The 10 players who will "define" cricket in the next decade

[Athlai]

But he is very unlikely to "define" cricket over a decade....

As probably captain of NZ I think he will have a very good chance of doing just that. He's a total maverick captain.

 

[wpdavid]

Given that he was nearly 40 at the time, that was no mean feat, was it? Imagine if he'd been given the captaincy in 1973 and not missed those prime years against the Lillees, Thommos, Robertses and Holdings in 1975 and 1976.

Nobody forced the awkward old sod to drop out for 3 years! And it was a combination of things, wasn't it - the England captaincy, not wanting to lose the Yorkshire captaincy, Solkar, etc. Mentally he was knackered, afaics, due to a combination of self-inflicted pressure and the real pressure of being the best batsman in an English lineup that wasn't nearly as good as it had been.

fwiw I rate his performances against WI in 1980 & 1981 as the finest of his career. To hold his own against that attack when approaching 40 was an extraordinary effort. As for the mid-70's series that he missed, I'm not sure that he'd have done a lot in 1974/5, simply because a lot of other very good batsmen failed out there (notably WI 12 months later), and it was no disgrace. Plus his test form had been pretty ordinary for most of the preceding 2 years for a variety of reasons.

Who's been a better batsman for England since the Hutton-Washbrook-Edrich-Compton-May-Cowdrey-Barrington-Dexter-Graveney days then?

There have been plenty of fine batsmen in that time... John Edrich, Amiss, Gooch (though again his sensational finish can overshadow the fact that he was no more than good for most of his career - and he's one of my favourite cricketers of all, given that said ending was the time when I was starting to watch the game), Gatting (in the middle phase of his career), Gower, Lamb, Atherton, Stewart, Thorpe... Vaughan even.

But surely none of those names are really in Boycott's league?

Certainly not Lamb, Vaughan or Gatting (even when cashing in against weak attacks in the middle phase ..). Not Gooch, for the reasons you mentioned. Atherton, as he said himself, was far too vulnerable at the start of his innings. Probably not Gower, although I know who I'd rather watch. I really rated Amiss, but maybe he didn't have Boycott's sheer bloodymindedness. I do think that Dennis gets a rough deal for his "failures" in 1974/5 though, but if Boycott was at the absolute peak of his game (which Amiss was in 1974) then perhaps you could see him doing better out there. Edrich was very good, mind. Possibly under-rated because he generally kept quiet and just scored lots of runs.

Certainly none of the current lot yet. Like you say, we can reconsider Cook & KP in 10 years' time.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

His bowling isn't that bad!

I think you're only saying that because White's bowling is dreadful. Watson's bowling is poor though. I think he should concentrate on his batting as that is certainly his strong suit and his career will last a lot longer if he doesn't shoulder the bowling load as well; let's face it, he's no Shaun Pollock

Um... Malinga?

Good call. I'd forgotten him. Not exactly the next Waqar Younis though, more the first Lasith Malinga. Certainly he's bound to be a good call for a star for the next 10 years if he can stay fit!

 

[four_or_six]

I think you're only saying that because White's bowling is dreadful. Watson's bowling is poor though. I think he should concentrate on his batting as that is certainly his strong suit and his career will last a lot longer if he doesn't shoulder the bowling load as well; let's face it, he's no Shaun Pollock

Well, the dreadfullness of White's bowling was a big factor.

I don't think Watson's bowling is poor. I think he has it to be a decent one-day bowler, he's shown that with an injury-free run (eg champions trophy) he can be way above poor. And he's said he looks as himself as a Kallis-type all-rounder in the longer form, a batsman whose bowling is a plus.

 

[gettingbetter]

This is what I wrote on another website on the same matter.

Raina I'm not sure about, I think with most 'great' future players, they would of established themselves arleady; I say, he, Ashraful, Tait, Taylor and Malinga have not convinced me yet. Clarke, Pietersen, Asif and Bravo (to some extent) have established themselves and the others mentioned have had glimpses of stardom in their short careers so far.

Raina - such a promising start, but failed when he played last. Certainly a future regular for India, but Tendulkar-esque as the article states? He's got to wait for the Indian beuracracy (sp) to die down so he can get a start in the Test team - Ganguly? Laxman?

Michael Clarke - been there done that. Other than converting his Test scores and probably train a little more at bowling, I got no qualms with him.

Tait - might fall down the track of so many 150km/ph bowlers (Hayward, Mahmood and many Pakistani bolwers). I'm unconvinced about his ability in the 5 day game. Also, I don't think his action is very suitable for someone who wants a long career.

Watson - he's played long enough for me to believe that he won't be a 'great'.

Pietersen, Asif - only thing stopping them is injury (and drugs)

Malinga - see Tait, although out of them two, he will have the longer and more properous career baring injury.

Bravo, Ashraful - more than anything, their teams will hold them back. The Windies are IMO on the rise and this allows Bravo to have more input, while Ashraful...it will be another 5-10 years for the Bangas to challenge, but hopefully he can be their Andy Flower

Taylor - looks good, just hasn't hit it home yet like Clarke, pietersen and Asif.

Look at the list in this way - they're the players that their countries are hoping to be the next 'great.'

 

[chaminda_00]

How did Tharanga not make the list, he is already far better players then Tait, Watson, Raina, Ashraful and Taylor. And Cook and De Villers, after KP and Clarke these three will be the best batsmen in the World for the next 10 years.

Raina got picked cus of his all round potential like Watson, Bravo really.

 

[Prince EWS]

How did Tharanga not make the list

The fact that he's not very good probably had something to do with it.

he is already far better players then Tait, Watson, Raina, Ashraful and Taylor.

"Already" suggests he'll continue to develop at a faster rate than they will - what makes you think that? Secondly, he's nowhere close to being as good as Watson, Tait or Taylor for mine. He's better than Ashraful obviously, and Raina is simply completely unproven rather than not-very-good like Tharanga.

 

[_Ed_]

Tharanga's a classy batsman, and probably in my opinion better than Taylor at the moment. I don't believe it will stay that way though, I think Taylor is the more talented of the two.

 

[chaminda_00]

The fact that he's not very good probably had something to do with it.



"Already" suggests he'll continue to develop at a faster rate than they will - what makes you think that? Secondly, he's nowhere close to being as good as Watson, Tait or Taylor for mine. He's better than Ashraful obviously, and Raina is simply completely unproven rather than not-very-good like Tharanga.

What has Taylor, Tait and Watson really done to show that they are better really. Taylor done nothing at all really. Tait had one good series, even if was a World Cup. Watson continues to improve, but even though im a fan, i want to see if he can be pentrative bowler Test before I can rate him, higher than Tharanga.

Its seems unless Tharanga scores a bucklet load of hundreds against the top sides, people are always going to see him an minnow even when his scoring runs lately against other sides. His got to covert his starts in a big scores, but apart from that his improving other areas, such his scoring rate, i.e during the SF and the recent Pakistab ODI series.

 

[_Ed_]

Taylor done nothing at all really.

Apart from 2 ODI centuries so far, one of which was a beautifully paced match-winning innings against the likes of Nathan Bracken, Shaun Tait and Glenn McGrath.

You're right that Tharanga's done more so far, but Taylor's done a lot more than you give him credit for.

 

[Prince EWS]

What has Taylor, Tait and Watson really done to show that they are better really. Taylor done nothing at all really. Tait had one good series, even if was a World Cup. Watson continues to improve, but even though im a fan, i want to see if he can be pentrative bowler Test before I can rate him, higher than Tharanga.

Its seems unless Tharanga scores a bucklet load of hundreds against the top sides, people are always going to see him an minnow even when his scoring runs lately against other sides. His got to covert his starts in a big scores, but apart from that his improving other areas, such his scoring rate, i.e during the SF and the recent Pakistab ODI series.

Even without his bowling, Watson is an infinitely better batsman than Tharanga. His first class average is nearing 50, for starters. Then take his ODI record, largely batting in positions and situations he isn't suited to, which is also far superior to Tharanga's against ODI standard teams.

I really don't see what others do in Tharanga. He hasn't done much of note against decent attacks at all really, and it's not even like his technique is anything to write home about for people to think he'll get that much better. I legitimately have no idea how he even makes the test team over Michael Vandort, and his ODI batting isn't that good either, especially cosidering he's supposed to be a top-order dasher and really isn't. If he's one of the 10 players who will define international cricket in the next decade, I might just stick to Pura Cup games. I could understand if you argued for Cook or De Villiers... but Tharanga? Please.

 

[Dasa]

Sreesanth should be there imo.

 

[Jono]

Great topic idea, can't believe there's already been 91 posts in this, I totally missed this thread.

Anyway I would have definitely added Cook and Sreesanth, and removed Raina and Ashraful. I'd also consider Steyn ahead of Watson.

Bravo belongs IMO, will play a big role in the direction cricket heads into for years to come.

 

[pasag]

Sreesanth should be there imo.

Yeah agreed.

 

[chaminda_00]

Even without his bowling, Watson is an infinitely better batsman than Tharanga. His first class average is nearing 50, for starters. Then take his ODI record, largely batting in positions and situations he isn't suited to, which is also far superior to Tharanga's against ODI standard teams.

I really don't see what others do in Tharanga. He hasn't done much of note against decent attacks at all really, and it's not even like his technique is anything to write home about for people to think he'll get that much better. I legitimately have no idea how he even makes the test team over Michael Vandort, and his ODI batting isn't that good either, especially cosidering he's supposed to be a top-order dasher and really isn't. If he's one of the 10 players who will define international cricket in the next decade, I might just stick to Pura Cup games. I could understand if you argued for Cook or De Villiers... but Tharanga? Please.

Watson ODI record is inflated by not outs down the order. His average of 50 is also on a lot flatter pitches in Australia and England compared to the minefields of Sri Lanka. Its kind of pointless arguement when you consider the pitches.

You seen one innings of Vandort right? Has got the worse techincally errors i have ever seen from a batsmen who has played International Cricket.

Who ever said Tharanga is top order slogger?

Tharanga got so much class, there no doubt in my mind that he will be one of best batsmen in the next 10 years. His only 20, maybe 21 now. Once he reaches his mid 20s, he will be a lot more consistant batsmen. His career will follow a similar patch to Sangakkara mark my words. Who also was very inconsistant, he only got his ODI average above 35 in the last 2-3 years.

 

[Prince EWS]

Watson ODI record is inflated by not outs down the order. His average of 50 is also on a lot flatter pitches in Australia and England compared to the minefields of Sri Lanka. Its kind of pointless arguement when you consider the pitches.

Haha, dire. Opening the batting in Sri Lankan conditions is probably one of the easiest jobs in first class cricket. From what we've seen at international level, their seam bowling options are pretty much dire and the pitches offer nothing to them so I reckon Tharanga would have scored a few if he was any good - although he's already proven he can score runs that don't matter against poor attacks at international level so I guess he doesn't need to. Watson's ODI average being inflated by not outs down the order is interesting when you consider he averages over 40 when he bats in the top 4. Don't let facts get in the way of a good story though.

Who ever said Tharanga is top order slogger?

No-one. He's supposed to be a dasher - not a slogger. As in, someone who scores at a good rate. No-one ever said anything about slogging. That's how he retains his place over the likes of Atapattu, apparently. But he scores at a similar dire rate most of the time before chucking his wicket away when he gets to 30 odd.

You seen one innings of Vandort right? Has got the worse techincally errors i have ever seen from a batsmen who has played International Cricket.

Seen a few. Looked fairly sound technically IMO - he did struggle with the ball swinging back into him early, but he played straight very well, had good off stump judgement and actually went back and across fairly well (by Sri Lankan standards, anyway).

 

[Sanz]

Raina - such a promising start, but failed when he played last. Certainly a future regular for India, but Tendulkar-esque as the article states? He's got to wait for the Indian beuracracy (sp) to die down so he can get a start in the Test team - Ganguly? Laxman ?.'

I failed to notice the promising start, can you please elaborate on Raina's prolific start and what he has done to be in the test team ahead of Ganuly/Lax ?

 

[chaminda_00]

Haha, dire. Opening the batting in Sri Lankan conditions is probably one of the easiest jobs in first class cricket. From what we've seen at international level, their seam bowling options are pretty much dire and the pitches offer nothing to them so I reckon Tharanga would have scored a few if he was any good - although he's already proven he can score runs that don't matter against poor attacks at international level so I guess he doesn't need to. Watson's ODI average being inflated by not outs down the order is interesting when you consider he averages over 40 when he bats in the top 4. Don't let facts get in the way of a good story though.

Have a looks at Sangakkara, Silva, Jayasuriya FC average and get back to me on the pitches. The pitches that most domestic matches are played on are far worse then the international pitches.

How many innings has Watson played in the top 4, umm 12 clearly enough to make a judgement about his ability in the top 4. His had a good start there, but not enough to judge him greater then someone who has batted there his whole career. 23 innings @ 7 and 11 not outs and an inflated average of 40...

No-one. He's supposed to be a dasher - not a slogger. As in, someone who scores at a good rate. No-one ever said anything about slogging. That's how he retains his place over the likes of Atapattu, apparently. But he scores at a similar dire rate most of the time before chucking his wicket away when he gets to 30 odd.

His not a dasher either, clearly been mis informed. Atapattu not really fit enough to play International cricket anymore. He just wants one last hit before he retires.

Seen a few. Looked fairly sound technically IMO - he did struggle with the ball swinging back into him early, but he played straight very well, had good off stump judgement and actually went back and across fairly well (by Sri Lankan standards, anyway).

Any bowler in Sri Lanka who swings the ball knocks him off pretty easier. The situation has been even worse in the A Team. His scored all his runs against attacks that don't have a good swing bowler or a flat pitch. Any pitch that offers assistant or has a good swing bowler his cannon flodder. If he makes the Sri Lanka side agian it will be as middle order batsmen. His no where near good enough to play as a opener.

 

[Mister Wright]

Cook, Bell & Pietersen are all going to shape England's fortunes over the next 10 years.

For Australia, I think the key for them who is going to be the next long term keeper, with none really showing they are ready for the bigger stage. Will need to step up next season.

Asif will be a superstar for Pakistan. They really missed him at the WC.

 

[The_Bunny]

Cook, Bell & Pietersen are all going to shape England's fortunes over the next 10 years.

For Australia, I think the key for them who is going to be the next long term keeper, with none really showing they are ready for the bigger stage. Will need to step up next season.

Asif will be a superstar for Pakistan. They really missed him at the WC.

So not big fan of Haddin?