Rejecting 'analysis by checklist' and 'skill absolutism' since Dec '09
Regardless, the openers spot is all tied up. At least one more vote so we can move on to the next team.
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 | Cameron+ | Procter3 | Steyn1 | Tayfield4 | Donald2
Hobbs | Hutton*^ | Hammond^ | Compton | Barrington | Botham5^ | Knott | Trueman1 | Laker4 | Larwood2 | Barnes3
Last edited by watson; 05-12-2012 at 02:02 PM.
- BenaudFortunately, tonight is a reminder that older people and older players have the opportunity to applaud all the good things done by the modern-day players – their ability to play outstanding attacking cricket, their flair and inspiration and innovation; and it’s a reminder also, in a quiet way, to the modern-day players that good things have happened before, that in every era there have always been cricketers who have served the game well and have loved it, and wanted to see it flourish
With or with out, it's still unquestionably one of the top two teams and neigh invincible.
Still would be nice to have one though.
Garner should only be behind Marshall anyway, definitely ahead of Holding.
Do I contradict myself?
Very well then I contradict myself,
(I am large, I contain multitudes.
Ambrose was definately better and Holding was arguably better, who for a period was the world's best bowler competing with the likes of Hadlee and Lillee not to mention Roberts. Don't think Garner ever was.
Yeah, I'm a Michael Holding fan.
My Grandfather took me to the Kennington Oval Test match during the 1976 series to watch Holding and Roberts bowl against Amiss and the rest of the England team. I haven't forgotten the experience. To a small boy looking through his binoculars he was far more scary than Roberts, or his other team mates, Holder and Daniel.
Last edited by watson; 05-12-2012 at 06:32 PM.
I'm going to let this slide for a bit guys, I have a busy few weeks approaching.
If anyone wants to carry on with this or run it again, be my guest!
marc71178 - President and founding member of AAAS - we don't only appreciate when he does well, but also when he's not quite so good!
Anyone want to join the Society?
Beware the evils of Kit-Kats - they're immoral apparently.
Walcott was not a part time keeper. He made and kept his place in the team as a wicketkeeper whose batting developed enough to allow him to ahed the gloves when he got hurt.
Dujon came into the team as a batsman who took the gloves to keep his place in the team.
Kindly also be reminded that the West Indies bacame the best team ever by relying on four fast bowlers in ALL conditions, including the sub continent.
As for your Dujon bull****, he played 2 games as a batsman out of a career of 81, hardly comparable.
So besides Australia what other teams are on par with a West Indies XI even with the handicap of having four of the greatest bowlers (top 20) who ever played the game and having a wicketkeeper who played Lindwall and Miller better than any else did.
South Africa, England and Pakistan, in that order just a class below the top two teams.
I did mention that they were next in line. Great team that is going to be.
If we ever get a final vote for the openers.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)