In a top England team I would say Giles. Played in a good England test side. They used to say it was because he could bat. He only averaged 20 with the bat (over 40 with ball) and batted at 8.
They used to say he got in for his batting, so he was classed as an all-rounder by Duncan Fletcher. Wasn’t a great fielder either and played in a top England test team. He often stopped good seamer bowlers getting in the side on seamer friendly decks too.
Fair enough having a spinner and some variation. But not for the sake of it. Not in England . Especially on some of the wickets they played on back then.
Had a career bat average in tests of 20. And averaged under 20 with bat and over 50 with ball in 2005 ashes. There was really no need for him at all.
They used to say he got in for his batting, so he was classed as an all-rounder by Duncan Fletcher. Wasn’t a great fielder either and played in a top England test team. He often stopped good seamer bowlers getting in the side on seamer friendly decks too.
Fair enough having a spinner and some variation. But not for the sake of it. Not in England . Especially on some of the wickets they played on back then.
Had a career bat average in tests of 20. And averaged under 20 with bat and over 50 with ball in 2005 ashes. There was really no need for him at all.
Last edited: