Absolutely. Unfortunately for him there seems to be a bit of an erasure of pre isolation SA cricketers amongst the cricket glitterati that only Pollock, Richards, Procter, and to an extent Faulkner, P Pollock(by dit of being part of that family) and Bland's fielding really break through. Dudley Nourse (to an extent his father too), Taylor, Mitchell, Cameron, Vogler, E Rowan, Waite, McGlew, Tayfield, Adcock, Goddard and Barlow all deserve to be mentioned far more frequently than they are.
-
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.
The ATG Teams General arguing/discussing thread
- Thread starter Red
- Start date
Coronis
Cricketer Of The Year
Its an unfortunate aftereffect of the ban. Pollock, Richards and Procter are only brought up since they were at the top of their respective fields right as it hit, as well as Richards and Procter being heavily around in WSC and County cricket. Its easier for a lot of people to just pretend SA cricket didn’t exist/matter before that.
Hell even Procter isn’t in the Hall of Fame…
For sure and I can see why they're doing it. Just think it's going after the wrong people tbh.
Coronis
Cricketer Of The Year
Of course, it sucks all round
Northerner
Cricket Spectator
The 1970s test team that beat the Aussies 4-0 was a very strong team. packed with world class players, the possible team of the 80s too had many class players, anyone who knows cricket should and can see that, their performances in WSC and Rebel tours prove that,
Somewhere around 1912 for Hobbs, sometime early 70s for Gavaskar, 1930 Bradman is boss imo, 2002 Gilchrist, really struggling between 2005 or somewhere mid 90s for Warne. Guys with more elongated great runs like Tendulkar, Hadlee and McGrath are much more difficult to pin down.
Coronis
Cricketer Of The Year
Like what, their peaks? For your team…
Hobbs (1912)
Gavaskar (1978)
Bradman (1930)
Richards (1976)
Tendulkar (2010)
Sobers (1966)
Gilchrist (2002)
Hadlee (1985)
Marshall (1984)
Warne (1994)
McGrath (2001)
Have tried (and probably failed) to take into account both raw numbers and strength of opposition.
Sobers was particularly tough because I wanted to try and getting him at his best as an AR. His batting peak would be different but 66 is still up there as one of his best bowling years.
Tendulkar honestly I’m not sure about his at all. Warne also had a couple it could’ve been, and McGrath.
Bradman’s 48 and 31 and 32 look impressive at first glance but he gorged himself on other teams during those years.
capt_Luffy
International Regular
30 cricketers who I think should be in the Hall of Fame (given Desmond Haynes is):
Clem Hill
Matthew Hayden
Bill Lawry
Bill Ponsford
Charlie MaCartney
Warwick Armstrong
Jack Blackham
Dudley Nourse
Mike Proctor
Dale Steyn
John Waite
Bruce Mitchell
Jock Cameron
Hugh Tayfield
Graeme Smith
Clive Rice
Vincent Van Der Bijl
Hedley Verity
Arthur Shrewsbury
K S Ranjitsinhji
Les Ames
Godfrey Evans
Tony Greig
Johnny Briggs
John Snow
Tom Richardson
B S Chandrasekhar
Vijay Merchant
Inzamam ul Haq
Younis Khan
Clem Hill
Matthew Hayden
Bill Lawry
Bill Ponsford
Charlie MaCartney
Warwick Armstrong
Jack Blackham
Dudley Nourse
Mike Proctor
Dale Steyn
John Waite
Bruce Mitchell
Jock Cameron
Hugh Tayfield
Graeme Smith
Clive Rice
Vincent Van Der Bijl
Hedley Verity
Arthur Shrewsbury
K S Ranjitsinhji
Les Ames
Godfrey Evans
Tony Greig
Johnny Briggs
John Snow
Tom Richardson
B S Chandrasekhar
Vijay Merchant
Inzamam ul Haq
Younis Khan
kyear2
Cricketer Of The Year
I think the only differences between yours and mine (for now) are Hutton and Hammond in.
Wasn't u8 for Gavaskar a WSC year? His other early surreal years were also gorging on some questionable attacks.
Other than the 21st century players (I accept it will take a while to get them all in) I think the really bad misses are Hill, Nourse, Procter (If Richards is there he definitely should be too), Waite, Verity, Ranji and Merchant. If i was to pick four to go straight in they would be Hill, Nourse, Procter and Ranji. No way those four should be absent.
He did do well in taking twin centuries off Imran but yeah the Windies he plundered had a Clarke and Marshall when they were very inexperienced and some plodders.
capt_Luffy
International Regular
Marshall I suffice was not the bowler he became later, but that was Clarke's best series by far....
Clarke took 14 @17 in Pakistan which was his only other proper series. He was pretty much ostracized from the Windies setup not long thereafter due to going to South Africa. Surrey fans will be certain that he was peaking for most of the 80s and I'm sure @fredfertang who is a Lancashire fan would agree with this.
capt_Luffy
International Regular
For the record, given the fact that Gavaskar's best two innings in the Australian tour (aka, Perth and Melbourne) also came in 1977; I don't think 78 works really. He was excellent in the Pakistan series, but the WI attack wasn't on par. I think 1979 works better, despite a much lower average he had an ATG England tour, a good series against Australia and another great one vs Pakistan. Another strong candidate is 1986, but his English tour was mid. My personal choice would probably be 1976; a great tour of West Indies, one great of New Zealand and a good home game against England.
capt_Luffy
International Regular
I somehow mixed up his average to be 23.... Sorry, my bad.
I'd probably go for 79 ahead of 76 tbh as NZ weren't really great shakes in the mid 70s. 86's numbers are too boosted by a dominant Test against SL and it's not like Australia or England were exactly at the height of their game then either.
capt_Luffy
International Regular
76 NZ had Richard Hadlee (averaged 16, with 12 wickets), Richard Collinge, Lance Cairns and Dayle Hadlee.... By far one of the strongest NZ attacks, imo on par with the recent one. Though Gavaskar truly faced Hadlee in only one Test, the second one and scored 70 odd (Hadlee was absent from the first one and Gavaskar got injured in the second, missing to bat in the 2nd innings; when actually Hadlee's moment came, as he won NZ the game taking a 7-fer and 11 of his 12 wickets). I think even without Hadlee, that was a strong NZ attack and all the Kiwi bowlers averaged sub or around 30.