Who is Australia's second best Test cricketer ever?

[fredfertang]

Considering he was just 21 when he played his last first class match and that he achieved what he did without ever being fully fit I'm going for Archie Jackson - one of the game's saddest stories - David Frith's short biography of him is a masterpiece

[Richard]

Originally Posted by four_or_six

I don't know why, but although I think Gilchrist was a great player, I've never been quite so amazed by him as I have by some other players.

Perhaps because the success he achieved in the first half of his Test career was virtually beyond comprehension - similar to Michael Hussey of more recent times.

And obviously, in the second half of his career he was no more than an average wicketkeeper-batsman who occasionally played some of the most astonishing innings' you'll ever see.

Ironically, it was in ODIs, his weaker format, that he was probably more notably remarkable.

[The Sean]

Originally Posted by fredfertang

Considering he was just 21 when he played his last first class match and that he achieved what he did without ever being fully fit I'm going for Archie Jackson - one of the game's saddest stories - David Frith's short biography of him is a masterpiece

The Duncan Edwards of Australian cricket - a tragic loss, he could have been anything.

His 164 on debut in 28/29 might just be the finest first Test innings of all.

[zaremba]

Originally Posted by fredfertang

Considering he was just 21 when he played his last first class match and that he achieved what he did without ever being fully fit I'm going for Archie Jackson - one of the game's saddest stories - David Frith's short biography of him is a masterpiece

Hadn't heard of such a book - and I know shamefully little about Archie Jackson - so it looks as though I'm in for a good read when I've been onto Amazon.

(once I've finished Maurice Tate's book, obviously, Fred).

[G.I.Joe]

Originally Posted by zaremba

Hadn't heard of such a book - and I know shamefully little about Archie Jackson.

*pops up collar*

Quite possibly a rare instance of a CW Book Club stalwart knowing lesser about an oldie than me.

Now, please don't go ahead and prick my balloon by suggesting you know anything more than the handful of facts I know about said player.

[silentstriker]

McGrath, definitely.

[Evermind]

Voted Gilchrist because other than Bradman, he'd be the only other guaranteed Australian pick in my all-time world XI.

Miller is good, but there've been other all-rounders better than him. Gilchrist is easily the best wicket-keeping batsman of all time. Besides, I'm biased towards post-Packer cricketers.

[four_or_six]

Originally Posted by Richard

Perhaps because the success he achieved in the first half of his Test career was virtually beyond comprehension - similar to Michael Hussey of more recent times.

And obviously, in the second half of his career he was no more than an average wicketkeeper-batsman who occasionally played some of the most astonishing innings' you'll ever see.

Ironically, it was in ODIs, his weaker format, that he was probably more notably remarkable.

Yeah, that's basically it. I think the fact I didn't really follow cricket while I was at uni meant I missed his best years, and I remember the rest more.

Also just personal preference, always liked McGrath for some reason.

[the wrong un]

Hi all

This is my first post so be gentle with me !!

I voted for Shane Warne but seeing Millar with no vote made me wish I'd voted for him

[Ikki]

Originally Posted by the wrong un

Hi all

This is my first post so be gentle with me !!

I voted for Shane Warne but seeing Millar with no vote made me wish I'd voted for him

Welcome to the forums. Miller has 5 votes, one less than Warney.

[JBH001]

No votes for Monty Noble?

[Richard]

Originally Posted by Evermind

Miller is good, but there've been other all-rounders better than him.

Not from Australia there haven't, and the only all-rounder better than him was a batting-all-rounder rather than a genuine, rounded all-rounder.

[Richard]

Originally Posted by JBH001

No votes for Monty Noble?

How many people on CW know much about cricketers from before the 1970s, never mind the 1930s? Even I don't know massive amounts about anyone before that famous Bradman's Ashes (except for the events of 1902 and 1905).

[popepouri]

Bradman.


I kid.

[Evermind]

Originally Posted by Richard

Not from Australia there haven't, and the only all-rounder better than him was a batting-all-rounder rather than a genuine, rounded all-rounder.

I was talking about the world in general, of course. Imran > Miller.