• 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.

Giles versus Tufnell - Who was better?

Giles v Tufnell... who was better?


  • Total voters
    39

Pratters

Cricket, Lovely Cricket
Who was the better bowler?

The serious nature of this means that there is no irrelevent third option.
 
Last edited:

Matteh

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Haha, ripping off my poll there.

Giles for me, because he's been one of my favourite players for the best part of 10 years.
 

stumpski

International Captain
Better what?

IMO, Tufnell was the better bowler, Giles the better cricketer. Not an easy quality to define.
 

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
Bowler. If I had a poll - Lara v Tendulkar, would you think any thing except better batsman? :ph34r:
That's not a fair comparison. A big reason that Giles was a useful player was that he contributed importantly with the bat and in the field.
 

stumpski

International Captain
That's not a fair comparison. A big reason that Giles was a useful player was that he contributed importantly with the bat and in the field.

Exactly, if you'd said 'who was the more valuable player to have in your side?' Giles would win hands down.

Even though coaches might argue that Tufnell was a superior spin bowler.
 

Pratters

Cricket, Lovely Cricket
That's not a fair comparison. A big reason that Giles was a useful player was that he contributed importantly with the bat and in the field.
I do know that Giles contributed not only as a bowler. This is for who the better bowler is. I thought that would be obvious but given the ambiguity I have specified the same in the first post now.
 
Last edited:

steds

Hall of Fame Member
Exactly, if you'd said 'who was the more valuable player to have in your side?' Giles would win hands down.
It may have been closer if Tufnell had been handled differently, and would definitely be the other way around had Tufnell been inclined to work harder.
 

Tom Halsey

International Coach
I never watched Tufnell bowl during what I consider to be his peak apart from highlights, so I'm going from what I've read from various people, and statistics.

Basically, I think that Tufnell had the potential to be the best spinner we've had since covered pitches, and at his peak he in fact was. Up until the 1992 World Cup, he only averaged above 30 in one series, and that a debut series in Australia. And it's not as if he didn't cause an impact there - he had a catch dropped off a hat-trick ball, and generally had a **** time with umpiring decisions (umpire called McConnal IIRC, anyway he sounds like a bit of a **** to me). This run includes bowling England to victory several times. None of this run was played on traditionally turning wickets - no matches in Asia IIRC.

Anyway, after the 1992 World Cup was when the personal problems started, and he was never as consistent afterwards. I did watch him several times after this (watching him bowl out the Aussies in 1997 was what made me a bit interested in cricket in the first place) and he always looked a handful on the turning wicket, and looked innocuous on non-turning wickets, much like Giles.

I've stated my opinion on Giles in the other thread, and I do rate him quite highly for a finger-spinner, but I'm not convinced he was any better than Tufnell was 1992-onwards, and Tufnell pre-1992 was (I think) a considerably better bowler.

EDIT: I've just realized I've made two long (for me) and reasonably thought-out posts in CC in twenty minutes - unheard of.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
IMO Tufnell never had much chance, he was too volatile and too unstable a person. He possessed skill with the ball, but was still nothing more than a fingerspinner.

IMO, Giles was the more complete person, and as a result a much, much more reliable bowler. Tufnell never managed any significant success on non-turning pitches, like any fingerspinner.
 

Matt79

Global Moderator
Since the Pratyush has specified the poll is solely based on bowling ability, Tuffers...

He's still a ****er though! :p
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
I honestly feel Giles was the better bowler, even if Tufnell on first glance appeared to have more ability.
 

The Sean

Cricketer Of The Year
Tuffers. I always felt he was a danger as a potential matchwinner, even if he rarely did it.

I never felt threatened by Giles, honest trier though he was.
 

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Is there any way you can be bannedd from threads involving England? You're like an unintentional BLE.
 

Top