• 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.

Another hypothetical.

Could he make it to the top?

  • Yes

    Votes: 1 5.6%
  • Yes, but only in one day cricket

    Votes: 7 38.9%
  • No

    Votes: 10 55.6%

  • Total voters


Following on from my last hypothetical about the Bradman like batsman who couldnt field at all.
Could a brilliant fielded make it to the top level if he couldnt really bat or bowl very well? Im talking about a player so good at fielding he would make the likes of Jonty Rhodes and Andrew Symonds look worse than Tuffnel. Able to stop everything, take every half chance, lightning quick across the field, tall, nimble - just brilliant in all aspects of fielding. The Bradman of fielding.

Now could he make it to the top level?
My opinion is not in test matches but perhaps in one day cricket.

Your thoughts?


U19 Debutant
No. Although taking half-chances and making something out of nothing can turn matches in the field, he would never get a look-in by selectors if he couldn't bat or bowl.


International Regular
Colin Bland of South Africa was an outstanding outfielder who often hit the stumps directly from the boundary. He would probably be a top cricketer.


International Captain
If selectors put everything into perspective, then a Bradmanesque fielder would save 30 to 50 runs in the field and take vital catches, if placed well. Your standard batsman would average from 25 to 40.

So this fielder would contribute to the team's cause without even strapping the pads on.

Of course, this player would be less instrumental in Test cricket.


I guess it depends quite how ar$e his batting or bowling was.

If he was truly magnificent, you know: direct hits from 50+ yards, twos turned into ones, threes into twos, then I reckon you could make a case.

The nearest analogy I suppose is a "specialist captain" like Mike Brearley, he averaged a shade over 22 as a nominal specialist bat but is often touted as England's best ever.

I'd reckon yer "Bradman of the field" would need to average at least 20 if he were a batter & no more than 45 if he were a bowler.

Slow Love™

International Captain
I seem to remember the West Indies trying this with Roger Harper. Overall, it didn't seem worth it to me. Generally, the fielding of the average player (who would be a capable batsman or bowler) at top level is very competent (with a few exceptions), so I can't see the value in a fielding specialist with little ability with the bat or ball. Even in ODI's.


International Vice-Captain
If every other batsman and bowler is of reasonable standards (with a few exceptions such as a Ponting in there), then I cant see it being worth it. May aswell bring in another batsman or bowler who is decent in the feild and can also contribute in other areas.


Wouldent get selected because the batting team would just hit the ball elsewhere and negate any value he has. Eleven players can make a difference of 25 runs in the field but one player cant cover enough area to have the impact needed.


Global Moderator
i wouldnt select him simply because so rarely is he going to be able to "win" you a match. he can make it harder for the opposition to win, but he will not ever be able to produce "match winning performances" as a fielder. and in picking him, there is one less player to help produce chances for him, or someone who will give him runs to defend.


U19 Debutant
What I was trying to say about the fieldsman not getting picked is that while he might save as many runs as a batsman makes and be useful, he would be lucky to be considered by his state selectors in the first place if he cant bat or bowl. It doesn't matter how good he is, he won't rise through the ranks without any ability in the areas that are most important in tests AND one-dayers, batting and bowling.


Virat Kohli (c)
I dunno. If he's a Bradman in the field and puts Jonty to shame he must be able to fly up in the air and grab just about everything.

Plus you can't really just ignore a fielder and hit the ball somewhere else. If that were the case the opposition would just never hit the ball to Ponting when he's at cover, Jonty, Yuvraj etc.

A good fielder playing in an important position (point, cover) will always get the ball.


Hall of Fame Member
shaka said:
Colin Bland of South Africa was an outstanding outfielder who often hit the stumps directly from the boundary. He would probably be a top cricketer.
Colin bland was also one of the finest batsmen from South Africa.

So well documented is his fielding prowess, we forget that he averaged nearly FIFTY in tests (49.1)