• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Which is the most important dismissal in cricket?

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Maybe would've been Stephen Waugh c Browne b K Benjamin 42, Sabina Park, 1995.

As it was, though, the catch was dropped.
 
Last edited:

DaRick

State Vice-Captain
If we include dropped chances:

MEK Hussey c. Kallis b. Pollock 27, Melbourne 2005

Who knows what would've happened in that Test series (and even in world cricket) if Kallis had held that catch? The possibilities are almost frightening.

The Waugh one would probably be more significant, though...as would the Kasprowicz dismissal.
 

Lillian Thomson

Hall of Fame Member
:laugh: Surely the most important dismissal ever should be of some lasting significance (important misses is surely a separate thread) in the history of the game not a random dismissal of little consequence beyond the time in which it happened.

The dismissal right at the end of this sequence is surely the winner.

Howzat
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Hmm, maybe it might've been.

Still would've been better if it was Winston, mind - Kenneth Benjamin was crap compared to his namesake.
 

wpdavid

Hall of Fame Member
Gatting's reverse sweep in the 1987 WC final, which decided the game and set up Aus' recovery from the mid80's and paved the way eventual world domination. Without Fat Gatt's brainstorm, none of that would ever have happened.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
It didn't, though. It cost England a World Cup victory, but that's it.

Australia's Test revivial didn't start for another 2 years, and had zero to do with the victory in the 1987 World Cup.
 

NUFAN

Y no Afghanistan flag
It didn't, though. It cost England a World Cup victory, but that's it.

Australia's Test revivial didn't start for another 2 years, and had zero to do with the victory in the 1987 World Cup.
Haha you can't say it had zero to do with it.

It gave everyone in Australian Cricket the belief that we could take on the world in the shorter game and win.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
But they already had that - they almost won the World Cup in 1975, 12 years previously.

In any case, as I said - that was the shorter game, the revival in the longer game was a) different and b) didn't start for another 2 years.
 

NUFAN

Y no Afghanistan flag
But they already had that - they almost won the World Cup in 1975, 12 years previously.

In any case, as I said - that was the shorter game, the revival in the longer game was a) different and b) didn't start for another 2 years.
Almost winning a world cup and winning one is completely different.
 

Top_Cat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
But they already had that - they almost won the World Cup in 1975, 12 years previously.

In any case, as I said - that was the shorter game, the revival in the longer game was a) different and b) didn't start for another 2 years.
The guys who actually played in that final have spoken many times about how winning the 1987 WC gave them much confidence and self-belief which transferred to their Test form. You won't need to look far to see Steve Waugh, Bobby Simpson, David Boon, AB and others quoted as saying exactly that. Considering the same players who led the WC win led the revival in Aussie fortunes, you can't credibly argue a disconnect between the two.
 

Top