Best English spinner?

[Richard]

Traditionally, Australia doesn't produce many good fingerspinners. The dynamic has always been that wristspinners come from Australia (O'Reilly, Grimmett, Benaud, Warne etc) and fingerspinners come from England (Verity, Laker, Underwood etc).

Exactly, and that was all well and good in the days when you got loads of fingerspin-friendly pitches in England, but now that it doesn't happen any more it simply results in Australia-produces-good-spinners-England-produce-nothing-ones.

The last time Australia had a fingerspinner I would consider "good" was probably Tim May, but he was only good, not great. The last time Australia had a "great" fingerspinner was probably never. However, this is irrelevant to Cullen, who I think is a pretty fine bowler. He's not likely to take 500 wickets at 20 in tests or anything, but he's a talent.

If he's going to be merely as good as Tim May (who took the phenominal total of 75 Test wickets at nearly 35 apiece - and that at just 2.37-an-over) then he's not going to amount to much, given that fingerspinners are no longer allowed to bowl at 2.37-an-over if the conditions don't help them and his average would probably end nearer 40.
When was the last time an Australian fingerspinner (no, the freak Colin Miller does NOT count) even finished a Test-career with an average under 30, let alone under 27?
Probably not since the 60s (maybe even before) - which under the circumstances is not very surprising.

 

[Swervy]

for a time Bruce Yardley may well have been in the top 2 or 3 spinners in the world

 

[Richard]

A rather short time.

 

[Swervy]

well probaby for 2 or 3 years..maybe more like 2..but still......

 

[Richard]

But still nothing.
2 years of success does not a good player make.

 

[Swervy]

But still nothing.
2 years of success does not a good player make.

well he was a good player

 

[Richard]

No, he wasn't. A Test-average of 31.63 is not good, especially when you can correct it to 32.10 by removing a Sri Lanka game... and it gets even worse when you consider that he only had success in 1 season (1981\82) out of 6.

 

[Swervy]

No, he wasn't. A Test-average of 31.63 is not good, especially when you can correct it to 32.10 by removing a Sri Lanka game... and it gets even worse when you consider that he only had success in 1 season (1981\82) out of 6.

well i can guarantee to you that Yardley was a very good off spinner

 

[Richard]

Oh, I don't doubt that - just that by virtue of being an offspinner and Australian and having a career after 1970 he wasn't a particularly good cricketer.

 

[Swervy]

Oh, I don't doubt that - just that by virtue of being an offspinner and Australian and having a career after 1970 he wasn't a particularly good cricketer.

ok..let me rephrase...I can guarentee that he was a very good cricketer

 

[Richard]

Well, you can get away with that, too - he wasn't too bad a cricketer at the domestic level.
But in Tests he was ordinary.
Whether eternal optimists like you think so or not.

 

[dro87]

Robert Croft...

 

[sledger]

Robert Croft...

i think thats quite enough about him, quite frankly the less said the better, very poor for england like so many before him.

 

[kendall]

i think thats quite enough about him, quite frankly the less said the better, very poor for england like so many before him.

yes croft was never a class bowler but he was often the only option. I think Giles is better and england must make do with what we have untill we get a truely talented soin bowler breaking through

 

[sledger]

yes croft was never a class bowler but he was often the only option. I think Giles is better and england must make do with what we have untill we get a truely talented soin bowler breaking through

yes, although i dont see playing giles as just persevering with what we have, i think giles is now a more than mediocre player for england, this past year he has become quite important to the team, and has been the hero in some of the tests.

 

[kendall]

yes, although i dont see playing giles as just persevering with what we have, i think giles is now a more than mediocre player for england, this past year he has become quite important to the team, and has been the hero in some of the tests.

Giles has proved himself and excellent team player and an asset however he will never be a world class spin bowler

 

[sledger]

Giles has proved himself and excellent team player and an asset however he will never be a world class spin bowler

all very true, but still very valuable to england as he would be to several other test playing nations none the less.

 

[Richard]

yes, although i dont see playing giles as just persevering with what we have, i think giles is now a more than mediocre player for england, this past year he has become quite important to the team, and has been the hero in some of the tests.

No, he's always been imperative almost any time a turning pitch has been encountered since his debut.

 

[sledger]

No, he's always been imperative almost any time a turning pitch has been encountered since his debut.

yes although now is the case when a pitch does not have a great degree of turn in it, and he is also relied on from time to time for a performance with the bat.

 

[Richard]

i think thats quite enough about him, quite frankly the less said the better, very poor for england like so many before him.

Poor like this?
Croft, exactly like Giles, has almost always been a handful on a turning pitch. Of course, we don't get them at home very often, so he was totally useless at home.
His ODI-record isn't shoddy at all, either.