• 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.

Nathan Astle or Stephen Fleming. Who was the better batsman?

thierry henry

International Coach
Nah what was expected of an ODI batsmen in those days was totally different. His stats WERE good in the context. Not great, mind you, but good.
I don't really think you needed to preface that post with a "nah" as I totally agree with you. All I said was he was a "liiiiiiiittle bit overrated", with numerous iiiiiiiis to emphasise it was only a small level of overrated-ness.

I've heard people really talk up Astle as an ODI player before, mostly because by NZ standards he scored so many centuries, so I was really just reacting to the very high praise I think he sometimes receives as an ODI player.
 

thierry henry

International Coach
To elaborate- Astle developed a reputation as an explosive hitter who also had a knack of scoring match-winning centuries. And I by no means deny that he was just that.

On the other hand, his average and s/r don't really reflect a particularly aggressive or big-scoring batsman. This is because he was very much susceptible to getting out cheaply and because he wasn't a genuinely fast-scoring batsman in ODIs either. He was a boundary-hitter, hard-handed, not great at rotating the strike, and tended to slow down rather than speed up as the innings progressed and fielders dropped back.

This approach worked well for him in terms of turning his starts into centuries and it also worked well for what the team wanted in that era, which was to try to get a RR going early and then to have an anchor. When he wasn't getting out early Astle played this role very adeptly. But he was also playing within limitations and there was usually an upper limit on what he could do in ODIs.

Very good player, won us matches, a crucial part of the team and possibly our best ODI bat of his era, I just think there's a healthy middle ground in acknowledging his shortcomings.
 

Fuller Pilch

Hall of Fame Member
Astle in my opinion.

No of international 100s
Astle 27 (2nd only to Ross Taylor)
Fleming 17 (6th amongst NZers). Note that Fleming played the 2nd most games for NZ behind Vettori.

Century ratios (innings per century)

Astle Test ratio - 12.45 ODI ratio 13.56

Fleming Test ratio - 21.00 ODI ratio 33.63
 
Last edited:

Athlai

Not Terrible
Taylor > both. This generation has knocked these guys out of our ATG XIs in all forms of the game
 

Top