Is Jimmy Adams the only player to ever complete this rare treble of achievements?

[cnerd123]

Why are we still ignoring Mahmudullah in this discussion?

He's scored more than one test century, taken a five-fer, and affected a stumping.

Haha I had totally forgotten about Mahamdullah keeping. It was such a fluky stumping too

 

[stephen]

That was comically bad.

 

[ankitj]

Why are we still ignoring Mahmudullah in this discussion?

He's scored more than one test century, taken a five-fer, and affected a stumping.

Never knew this happened. Great stuff.

 

[Julian87]

Mark Waugh:


*And of course he was a brilliant slips fieldsman, possibly in the top 5 ever and retired with 181 test catches, at the time the most ever

That's like saying The Beatles are possibly in the top 5 greatest bands of all time.

 

[Julian87]

Ponting snared some decent batsman though

His 8 international wickets were Gurusinha, Jimmy Adams, Moin Khan, Jacobs, Vaughan, Ranatunga, Lara, Streak


All batsman, no tailenders

How often does a part timer get to bowl to a tail ender in a test career? Especially if they're from an ATG team.

 

[mr_mister]

That's like saying The Beatles are possibly in the top 5 greatest bands of all time.

I wanted to show a bit of restraint in my praise of Junior that's all

 

[Julian87]

I wanted to show a bit of restraint in my praise of Junior that's all

utter disrespect to the great man!

 

[TheJediBrah]

How often does a part timer get to bowl to a tail ender in a test career? Especially if they're from an ATG team.

Excellent point.

They do seem to be mostly above-average batsmen though

 

[Julian87]

Excellent point.

They do seem to be mostly above-average batsmen though

Agreed. From memory he looked a handy medium pacer. I remember him getting a ten over spell in his first ODI back after the bourbon and beef steak incident.

 

[Dan]

Travis Head was listed as a wk in a few ICC iterations iirc.

Finch got his wicketkeeping hours up a bit when SuperNev kept getting concussed by freak accidents and/or Brad Hodge, and who can forget that period where he bowled a couple of dodgy overs of SLA seemingly every game?

 

[Dan]

Agreed. From memory he looked a handy medium pacer. I remember him getting a ten over spell in his first ODI back after the bourbon and beef steak incident.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_YMiQJl33A

 

[honestbharani]

once again sometimes people do discuss things that aren't directly related to what you want to talk about. Not everything revolves around you and you don't have to ask people why they are posting about things every time it isn't about you or things you are saying.

do you often talk to yourself like in this post? If people want to bring up other topics of discussion, they can do it without responding to me. FYI, when someone responds to my post, it does imply it has something to do with what I posted. Now take your own advice and understand you don't have to comment on every exchange, coz honestly, this has nothing to do with you.

 

[GoodAreasShane]

Can't speak for anybody else, but I certainly wasn't talking to you at first until you chose to take issue with my post

 

[Julian87]

that reminds me - Andrew Hall opened the batting, bowling, and even kept wicket once during his SA career right? Versatile player right there.

Good shout. Of everyone I've seen he's probably the most versatile. Succeeded as an opening bat and a bowling all rounder at the top level and could keep.

 

[honestbharani]

Can't speak for anybody else, but I certainly wasn't talking to you at first until you chose to take issue with my post

Fair enough but once again, since it was directly after mine after I had brought up the player in question, I am sure its obvious why anyone would take it as a response to my post.

 

[TheJediBrah]

do you often talk to yourself like in this post? If people want to bring up other topics of discussion, they can do it without responding to me. FYI, when someone responds to my post, it does imply it has something to do with what I posted. Now take your own advice and understand you don't have to comment on every exchange, coz honestly, this has nothing to do with you.

Bro not trying to start a fight, just noticed that you've actually done this 3 or 4 times recently and thought that maybe you didn't realise you were doing it. I can understand if you're fixated on a point you're trying to make, you can assume that every successive post is about exactly the same point and then get "upset" and take issue with something you see as not relevant. I'm sure we've all done it at some stage.

Also just because someone has quoted your post, doesn't mean that they are going to repond to the aspect of it that you would like them to. Much like in real life conversations, people will take parts of what you said, often unrelated to the point you want to make, and run with it in a different direction. Might help to keep that in mind.

 

[honestbharani]

Bro not trying to start a fight, just noticed that you've actually done this 3 or 4 times recently and thought that maybe you didn't realise you were doing it. I can understand if you're fixated on a point you're trying to make, you can assume that every successive post is about exactly the same point and then get "upset" and take issue with something you see as not relevant. I'm sure we've all done it at some stage.

Also just because someone has quoted your post, doesn't mean that they are going to repond to the aspect of it that you would like them to. Much like in real life conversations, people will take parts of what you said, often unrelated to the point you want to make, and run with it in a different direction. Might help to keep that in mind.

Do you always assume things and then treat them as reality like with these points? I am again telling you, when discussion and responses pertain to a topic, there is nothing wrong in bringing it up. It does not mean I am either "upset" or whatever, just pointing out the context (and the thread topic) under which said point is made. That is all. And I am done with this back and forth.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Do you always assume things and then treat them as reality like with these points? I am again telling you, when discussion and responses pertain to a topic, there is nothing wrong in bringing it up. It does not mean I am either "upset" or whatever, just pointing out the context (and the thread topic) under which said point is made. That is all. And I am done with this back and forth.

Ok bud. I didn't expect a thank you, but I bet $100 you stop doing it (at least for a while), and it makes things better for all of us.

 

[honestbharani]

Ok bud. I didn't expect a thank you, but I bet $100 you stop doing it (at least for a while), and it makes things better for all of us.

So it would if you would stop posting nonsense like this, so again, follow your own advice first.

 

[a massive zebra]

William Beldham, by general consent the best batsman in the world at the end of the 18th century, must have been quite a versatile cricketer. In addition to his 7,042 runs, he also took at least* 218 wickets and made 48 stumpings in first class cricket.

*at the time, full bowling analysis were not recorded and bowlers were only credited with bowled dismissals