- Thread starter
- Banned
- #26
Pollock probably in the top 3 all rounders ever, 5th 11? Yeah nah.Steyn fair enough. Pollock 5th XI at best ..
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Pollock probably in the top 3 all rounders ever, 5th 11? Yeah nah.Steyn fair enough. Pollock 5th XI at best ..
Maybe top ten allrounders ever, if lucky. Probably generous in 5th XI. 6th maybePollock probably in the top 3 all rounders ever, 5th 11? Yeah nah.
23 with the ball and 33 with the bat says otherwise, Kallis is the only other all rounder to boast stats like that albeit the other way round.Maybe top ten allrounders ever, if lucky. Probably generous in 5th XI. 6th maybe
You can live in statsville and have him. He nowhere near my team23 with the ball and 33 with the bat says otherwise, Kallis is the only other all rounder to boast stats like that albeit the other way round.
420 test wickets and almost 4000 runs, I’ll gladly take him.You can live in statsville and have him. He nowhere near my team
None of them in my team. Hadlee bowler420 test wickets and almost 4000 runs, I’ll gladly take him.
Clearly ahead of Dev, Beefy, Hadlee, I would have Kallis and Khan ahead and that is all
Top 3 all rounders ever? Sobers, Kallis, Miller would be ahead for sure. Arguably Imran, Kapil.Pollock probably in the top 3 all rounders ever, 5th 11? Yeah nah.
Roy Fredericks probably is one of those ahead of Haynes, and a good partnership with Greenidge. And 1973 was arguably overall better than pre-1973 for the 50 year cut-off.I can't have Haynes at all.
There about 20 openers around his standard in my time of watching. He not even in contention in my thinking.
But Greenidge is a must.
Yeah, Fredericks probably was but i think i saw less of him than Barry Richards so struggle to rate him and rely on older types that seen him to rate himTop 3 all rounders ever? Sobers, Kallis, Miller would be ahead for sure. Arguably Imran, Kapil.
Roy Fredericks probably is one of those ahead of Haynes, and a good partnership with Greenidge. And 1973 was arguably overall better than pre-1973 for the 50 year cut-off.
I'm going mostly off reputation and numbers for both of these; but yes, if WSC is included Barry Richards is the one to go for imo. South Africa were banned by 50 years ago, so no official Tests in the cutoff period.Yeah, Fredericks probably was but i think i saw less of him than Barry Richards so struggle to rate him and rely on older types that seen him to rate him
One of his old teammates Andy Murtagh wrote a biography of him and said that in county cricket in the 70s it was Barry not Viv that was considered to be the better of the two them.I'm going mostly off reputation and numbers for both of these; but yes, if WSC is included Barry Richards is the one to go for imo. South Africa were banned by 50 years ago, so no official Tests in the cutoff period.
It was probably still ill-advised to sledge Viv by saying he wasn't the best Richards in the match.One of his old teammates Andy Murtagh wrote a biography of him and said that in county cricket in the 70s it was Barry not Viv that was considered to be the better of the two them.
G. Smith
Haynes
Lara
Richards (C)
S.Smith
Kallis
Gilchrist (W)
Warne
Lillee
Marshal
McGrath
Murali averaged over 75 in Australia, Warne averaged 20 in Sri Lanka, Warne also had a better average in India believe it or not, both had similar averages in England.
Warne also played a combined 3 tests against Zimbabwe and Bangladesh, Murali played a combined 25 tests against those nations.
Steyn fair enough. Pollock 5th XI at best ..
I’m not sure if this stayed the case to the end of their careers but at one point late in their careers, if you removed matches against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, Murali still had a better record. And let’s be realistic for most of Warne’s career SA and England who he played regularly, handled leg spin about as well as a minnow side.
That said I think Warne was the better bowler.
If you take out the minnows then take into account that murali bowled a lot more overs than Warne per innings their overall stats are actually remarkably similar.
For mine Warne has the edge simply because he was a big game player and also one thing people leave out is that he was a significantly better batsman than murali. Not even close. Murali was a genuine no11 and Warne batted at 8.
He is for mine. There not much difference between a lot of very good players. He was very tight restraining bowler but he does not rate very highly in all the bowlers I seen in my life.He’s not as far away from a side like this as you think.
He is for mine. There not much difference between a lot of very good players. He was very tight restraining bowler but he does not rate very highly in all the bowlers I seen in my life.
I see when picking a world XI of last 50 years no one has any English players, and rightly so.
They have produced fine cricketers, but all of their best are quite easily superseded by other equivalents. For the sake of the exercise he is my best English side of the last 50 years (I’m just thinking of it right now, so bound to miss some)
Cook
Gooch
Gower
Pietersen
Root
Stokes (captain, we are playing Baz ball)
Alec Stewart (keeper)
Botham
Swann
Broad
Anderson
Willis
Botham at 8 seems a bit rough, but gives lots of depth, and endless flexibility with him and Stokes.
I can’t think of a spinner if we are measuring careers from 1972 onwards who would be head of Swann (underwood perhaps? Though not sure how much of his career was pre 72). He’s certainly miles ahead of Emburey, Edmonds, Tufnell, Croft, Giles etc.