Who is the second best opener of the last half century?

[sunilz]

His claims to be 2nd best after Bradman was stronger in 2000 than it is now.
Bradman, Benaud, Wisden.. Etc already acknowledged it by then.

Because Lara was on decline then , Ponting hadn't peaked. After watching Lara's 2nd peak and Ponting's peak between 2002-06 people would have rated Tendulkar lower than these 2 test batsman had Tendulkar retired in 2000.

 

[trundler]

I cannot believe people are voting for Barry Richards in this. Sorry, it gets my goat.

The guy did not play a single test match in the half-century the vote is based on. Not one.

In the half-century we are voting on, he played some first-class matches and was part of a circus extravaganza some impressario fixed, but he never played a meaningful test match ever. We have absolutely no idea how he would have performed in the cauldron of a real test match against fired-up bowlers bowling in a match where something mattered.

I mean, I understand he was a pretty boy and teenagers of that era might have had a crush on him, but that does not make him a candidate for this poll. He's the joke last option in the poll, and people voting for him are idiots.

Mark Waugh looked a million bucks, averaged in the mid 50s over a ****load of games and had a decent start to his career. Most who saw him at FC would've guessed he'd end up the better Waugh but he didn't. A pretty technique and good FC numbers don't come anywhere near trumping blokes who had careers stretching over a decade against the toughest opposition possible in a variety of conditions. And it's disrespectful to suggest that imo. If we're rewarding FC stats then I'll take the guy with 150 centuries and an average of 56. Boycott's career overlapped with Trueman and Marshall at each end, on top of that.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Barry Richards is one of the great batsman of the last 50 years. If anyone wants to rate him lower than those with a proven Test record then fair enough. But that sort of clueless juvenile offensive rambling should be deleted, not quoted.

 

[Gob]

Matty Hayden is way bigger than Barry Richards

 

[Jack1]

Barry Richards is one of the great batsman of the last 50 years. If anyone wants to rate him lower than those with a proven Test record then fair enough. But that sort of clueless juvenile offensive rambling should be deleted, not quoted.

pretty much , not sure why he’s so mad

 

[Anil]

hayden for me...

 

[Immenso]

Greenidge and Haynes both ended up wearing glasses when they batted by their late 30s. Seemed to effect Greenidge more than Haynes. Needed a better optometrist?

 

[bagapath]

if Barry Richards could be included in this poll, one might as well include Bjorn Borg. Both played zero tests in the last 50 years.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

if Barry Richards could be included in this poll, one might as well include Bjorn Borg. Both played zero tests in the last 50 years.

That would be a good point if the word “Test” was mentioned in the poll and there was documented evidence of Bjorn Borg ever playing cricket.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Because Lara was on decline then , Ponting hadn't peaked. After watching Lara's 2nd peak and Ponting's peak between 2002-06 people would have rated Tendulkar lower than these 2 test batsman had Tendulkar retired in 2000.

Not likely.. 90s Sachin was batting equivalent of Marshall.

 

[Pap Finn Keighl]

Barry Richards is not a guaranteed ATG,
Unlike Mike Procter.

 

[Bolo.]

Interesting that Gordon is winning this despite being clearly not the best opener in the team he played the most for. Not wrong, cos its only FC, just interesting.

 

[Slifer]

Not likely.. 90s Sachin was batting equivalent of Marshall.

No. The batting equivalent of Marshall would be a batsman averaging around 50+ home and away vs all comers. Marshall averaged sub 25 home and away vs everyone ( not including 3 tests in NZ). Sachin just didn't have that level of consistency vs all comers and around the world.

Sachin still was probably the batsman of the 90s, won't really argue against that.

 

[bagapath]

That would be a good point if the word “Test” was mentioned in the poll and there was documented evidence of Bjorn Borg ever playing cricket.

well, "cricket" wasn't mentioned in the poll either. so I took the liberty.

I operate on the principle that all discussions on cricket chat are about test cricket unless specified otherwise.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

well, "cricket" wasn't mentioned in the poll either. so I took the liberty.

I operate on the principle that all discussions on cricket chat are about test cricket unless specified otherwise.

The fact that it refers to cricket is self evident. Any principles that you apply are not only not self evident, they’re completely irrelevant.

 

[shashy]

Barry Richards should be nowhere near a discussion of ATGs.

 

[Days of Grace]

Interesting that no one has mentioned that Greenidge never had to face the attack (by a distance) of his era.

 

[stephen]

Look guys, Greenidge never had to face the best attack of his era (and they were the best by some distance too). That automatically means you should knock 9.375 runs from his average, proving once and forever that Boeta Dippenaar was the second best opener of the last fifty years behind Chris Gayle.

 

[bagapath]

The fact that it refers to cricket is self evident. Any principles that you apply are not only not self evident, they’re completely irrelevant.

Well... Barry Richards is irrelevant. As irrelevant as Bjorn Borg.

 

[Slifer]

Interesting that no one has mentioned that Greenidge never had to face the attack (by a distance) of his era.

Because then, you'd have to also penalize any Australian who made runs post 2000 when their attack was by far the best in the world.