Who is the greatest Englishman never to win the Ashes?

[Pedro Delgado]

Slightly longer, I would say. Go back to the late 70's when Willis was absolutely at his peak, and Hendrick, Old & Lever were still very good, plus Botham had just emerged.

Wasn't Deadly still in the side then too? Second best fellow to have come out of Bromley (after Bowie).

 

[a massive zebra]

Ken Barrington by an absolutely gargantuan distance.

 

[Richard]

Do you not think Flintoff is fast becoming the best since Willis? Over the last two years or so Fred has been superb with the ball.

Big fan of Fraser though, and but for his injury he'd have been right up there.

Oh, quite. But I think Hoggard bowled better even than him in India.
Fraser's quality lasted more than just a couple of years - and IMO would have been vastly superior to what it was (400-odd wickets at 24s, 25s) but for his hip.

 

[Richard]

I have to agree with that...Bothams peak was about as good as anyone for England as a pacer since Truemans best years...and I would say Bothams peak was after Willis'...so I would say that Flintoff is probably England best pace bowler on a consistant basis since Bothams best years.

I do think Hoggard could challenge as well..and I really do think if Jones could stay healthy he as the ability challenge as well...and then again, I think Harmison could still be the type of bowler who will actually win a lot more games for England in the future.

Simply put, England hasnt had a pace attack like this...well..since when???? At least 25 years!!!!!

Botham's peak - 1977-1981\82 (First Test).
Willis' peak - 1976\77-1983
Know which one I think lasted longer and finished most recently...

 

[Richard]

Slightly longer, I would say. Go back to the late 70's when Willis was absolutely at his peak, and Hendrick, Old & Lever were still very good, plus Botham had just emerged.

Was there ever a period where Willis, Old, Lever, Hendrick and Botham were around together?
Or was Underwood's presence still obstructing that?
Snow-Brown-Jones-Arnold-Underwood-Illingworth couldn't have been too bad, either.

 

[Richard]

As far as strength in depth, backup and the like?

Well, I've been watching the game keenly for 41 years, and the pool is as deep if not deeper now than at any time since I've been watching.

Forgive me - Tremlett and Plunkett are a deep pool of talent?
Not from where I'm sitting.
If 2 of Hoggard, Jones and Flintoff are injured at the same time (and the pitch doesn't suit Giles) - watch out, 600-here-comes-the-opposition.
What makes the current lot so good is that, when one (Jones recently) is injured, the other 2 good-'uns put their hands up higher still - and, amazingly, Anderson comes in and bowls better than he ever has at Test level.

 

[Pedro Delgado]

It'd be interesting to see whom was behind the '70s cream of the crop, compared with Tremors, Plunkett, Anderson, Monty.

Anyone know whom might have come in if Both, Willis et al were injured?

 

[Swervy]

Forgive me - Tremlett and Plunkett are a deep pool of talent?
Not from where I'm sitting.
If 2 of Hoggard, Jones and Flintoff are injured at the same time (and the pitch doesn't suit Giles) - watch out, 600-here-comes-the-opposition.
What makes the current lot so good is that, when one (Jones recently) is injured, the other 2 good-'uns put their hands up higher still - and, amazingly, Anderson comes in and bowls better than he ever has at Test level.

oh boy...LE said that he cant think of a time when Englands bowling depth has been so deep, he has watched the game for 41 years, I think his opinion has to have some credit.

Probably any team apart from WI in there fast bowling pomp would struggle if 2 of their top bowlers were injured, the good thing for England is pretty much any one of the four can be used as a strike bowler if there is a need

England at full strength have 4 bowlers who are of genuine ability,and work brilliantly as a team ...as yet Plunkett and Tremlett are unproven but undoubtedly have ability, and Anderson is always hovering around always threatening to bowl like he did back a few years ago,and last week.

That represnts a pretty healthy stock of pace bowlers IMO

 

[Neil Pickup]

Do those concerned want me to write a review?

If anyone ever fancies writing a review/piece/guest article, feel free to send it in our direction and we'll seriously consider it for inclusion (i.e. unless it's complete crap then we generally use it!)

 

[Richard]

oh boy...LE said that he cant think of a time when Englands bowling depth has been so deep, he has watched the game for 41 years, I think his opinion has to have some credit.

Probably any team apart from WI in there fast bowling pomp would struggle if 2 of their top bowlers were injured, the good thing for England is pretty much any one of the four can be used as a strike bowler if there is a need

England at full strength have 4 bowlers who are of genuine ability,and work brilliantly as a team ...as yet Plunkett and Tremlett are unproven but undoubtedly have ability, and Anderson is always hovering around always threatening to bowl like he did back a few years ago,and last week.

That represnts a pretty healthy stock of pace bowlers IMO

England certainly do not have 4 bowlers of certainly genuine ability - Anderson is far from proven at the Hoggard-Jones-Flintoff level. Until he is, we have 3. Certainly, this is the best seam-attack of my lifetime (for any team), but it's three-, not four-pronged (yet).

 

[Richard]

I recently read Graham Thorpe's autobiography (cracking read by the way - and do those concerned want me to write a review??)

I read the first couple of chapters and it seemed very much more like the autobio of an abused husband than a great cricketer.

 

[Swervy]

England certainly do not have 4 bowlers of certainly genuine ability - Anderson is far from proven at the Hoggard-Jones-Flintoff level. Until he is, we have 3. Certainly, this is the best seam-attack of my lifetime (for any team), but it's three-, not four-pronged (yet).

your inability to see the virtues of harmison is verging on the childish Richard..you know for a fact I was talking abot Harmison in that 4, and he thoroughly deserves to be rated as a genuine threat at test level...no matter how stubborn you might be

 

[Richard]

So, the fact that he's done next to nothing in his last 19 Tests means absolutely nothing to you?
The fact that people still talk about Harmison as a World-class bowler attests to the absolute stubbornness and stupidity and refusal to see what is blatantly in front on one's face.
Harmison's 7 good Tests at the start of 2004 were quite blatantly just a lucky flash-in-the-pan and since then he's been found-out in a big way.
The things people think-of to try and ignore the obvious virtually defy belief, from "he hit Hayden and Ponting and that helped England win The Ashes" to "the pitches have discouraged him" to "he doesn't want it enough" to "he takes wickets at the other end" to "he doesn't travel well" and all manner of other stupidities.
Sooner or later, people are going to have to face facts.

 

[SJS]

Short careers of otherwise great players and contempararies of Bradman come to mind.

First hit : Duleepsinhji, Kumar Sri

 

[SJS]

There are many names in the 57-76 period (a virtual drought for England barring one series) but none bigger than Dexter and Barrington already mentioned.

 

[Pedro Delgado]

Ken's greatest gift to England was Botham, without him I think we'd have lost him.

 

[SJS]

Finally there are the tragic figures of the 1987-2005 ers...Nasser, Atherton, Stewart, Gough and Caddick suggest themselves.

I suppose Dexter and Barrington will have to top the list.

 

[luckyeddie]

I didn't make my '41 years' blah blah to wind Richard up, but I must confess that I did expect that kind of a nonsense reply. It was an honest opinion and I ventured it - seldom does this country produce 2 world-class bowlers at any one time, three is a luxury and four absolutely unheard-of.

Yes, Richard, four. World class as in 'any one of them would walk into ANY side in the world'. That doesn't mean that they ALL would together at any one time, of course - I thought I'd better mention that before you just assumed that Harmison was better than McGrath and Pollock and Ntini and Vaas and Styris (just put the last one in to see if the Kiwis are awake). I mean that if Harmison were any other nationality, he would make that country's starting XI in any conditions against any opposition, the same way as he does ours. World class - not 'all time great'.

I never even mentioned Harmison in the original post, but once again Richard just jumped onto his favourite hobby-horse and rode it until the runners broke. Says more about Richard than his words did about Harmison.

Naturally the likes of Tremlett and Plunkett and Mahmood are not finished articles - that comes with experience. Plunkett, for instance, isn't even 21 yet. Only a complete idiot would make a snap judgement regarding their talent at this stage of their career - it didn't surprise me one bit Richard that you did.

Anderson's come through a huge 'slough of despond', 'crisis of confidence', call it what you will - where he has had all and sundry telling him to modify his action to the extent that 'they' nearly destroyed the guy. He looked very good indeed at the end of the India test series - coming off almost no cricket. I think someone just said 'bowl' to him instead of trying to coach him. Maybe Troy Cooley finally came to his senses on that one - no matter how 'ugly' or 'active' Anderson is in the delivery stride, he maintains a wonderful seam position and the ability to jag the ball around. Works for me.

 

[Richard]

I didn't make my '41 years' blah blah to wind Richard up, but I must confess that I did expect that kind of a nonsense reply. It was an honest opinion and I ventured it - seldom does this country produce 2 world-class bowlers at any one time, three is a luxury and four absolutely unheard-of.

Yes, Richard, four. World class as in 'any one of them would walk into ANY side in the world'. That doesn't mean that they ALL would together at any one time, of course - I thought I'd better mention that before you just assumed that Harmison was better than McGrath and Pollock and Ntini and Vaas and Styris (just put the last one in to see if the Kiwis are awake). I mean that if Harmison were any other nationality, he would make that country's starting XI in any conditions against any opposition, the same way as he does ours. World class - not 'all time great'.

I never even mentioned Harmison in the original post, but once again Richard just jumped onto his favourite hobby-horse and rode it until the runners broke. Says more about Richard than his words did about Harmison.

Your delusion on the Harmison matter reaches crazy levels.
I will not stop going-on, very profusely, about the fact that Harmison is quite obscenely overrated in this country. There is no way on Earth that Harmison would make any of the 8 Test-standard nations a better side. No way on this planet. England are a poorer side for his presence, and the sooner everyone realises that the better the chances of us actually getting to the top of the tree.
There is absolutely nothing in Harmison's Test performances to justify labelling him close to Hoggard, Jones and Flintoff. Quite how long it will take some thick skulls to absorb this piece of information is not something I have the slightest clue of.

Naturally the likes of Tremlett and Plunkett and Mahmood are not finished articles - that comes with experience. Plunkett, for instance, isn't even 21 yet. Only a complete idiot would make a snap judgement regarding their talent at this stage of their career - it didn't surprise me one bit Richard that you did.

Really?
I'd wager quite a bit that both Tremlett and Plunkett come to nothing at international level - and quite possibly Mahmood too.
It takes an idiot, quite frankly, to say "he's 21, he WILL improve with experience". Most players don't. Plunkett and Tremlett are clearly very, very poor and are, in my estimation, unlikely to get much better.

 

[Magrat Garlick]

There is no way on Earth that Harmison would make any of the 8 Test-standard nations a better side. No way on this planet.

Either Bangladesh are a Test-standard nation, or you rate West Indies' bowling attack beyond all reasonable levels.