That's the greatness of Richards though. His greatness over 4 tests can be stacked up over Hayden though he's played many more.
His greatness is not based on those 4 games.
Simpson^ | Hayden | Bradman | Chappell^ | Ponting | Border* | Gilchrist+ | Davidson3 | Warne4^ | Lillee1 | McGrath2
Greenidge | Hunte | Richards^ | Headley* | Lara^ | Sobers5^ | Walcott+ | Marshall1 | Ambrose2 | Holding3 | Garner4
Richards^ | Smith*^ | Amla | Pollock | Kallis5^ | Nourse | Waite+ | Procter3 | Steyn1 | Tayfield4 | Donald2
Hobbs | Hutton*^ | Hammond^ | Compton | Barrington | Botham5^ | Knott | Trueman1 | Laker4 | Larwood2 | Barnes3
Well they were pretty good all the same. Even if his fc record is the measure its still a terrific effort to have made such a rep.
There's not much point arguing about this stuff. There is no doubt Barry Richards was an incredible batsman. His FC records shows that. His all too brief test record shows that. His WSC record very very clearly shows that. Clearly four tests isn't enough to judge him as a test cricketer, but nearly everyone who saw him bat (good judges) say he was uncannily good, even to the point of being the second best of all time. For some people that's enough, for others he didn't prove himself. Dun matter, he was a great batsman.
One of the really sad things about SA missing so many years was the fact that Barry Richards, Graham Pollock and Procter would've all legit been contenders for an ATG world XI, but the world just never got to see enough of them. They would've been the nucleus of a team about as great as the Australians of recent times, the WIs of the 80s and the Invincibles.
Calm down peeps. I made the adjustment for the Richards' comment. Fact that his fc record still trumps Hayden is impressive enough.
Australian ODI XI of players who never played in the shorter format.
This team can bat down to no 10. Seven of them, No 1 and No 5 to No 10, are thrilling stroke makers who will give it a serious whack. No. 2 and No. 4 are masters in building innings. No. 3, of course, will carry his bat in every game.
The bowling has the accurate pace and swing of miller and lindwall to dominate any batting line-up. gregory was a little erratic at times but he was express fast. davidson was much slower but always laser sharp. This combination should be good for any condition. Of course, the skipper richie benaud was a master spinner who will complete the attack with his bag of tricks.
I'd go something like...
- Victor Trumper: Would've been an amazing limited overs opener. Nuf said really.
- Charlie Macartney: Think Gilly, or Sehwag, or Jaya, but maybe even better! Decent bowling option too.
- Don Bradman: Scored incredibly quickly and was the Don. Good fieldsman.
- Clem Hill: Along with Trumper, our greatest batsman pre Bradman. Nice to have a LH in the mix
- Keith Miller: Would've been the greatest ODI player of all time, given the chance. Big hitting bat, brilliant pace bowler, brilliant fielder.
- Warwick Armstrong: The big ship was a beautiful batsman and very steady slow bowler. Skipper of the XI
- Neil Harvey - Batting low, playing the Bevan/Hussey role, would've been masterful. One of our best fielders of all time.
- Alan Davidson: Miserly left armer, would've been similar to McGrath in his ability to tie good batsmen down.
- Ray Lindwall: Brett Lee style ODI bowler who would've been incredible in the shorter form. Capable batsman.
- Hanson "Sammy" Carter: Quality keeper who was playing "over the shoulder scoops" a long time before it became funky.
- Clarrie Grimmet: Miserly leggie, capable of tying down batsmen and causing rash shots.
Bowlers- Lindwall, Miller, Davidson, Grimmett, Armstrong and Macartney.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)