border
Inzamam
JB Hobbs
-
How many runs scored at SSC?
-
My top 15 in no particular order
Tendulkar
Dravid
Lara
Kallis
V Richards
Sobers
Sangakarra
Ponting
Bradman
Hammond
Hobbs
Gavaskar
Miandad
Hutton
Jayawardene
-
How many runs scored at SSC?
only 1943
which is somewhat less than the 2697 scored by DPMD Jayawardene 9or the 2015 scored by Gooch at Lords.
-
interesting, sustained excellence assisted by a banker.
Sangakkara played the best Test innings I have seen, but was sawn off by an umpire (Koertzen if I remember correctly) - 192 against Australia at Hobart.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2fDEqxPr1c
-
15 is too many
Bradman
Richards
Lara
Tendulkar
S Waugh
Grace
Miandad
Gavaskar
M Crowe
C Lloyd
Gooch
Sobers
Kallis
Hutton
Border
-
Bruce, you've missed the point. Test BATSMEN.
Take McGrath, Lee, Warne, Murali, Flintoff, Botham and Gayle out for starters. And Punter #1? You're having a laugh.
Whoopsie :-[
But Ponting isn't my #1, but he is right up there. Not based on current form, But 3rd in alltime test scorers isn't to be sniffed up.
-
only 1943
which is somewhat less than the 2697 scored by DPMD Jayawardene 9or the 2015 scored by Gooch at Lords.
How many matches did Gooch play at Lord's?
-
Glenn McGrath
Gerhardus Liebenberg
Aftab Habib
Andy Lloyd
Courtney Walsh
Phil Tufnell
Steve James
Peter George
Imran Farhat
Vikram Rathour
Doug Marillier
Mark Vermuelen
Gavin Hamilton
Chris Adams
Aakash Chopra
Surely theres a spot for Alan Mullally in there???
-
He twunted an entertaining 20-odd once though didn't he?
-
Here is my list;
1. Mohammad Yousuf
2. Inzamam Ul Haq
3. Javed Maindad
4. Hanif Mohammad
5. Sir IVA Richards
6. Brain Charles Lara
7. Sir Don Bradman
8. Jacques Kallis
9. Ricky Pointing
10. Kumair Sangakarra
11. Rahul Dravid
12. Sir Gary Sobers
13. Steve Waugh
14. Mathew Hayden
15. Saeed Anwar
-
Alvaro no Chris Martin and Walsh?;-)
-
Courtney's in there CD.
Chris Martin isn't really a cricketer.
And, if we're picking holes, Gloucestershire's Zaheer Abbas was ten times the player Saaed Anwar was...
-
In no order
Sir viv
The don
Graham pollock
Sobers
Sachin
Kallis
Lara
Steve Waugh
Dravid
Hutton
Gavascar
Lloyd
Border
Barry Richards
Gayle (for a bit of fun)
-
Chris Martin and Alan Mullally are cult heros at my club!
Such a difficult question because of the years cricket has spanned - the best players i've seen play are Lara and Tendulkar, although i'd also begrudgingly stick Steve Waugh up there.
-
And, if we're picking holes, Gloucestershire's Zaheer Abbas was ten times the player Saaed Anwar was...
Oh definitely mate I fully agree with you. But I love Saeed Anwar and I'm big fan of him. Lovely timing etc
Hence he was last, I know he doesn't break into Top 15 but I added because I like him LOL
-
Perhaps 15 Modern Test batsmen is a better topic.
Wally Hammond would be my pick as the best. Particularly as he lost time to the war, was shafted by county qualification red tape and, best of all, riven with syphilis in the second half of his career.
Also, unlike Bradman, he didn't whinge about the short stuff :)
-
Perhaps 15 Modern Test batsmen is a better topic.
Wally Hammond would be my pick as the best. Particularly as he lost time to the war, was shafted by county qualification red tape and, best of all, riven with syphilis in the second half of his career.
Also, unlike Bradman, he didn't whinge about the short stuff :)
LOL I have never seen Wally Hammond stats let alone his batting!
-
Hokay, I'll have a go - the following list starts after the Great War only because that allows for the chance of at least some archive footage.
Bradman, Sutcliffe, Hutton, Hammond, Tendulkar, Lara, Richards, Sobers, Ponting, Miandad, Compton, Worrall, Steve Waugh, Clive Lloyd, Border
Its not an easy task because there are so many variables - I initially included George Headley but then discounted him on grounds of his relatively brief test career - harsh, but then what would one do with Barry Richards and Graeme Pollock who would surely merit places on this list if they had had a bit longer?
Idon't personally place too much store in the weight of runs scored by modern players - they get more games to score them in - nor do I look purely at averages because the conditions are so obviously variable. I've ignored players currently at or close to their peak because, well, we just don't know where they will eventually get to - though Kallis, who is past his peak, is left out on purpose because he is, when it comes down to it, a fat blocker with one eye on his average! Likewise, no Geoff Boycott...
Some of you may perceive a couple of these to be odd choices - if you want me to elaborate I'm happy to...
-
Wally Hammond stats
Batting and fielding averages
Mat Inns NO Runs HS Ave 100 50 6s Ct St
Tests 85(matches) 140(innings) 16(NotOuts) 7249(Runs) 336*(HS) 58.45(Ave) 22(100s) 24(50s) 27(6s) 110(ct)First-class 634(matches) 1005(innings) 104(NotOuts) 50551(Runs) 336*(HS) 56.10(Ave) 167(100s) 185(50s) 820(ct)
-
Clive Lloyd in purely on batting ability?
-
Hokay, I'll have a go - the following list starts after the Great War only because that allows for the chance of at least some archive footage.
Bradman, Sutcliffe, Hutton, Hammond, Tendulkar, Lara, Richards, Sobers, Ponting, Miandad, Compton, Worrall, Steve Waugh, Clive Lloyd, Border
Its not an easy task because there are so many variables - I initially included George Headley but then discounted him on grounds of his relatively brief test career - harsh, but then what would one do with Barry Richards and Graeme Pollock who would surely merit places on this list if they had had a bit longer?
Idon't personally place too much store in the weight of runs scored by modern players - they get more games to score them in - nor do I look purely at averages because the conditions are so obviously variable. I've ignored players currently at or close to their peak because, well, we just don't know where they will eventually get to - though Kallis, who is past his peak, is left out on purpose because he is, when it comes down to it, a fat blocker with one eye on his average! Likewise, no Geoff Boycott...
Some of you may perceive a couple of these to be odd choices - if you want me to elaborate I'm happy to...
What about Peter May?
-
The judgment of cricket history is that the greatest batsmen the game has known are - in order of appearance, only - WG Grace, Jack Hobbs, Walter Hammond and Don Bradman. Others may come close indeed to those four but do not quite take place with them. It is, of course, coincidence that two of them played for Gloucestershire; but without doubt Hammond, although he was not a native of that county, succeeded by right and without question to the eminence there previously occupied solely by Dr Grace.
Wally Hammond was a most exciting cricketer, perhaps the more so for the hint of an almost Olympian aloofness. He was also - and the two do not always go together - a naturally-gifted athlete who could excel at any game he cared to play; today he would be brought up as a rising football star. He had that physical stamp; he moved easily, with an ease which yet promised that, at need, he could launch himself into a tiger leap. Even as late as 1951, when he made his last first-class appearance and after he had put on a considerable amount of weight, his movement was poised, assured, and graceful.
The instant he walked out of a pavilion, white-spotted blue handkerchief showing from his right pocket, bat tucked underarm, cap at a hint of an angle, he was identifiable as a thoroughbred. Strongly-built, square-shouldered, deep-chested, with impressively powerful forearms, it seemed as if his bat weighed nothing in those purposeful hands.
His figures are convincing evidence of his quality. Between 1920 and 1951 he scored 50,493 runs, with 167 centuries and an average of 56.10; in Tests 7249 runs (22 centuries) at 58.45, as a bowler, 732 wickets (average 30.58); and he held 819 catches. Like Jack Hobbs, he might have achieved even more impressive figures if he had been able to play throughout his career. For instance, he first appeared for Gloucestershire (where he had been to school at Cirencester for five years) in 1920; but Lord Harris, piqued that he would not play for Kent, the county of his birth, quibbled about his qualification. So, effectively, he did not enter county cricket until 1923; he missed the entire season of 1926 through an illness contracted in the West Indies (he came back to start the next season by scoring 1000 in May); of course, he lost the 1940 to 1945 seasons when he was on a high plateau of achievement; and played only two first class matches after he returned from Australia in March 1947.
A natural player, he was virtually never coached until he had become a county player, when George Dennett used sometimes to advise him. Instinctively basically correct, he was sound in defence, but never defensively-minded. Like most outstanding batsmen, he was primarily a front-foot player who, with the years, operated more off the back. His great power lay in his driving, which was pure textbook in style, clean, apparently effortless but, through the combination of innate timing and immense strength, often achieving immense velocity.
As a young man he was a dashing strokemaker; willing to tilt at all the bowlers of the world. He remained superbly stylish, his cover-driving, from front foot or back, utterly memorable. In those early days he cut, glanced, hooked and lofted the ball quite fearlessly. With his early maturity, he became a thinking batsmen. When he went to Australia under Percy Chapman in 1928-29, although he was only 25 he had worked out exactly how he would make his runs. Eschewing the hook altogether and, largely, the cut, he decided to score - off all but the obviously punishable ball - within the V between extra cover and midwicket. He succeeded with a new record aggregate for a rubber of 905 runs at 113.12 in the five Tests; which has still only once been exceeded (by Sir Donald Bradman, of course).
Even in his cricketing middle age, his footwork flowed like that of a young man. He would be down the pitch - two, three or four yards - with unhurried ease and, as he reached the length he wanted, the bat moved with languid certainty through the ball, which flew, with that savage force which was the measure of his hitting, to the place he wished.
Of the four great batsmen he was physically the finest and most powerfully equipped. He was a superb fast-medium bowler who often, as Sir Donald Bradman once remarked, "was too busy scoring runs to worry about bowling." When he was roused - as he once was by Essex bowling bouncers at the Gloucestershire batsmen - his pace could be devastating. "I never saw a man bowl faster for Gloucestershire than Wally did that day," said Tom Goddard, "and he not only battered them, he bowled them out as well."
At slip he had no superior. He stood all but motionless, moved late but with uncanny speed, never needing to stretch or strain but plucking the ball from the air like an apple from a tree.
Statistics cannot tell all: but revealingly they show of Wally Hammond that he made 167 centuries and reached fifty without making a hundred 184 times, in Tests 22 hundreds, only 24 fifties without reaching three figures; in each case almost even money on 100 if he got halfway.
He became an amateur in 1938, and captained England as well as both Gentlemen and Players. It is some measure of his quality that in 1946, at 43, he was top of the first-class averages with 1783 runs at 84.90 - 16 ahead of the next man. He had a sad tour as captain of England in Australia 1946-47. He was miserably afflicted with arthritis, had acute personal problems, could make runs in State matches but not in Tests, England were roundly beaten and, on his return to England, he announced his retirement. He mistakenly allowed himself to be persuaded to appear in one match in each of the 1950 and 1951 seasons. A quiet - some thought introverted - man, but a loyal friend, he retired, hard-up and unhappy, to South Africa. There he died in 1965, mourned by more admirers than he may have guessed. By then he was, unchallengeably, one of the cricketing immortals.
Wisden Cricketers' Almanack
-
Excert from Wally Hammond summary was The instant he walked out of a pavilion, white-spotted blue handkerchief showing from his right pocket, bat tucked underarm, cap at a hint of an angle, he was identifiable as a thoroughbred.
Buzz - are you sure that you're not related to the fella? ;)
-
Excert from Wally Hammond summary was The instant he walked out of a pavilion, white-spotted blue handkerchief showing from his right pocket, bat tucked underarm, cap at a hint of an angle, he was identifiable as a thoroughbred.
piddles on Steve Waugh's dirty red snotrag, doesn't it?
-
Clive Lloyd in purely on batting ability?
thought that one would be controversial - but yes. Averaged 46 batting much of his career at six, made crucial runs for the West Indies - many of them before they became the "great" West Indies side of recent reknown - and played many devastating innings. I agree that his selection evidences the point that a top 15 is a bit too much of a stretch for most to agree upon, but yeah, I'm happy with that selection...
-
What about Peter May?
worthy of consideration, but I don't have him in there, no.
-
worthy of consideration, but I don't have him in there, no.
Interesting you have Border - cussed, knew his limitations, made runs when it counted, but more proficient than great?
-
thought that one would be controversial - but yes. Averaged 46 batting much of his career at six, made crucial runs for the West Indies - many of them before they became the "great" West Indies side of recent reknown - and played many devastating innings. I agree that his selection evidences the point that a top 15 is a bit too much of a stretch for most to agree upon, but yeah, I'm happy with that selection...
Fair enough reasons. The footage I've seen of him he looked an excellent player. The situation runs are scored in is as important, in my opinion, as the talent the batsman has. Thats why I mentioned Steve Waugh! Atherton also has a hint of what you say about Lloyd and i'm convinced that if he hadn't been handed the captaincy of a dreadful set-up at such a young age he would've pushed his average up higher than the eventual 38 or whatever he finished on
-
Fair enough reasons. The footage I've seen of him he looked an excellent player. The situation runs are scored in is as important, in my opinion, as the talent the batsman has. Thats why I mentioned Steve Waugh! Atherton also has a hint of what you say about Lloyd and i'm convinced that if he hadn't been handed the captaincy of a dreadful set-up at such a young age he would've pushed his average up higher than the eventual 38 or whatever he finished on
I think Atherton himself was crippled more by his degenerative back problem than captaincy. In fact, he was one player who seemed to revel in it rather than be hindered. Not a great, because he only scored one hundred against Australia in 33 Tests.
-
Interesting you have Border - cussed, knew his limitations, made runs when it counted, but more proficient than great?
Technically, yeah, he was quite limited - though I think younger viewers may not realise that he was a lot more free and open in his stroke play when he first came in to the Australian side and reduced his range of shots largely in an attempt to convince his colleagues to knuckle down once he became captain. But he was another one who made critical runs, match saving, match winning runs. And the volume, given the standard of bowling around at the time, was exceptional...
-
Fair enough reasons. The footage I've seen of him he looked an excellent player. The situation runs are scored in is as important, in my opinion, as the talent the batsman has. Thats why I mentioned Steve Waugh! Atherton also has a hint of what you say about Lloyd and i'm convinced that if he hadn't been handed the captaincy of a dreadful set-up at such a young age he would've pushed his average up higher than the eventual 38 or whatever he finished on
I think that is a very valid point - I discounted some good players based on their propensity for "easy" runs as against playing top quality innings - something I would have accused Pup of before his knock in the first test against the yarpies.
As for Atherton - you have to give credit to him that he played under the pressure of captaincy from a very young age, and with a debilitating back injury for much of his career, against a wonderful array of pace bowlers. But he was not a match winner so much as a match saver, and 40 really has to be the baseline for any profession of talent...
-
Technically, yeah, he was quite limited - though I think younger viewers may not realise that he was a lot more free and open in his stroke play when he first came in to the Australian side and reduced his range of shots largely in an attempt to convince his colleagues to knuckle down once he became captain. But he was another one who made critical runs, match saving, match winning runs. And the volume, given the standard of bowling around at the time, was exceptional...
Can't really argue with that. :)
-
I never said or imagined Atherton to be a great. But . . . . . he only got the bad back as he got older. His record before he was captain was very promising but slipped away during his regime and after, hindered no doubt by the countless failures against Australia that you mention and the pressure of knowing a collapse was very likely once he was out!
-
I never said or imagined Atherton to be a great. But . . . . . he only got the bad back as he got older. His record before he was captain was very promising but slipped away during his regime and after, hindered no doubt by the countless failures against Australia that you mention and the pressure of knowing a collapse was very likely once he was out!
His first problems with it were aged 24 from what I understand, which is pretty young...
-
What if Stewart hadn't kept wickets? He could (woulda, shoulda...) have averaged mid-40s at least. Two hundreds in Bridgetown...
-
What if Stewart hadn't kept wickets? He could (woulda, shoulda...) have averaged mid-40s at least. Two hundreds in Bridgetown...
Now thats an interesting one - the guy had wonderful talent as an opening bat, supreme timing and decent technique. He was also, crucially, an excellent player of fast bowling.
Indeed, one wonders with the modern attitude to consistency of selection, planning etc, just how mucg better that mid-90s England side could have been - Stewart without the gloves (if they wouldn't stick with Russell, how about Blakey with?), Smith given support rather than brickbats, Atheron given proper medical care, the likes of Maynard and Morris encouraged to be individuals...
...the bowling attack would still have been (No Swearing Please) mind you!
-
Martin McCague! Neil Mallender! Alan Igglesden! Richard Illingworth! We'd have taken over the world!
-
Martin McCague! Neil Mallender! Alan Igglesden! Richard Illingworth! We'd have taken over the world!
Hmmm...might make a decnt club attack...
-
:D
-
Once again Alan Mullally has been overlooked ;)
But yep England were miles behind Australia in that era in terms of preperation and set-up, too many people above the captain and coach back then!
-
Andy Flower ???
-
Gough, Caddick, Headley, Fraser - wasn't the worst attack going
-
Andy Flower ???
Good call, but too many of his games were in the subcontinent, so average is inflated. Zim seemed to be permanently playing Pakistan on cement tracks for about five years; I'd say a limited but dedicated player.
-
This all makes me wonder if we did a modern version would Matt Prior get in anyones top 15?
-
Gough, Caddick, Headley, Fraser - wasn't the worst attack going
Injury prone though, and Gough aside, needed a bit in the surface to be truly penetrative.
-
This all makes me wonder if we did a modern version would Matt Prior get in anyones top 15?
Not ahead of Gilchrist or Les Ames as batting wicketkeepers
-
Gough, Caddick, Headley, Fraser - wasn't the worst attack going
No spinner, and they never took the field together...
Cork over Headley and Fraser anyway for me...
-
This all makes me wonder if we did a modern version would Matt Prior get in anyones top 15?
Nope. I know what you're saying with regards to the perception that he scores important runs batting selflessly, but would he really be able to score heavily at 40-4 on a green top against a top attack?
-
you obviously werent at lords when prior scored a big hundred against the Indians this summer. one of the best knocks I have watched live
-
Nope. I know what you're saying with regards to the perception that he scores important runs batting selflessly, but would he really be able to score heavily at 40-4 on a green top against a top attack?
Honestly i think he could the way he has batted in the last 18 months has been phenomenal.
-
you obviously werent at lords when prior scored a big hundred against the Indians this summer. one of the best knocks I have watched live
"one" being the operative word!
-
Honestly i think he could the way he has batted in the last 18 months has been phenomenal.
he's been a good team player in a good team - but as an all time great? Not yet, probably not ever...
-
No spinner, and they never took the field together...
Cork over Headley and Fraser anyway for me...
Injury prone - they played too much cricket, fraser lost his nip as a result and would've been a 90's great but for that. Headley's career was cut short just after him and gough ran through the aussies at the MCG in 1998. Cork would've played as an allrounder batting 7, stewart keeping and batting 6.Tuffers never had the support to put pressure on teams, but still won 2 test matches at the oval against the aussies and windies.
-
Injury prone - they played too much cricket, fraser lost his nip as a result and would've been a 90's great but for that. Headley's career was cut short just after him and gough ran through the aussies at the MCG in 1998. Cork would've played as an allrounder batting 7, stewart keeping and batting 6.Tuffers never had the support to put pressure on teams, but still won 2 test matches at the oval against the aussies and windies.
Tufnell bottled it any time he bowled on a track that really suited him!
But as a mid-90s XI under modern selectorial and coaching regimes, the following, assuming a direct choice between Maynard and Cork for the last slot, would have been pretty decent: Atherton, Stewart, Smith, Hick, Ramprakash, Maynard, Blakey (w), Cork, Gough, Caddick, Fraser, Tufnell
-
he's been a good team player in a good team - but as an all time great? Not yet, probably not ever...
I was never saying as an all time great i meant a top 15 of batsmen now
-
I was never saying as an all time great i meant a top 15 of batsmen now
interesting question - open the floor on that one, though personally I can think of five better English batsmen...
...okay, two better English batsmen and three Saffers playing alongside them...