I went Miller.
I went Miller.
Forever 63* at the SCG
With fear of being called a heretic, I'd almost go as far to say that Miller would be more valuable than Bradman in the context of most teams.
Obviously Bradman's achievements are more impressive in not only their difficulty but in the fact that no-one came close to matching them. He was completely unparalleled in his art and he has rightfully been crowned the greatest ever cricketer based on this. However, in terms of shere value to a team, I'd probably rather have someone who was a world class batsman and an all-time great bowler than someone who is going to score absolutely freakish amounts of runs.
Hence, I'm pretty surprised that Miller isn't winning this poll.
Rejecting 'analysis by checklist' and 'skill absolutism' since Dec '09
Rejecting 'selection deontology' since Mar '15
'Stats' is not a synonym for 'Career Test Averages'
Originally Posted by Jeffrey Tucker
But yeah there's no way Miller shouldn't be winning this poll.
Miller, marginally ahead of Warne for mine
Noting that the poll asked for 'best' rather than 'greatest' or 'most valuable' I went for McGrath just over Miller and Warne. If it had been the other questions, it would have been a toss up tween warne, miller and Lillee.
GOOD OLD COLLINGWOOD - PREMIERS IN 2010Originally Posted by Irfan
Is Cam White, Is Good.
Not to me.
Very interesting to see no votes for Steve Waugh and ONLY 1 FOR LILLEE!!!! Incredible. And Greg Chappell was good, but not Australia 2nd best ever. Not by a long shot.
Rod Marsh: How's your wife and my kids?
Ian Botham: The wife is fine but the kids are ********.
As for Grace and Hobbs being unquestionably the top two - well if you as John Woodcock he's got Alfred Mynn sandwiched in between them.
A follower of the schools of Machiavelli, Bentham, Locke, Hobbes, Sutcliffe, Bradman, Lindwall, Miller, Hassett and Benaud
Member of ESAS, JMAS, DMAS, FRAS and RTDAS
Originally Posted by maybe Theresa
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)