Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

The Immortals of English Cricket

2

Comments

  • bobmunro
    bobmunro Posts: 20,993
    thickandthin63 said:
    killerandflash said:
    Just like all time Charlton teams, it's really hard to judge modern day players versus ones from your younger years who give you rose-tinted memories, and those who played before you were born.

    Off the top of my head, just choosing players I've seen (on TV or live)

    Boycott
    Gooch
    Gower
    Root
    Thorpe
    Botham
    Knott
    Swann
    Broad
    Anderson
    Willis

    Which is slightly coloured by trying to imagine how some of the more recent players would have coped with the Windies pace quartet of the 80s
    I agree,even further back when Wesley Hall and Charlie Griffith were chucking them down,against un protected batsman,dont forget when Lillee and Thompson where at their peak Boycott somehow decided he needed a break from test cricket.
    Thompson was a brute but Boycs faced much faster bowlers than Lillee, albeit nowhere near as clever!
  • cantersaddick
    cantersaddick Posts: 17,216
    Chizz said:
    cantersaddick said:
    As if my great great uncle (i think thats the right number of greats) didn't make the cut ;) he did the "double" 8 times (1000runs and 100 wickets in a season) wisden cricketer of the year in 1914

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Relf



    I hope you inherited his magnificent moustache
    Unfortunately not. My face looks like I am still waiting for puberty! :p
  • cantersaddick
    cantersaddick Posts: 17,216
    Can't stand KP the man but the player was exceptional. I'd pick Root over him for any role in the middle order though.
  • soapboxsam
    soapboxsam Posts: 23,242
    cantersaddick said:
    As if my great great uncle (i think thats the right number of greats) didn't make the cut ;) he did the "double" 8 times (1000runs and 100 wickets in a season) wisden cricketer of the year in 1914

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Relf





    A sad ending to Albert Relf's life but a star player in his day and i love the name of the skipper going to Australia: Plum Warner !

    So we have another contender for quality DNA; difficult to beat James Seed but @cantersaddick is Cricket Gold !
  • lolwray
    lolwray Posts: 4,921
    I'd take out Stokes and put in Root otherwise spot on 
  • Blackheathen
    Blackheathen Posts: 6,673
    The book was published in 2021 and, as mentioned the author tried to not consider current players.

    However …. He included Ben Stokes.  By age 28 he had played 57 Tests averaging 35 with the bat and 32 with the ball.

    ”Stokes compares favourably with the other great post-war English all-rounders:
    Flintoff 31 and 33, Botham 33 and 28, Greig 40 and 32, Trevor Bailey 29 and 29.  All these players were outstanding in their different ways.  But none of the, not even Botham, achieved highs - and lows - in the sensational way that Stokes has managed”
  • Leuth
    Leuth Posts: 23,413
    Blackheathen said:
    The book was published in 2021 and, as mentioned the author tried to not consider current players.

    However …. He included Ben Stokes.  By age 28 he had played 57 Tests averaging 35 with the bat and 32 with the ball.

    ”Stokes compares favourably with the other great post-war English all-rounders:
    Flintoff 31 and 33, Botham 33 and 28, Greig 40 and 32, Trevor Bailey 29 and 29.  All these players were outstanding in their different ways.  But none of the, not even Botham, achieved highs - and lows - in the sensational way that Stokes has managed”
    Or, rather than pick another all-rounder, how about a really, really good batsman? Eh who cares tbh
  • MarcusH26
    MarcusH26 Posts: 8,163
    cantersaddick said:
    Can't stand KP the man but the player was exceptional. I'd pick Root over him for any role in the middle order though.

    I was wondering about KP and where he'd rank in all this. Fantastic cricketer but as a man I absolutely can't stand him, a whole summer of him waffling on during the Ashes is something I'm not looking forward to. 
  • cantersaddick
    cantersaddick Posts: 17,216
    edited April 2023
    soapboxsam said:
    cantersaddick said:
    As if my great great uncle (i think thats the right number of greats) didn't make the cut ;) he did the "double" 8 times (1000runs and 100 wickets in a season) wisden cricketer of the year in 1914

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Relf





    A sad ending to Albert Relf's life but a star player in his day and i love the name of the skipper going to Australia: Plum Warner !

    So we have another contender for quality DNA; difficult to beat James Seed but @cantersaddick is Cricket Gold !
    I prefer to be called cricketing royalty

    I played a few times against the grandson (or great nephew) of the great Terry Alderman. He was a bit of a twat, playing below his level trying to dominate against kids. Didn't like it when he chipped my medium pace to cover first ball.
  • Stig
    Stig Posts: 29,180
    killerandflash said:
    Just like all time Charlton teams, it's really hard to judge modern day players versus ones from your younger years who give you rose-tinted memories, and those who played before you were born.

    Off the top of my head, just choosing players I've seen (on TV or live)

    Boycott
    Gooch
    Gower
    Root
    Thorpe
    Botham
    Knott
    Swann
    Broad
    Anderson
    Willis

    Which is slightly coloured by trying to imagine how some of the more recent players would have coped with the Windies pace quartet of the 80s
    So glad to see Knott getting a mention.

  • Sponsored links:



  • Cafc43v3r
    Cafc43v3r Posts: 21,600
    killerandflash said:
    I'd question the place of Stokes in that team, who to me would be backup to Botham, as we don't need 2 all rounders.

    At 5 I'd want a "proper" batsman, someone like Root averaging around 50, plus he can bowl some offspin too.
    Stokes is obviously a very good cricketer but I always think he is a good player capable of doing great things, rather than being a great player.  


  • Chizz
    Chizz Posts: 28,404
    Cafc43v3r said:
    killerandflash said:
    I'd question the place of Stokes in that team, who to me would be backup to Botham, as we don't need 2 all rounders.

    At 5 I'd want a "proper" batsman, someone like Root averaging around 50, plus he can bowl some offspin too.
    Stokes is obviously a very good cricketer but I always think he is a good player capable of doing great things, rather than being a great player.  


    That's a really good description.  
  • kentaddick
    kentaddick Posts: 18,729
    killerandflash said:
    kentaddick said:
    killerandflash said:
    Just like all time Charlton teams, it's really hard to judge modern day players versus ones from your younger years who give you rose-tinted memories, and those who played before you were born.

    Off the top of my head, just choosing players I've seen (on TV or live)

    Boycott
    Gooch
    Gower
    Root
    Thorpe
    Botham
    Knott
    Swann
    Broad
    Anderson
    Willis

    Which is slightly coloured by trying to imagine how some of the more recent players would have coped with the Windies pace quartet of the 80s


    no disrespect to thorpe as he was our only test level batsman in an extremely poor side at the time but he doesn't get in a look in on that side, especially not in front of pietersen.
    He averaged 44.66 is a very poor side. Imagine how many runs he would have scored striding to the crease with more runs on the board AND a better England set up.

    KP is of course hard to leave out.
    eh, but then if you're going to let thorpe in you may as well think about bell, collingwood etc who i'd rank at a similar level to thorpe. 
  • kentaddick
    kentaddick Posts: 18,729
    Cafc43v3r said:
    killerandflash said:
    I'd question the place of Stokes in that team, who to me would be backup to Botham, as we don't need 2 all rounders.

    At 5 I'd want a "proper" batsman, someone like Root averaging around 50, plus he can bowl some offspin too.
    Stokes is obviously a very good cricketer but I always think he is a good player capable of doing great things, rather than being a great player.  


    I think stokes is the greatest all round cricketer this country has produced. But then i wasn't around to see botham play and obviously not WG Grace. He's england's best fielder, possibly one of our best batsmen until recently and always chips in with a couple of key wickets and is mr reliable with the ball. His performance against oz at headingly might just eclipse botham's test (which was willis' test really). 
  • killerandflash
    killerandflash Posts: 70,139
    Stokes is a slightly better batsman than Botham, but Beefy has twice the number of wickets. Which isn't knocking Stokes who's a talisman for the current team AND a much better captain than Botham, but highlighting just how good Botham was. If he was a rabbit with the bat, you'd still pick him as a bowler.

    Stokes
    91 tests
    5712 @ 35.92
    194 wickets @ 32.10
    95 catches

    Botham
    102 tests
    5200 @ 33.54
    383 wickets @ 28.40
    120 catches
  • kentaddick
    kentaddick Posts: 18,729
    i guess "a very good cricketer capable of doing great things" is kind of true, I see him in a similar vein to cristiano ronaldo, a great player who worked his arse off to become the best in the world, rather than a naturally talented freak like messi. 
  • killerandflash
    killerandflash Posts: 70,139
    kentaddick said:
    killerandflash said:
    kentaddick said:
    killerandflash said:
    Just like all time Charlton teams, it's really hard to judge modern day players versus ones from your younger years who give you rose-tinted memories, and those who played before you were born.

    Off the top of my head, just choosing players I've seen (on TV or live)

    Boycott
    Gooch
    Gower
    Root
    Thorpe
    Botham
    Knott
    Swann
    Broad
    Anderson
    Willis

    Which is slightly coloured by trying to imagine how some of the more recent players would have coped with the Windies pace quartet of the 80s


    no disrespect to thorpe as he was our only test level batsman in an extremely poor side at the time but he doesn't get in a look in on that side, especially not in front of pietersen.
    He averaged 44.66 is a very poor side. Imagine how many runs he would have scored striding to the crease with more runs on the board AND a better England set up.

    KP is of course hard to leave out.
    eh, but then if you're going to let thorpe in you may as well think about bell, collingwood etc who i'd rank at a similar level to thorpe. 
    Collingwood is actually the sort of player who doesn't stand out as one of the greats, BUT makes sides better. Tough runs, useful fill in bowling and brilliant fielding. 
  • Addick Addict
    Addick Addict Posts: 40,028
    killerandflash said:
    Stokes is a slightly better batsman than Botham, but Beefy has twice the number of wickets. Which isn't knocking Stokes who's a talisman for the current team AND a much better captain than Botham, but highlighting just how good Botham was. If he was a rabbit with the bat, you'd still pick him as a bowler.

    Stokes
    91 tests
    5712 @ 35.92
    194 wickets @ 32.10
    95 catches

    Botham
    102 tests
    5200 @ 33.54
    383 wickets @ 28.40
    120 catches
    Greig
    55 Tests
    3599 @ 40.43
    141 wickets @ 32.20
    87 catches
  • killerandflash
    killerandflash Posts: 70,139
    Addick Addict said:
    killerandflash said:
    Stokes is a slightly better batsman than Botham, but Beefy has twice the number of wickets. Which isn't knocking Stokes who's a talisman for the current team AND a much better captain than Botham, but highlighting just how good Botham was. If he was a rabbit with the bat, you'd still pick him as a bowler.

    Stokes
    91 tests
    5712 @ 35.92
    194 wickets @ 32.10
    95 catches

    Botham
    102 tests
    5200 @ 33.54
    383 wickets @ 28.40
    120 catches
    Greig
    55 Tests
    3599 @ 40.43
    141 wickets @ 32.20
    87 catches
    But what about Derek Pringle?  ;)
  • blackpool72
    blackpool72 Posts: 23,774
    Addick Addict said:
    killerandflash said:
    Stokes is a slightly better batsman than Botham, but Beefy has twice the number of wickets. Which isn't knocking Stokes who's a talisman for the current team AND a much better captain than Botham, but highlighting just how good Botham was. If he was a rabbit with the bat, you'd still pick him as a bowler.

    Stokes
    91 tests
    5712 @ 35.92
    194 wickets @ 32.10
    95 catches

    Botham
    102 tests
    5200 @ 33.54
    383 wickets @ 28.40
    120 catches
    Greig
    55 Tests
    3599 @ 40.43
    141 wickets @ 32.20
    87 catches
    Greig is often overlooked when people discuss great all rounders.
    Very underrated imo.

  • Sponsored links:



  • Addick Addict
    Addick Addict Posts: 40,028
    killerandflash said:
    Addick Addict said:
    killerandflash said:
    Stokes is a slightly better batsman than Botham, but Beefy has twice the number of wickets. Which isn't knocking Stokes who's a talisman for the current team AND a much better captain than Botham, but highlighting just how good Botham was. If he was a rabbit with the bat, you'd still pick him as a bowler.

    Stokes
    91 tests
    5712 @ 35.92
    194 wickets @ 32.10
    95 catches

    Botham
    102 tests
    5200 @ 33.54
    383 wickets @ 28.40
    120 catches
    Greig
    55 Tests
    3599 @ 40.43
    141 wickets @ 32.20
    87 catches
    But what about Derek Pringle?  ;)
    I'm sorry Pringle shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath as those three unless it's in relation to the consumption of, perhaps, alcohol and er pringles
  • killerandflash
    killerandflash Posts: 70,139
    Addick Addict said:
    killerandflash said:
    Addick Addict said:
    killerandflash said:
    Stokes is a slightly better batsman than Botham, but Beefy has twice the number of wickets. Which isn't knocking Stokes who's a talisman for the current team AND a much better captain than Botham, but highlighting just how good Botham was. If he was a rabbit with the bat, you'd still pick him as a bowler.

    Stokes
    91 tests
    5712 @ 35.92
    194 wickets @ 32.10
    95 catches

    Botham
    102 tests
    5200 @ 33.54
    383 wickets @ 28.40
    120 catches
    Greig
    55 Tests
    3599 @ 40.43
    141 wickets @ 32.20
    87 catches
    But what about Derek Pringle?  ;)
    I'm sorry Pringle shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath as those three unless it's in relation to the consumption of, perhaps, alcohol and er pringles
    The smiley should have made my comment's tone obvious!

    The first of the new Bothams
  • cantersaddick
    cantersaddick Posts: 17,216
    kentaddick said:
    killerandflash said:
    kentaddick said:
    killerandflash said:
    Just like all time Charlton teams, it's really hard to judge modern day players versus ones from your younger years who give you rose-tinted memories, and those who played before you were born.

    Off the top of my head, just choosing players I've seen (on TV or live)

    Boycott
    Gooch
    Gower
    Root
    Thorpe
    Botham
    Knott
    Swann
    Broad
    Anderson
    Willis

    Which is slightly coloured by trying to imagine how some of the more recent players would have coped with the Windies pace quartet of the 80s


    no disrespect to thorpe as he was our only test level batsman in an extremely poor side at the time but he doesn't get in a look in on that side, especially not in front of pietersen.
    He averaged 44.66 is a very poor side. Imagine how many runs he would have scored striding to the crease with more runs on the board AND a better England set up.

    KP is of course hard to leave out.
    eh, but then if you're going to let thorpe in you may as well think about bell, collingwood etc who i'd rank at a similar level to thorpe. 
    Not even close - Bell and Colly were good in an excellent side. No chance could they do what Thorpey did in a terrible side. Thorpey was a proper player. 

    Bell struggles scoring the tough runs and Colly made everything of the talent he had but there is no arguing he had even half the talent of Thorpey.
  • Addick Addict
    Addick Addict Posts: 40,028
    killerandflash said:
    Addick Addict said:
    killerandflash said:
    Addick Addict said:
    killerandflash said:
    Stokes is a slightly better batsman than Botham, but Beefy has twice the number of wickets. Which isn't knocking Stokes who's a talisman for the current team AND a much better captain than Botham, but highlighting just how good Botham was. If he was a rabbit with the bat, you'd still pick him as a bowler.

    Stokes
    91 tests
    5712 @ 35.92
    194 wickets @ 32.10
    95 catches

    Botham
    102 tests
    5200 @ 33.54
    383 wickets @ 28.40
    120 catches
    Greig
    55 Tests
    3599 @ 40.43
    141 wickets @ 32.20
    87 catches
    But what about Derek Pringle?  ;)
    I'm sorry Pringle shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath as those three unless it's in relation to the consumption of, perhaps, alcohol and er pringles
    The smiley should have made my comment's tone obvious!

    The first of the new Bothams
    The smiley did. To be fair to Pringle he was a decent cricketer and trying to follow in Botham's footsteps was always going to be hard simply because Botham was a one off at that time. 
  • soapboxsam
    soapboxsam Posts: 23,242
    edited April 2023
    Hedley Verity sounds like an amazing Spin bowler between the Wars. Similar to Deadly Derek Underwood was unplayable on wet pitches.
    1956 wickets at average 14.90 in county matches and took 10 wickets for 10 runs against Notts; a record for the lowest runs conceded in domestic first class when taking all 10.

    In test cricket 144 wickets at 24.37: 
    This included test matches against the great Bradman.

    Another sad ending to a Cricketer's life when he died from injuries sustained in the war in 1942 at 38 years old.
  • MrOneLung
    MrOneLung Posts: 26,964
    none of them would beat this team


    Andy Lloyd
    Mark Lathwell
    Jon Stephenson
    Chris Cowdrey
    @Leuth (C) 
    Richard Blakey (WK)
    Gavin Hamilton
    Simon Kerrigan
    Martin McCague
    Boyd Rankin
    Jake Ball 


  • kentaddick
    kentaddick Posts: 18,729
    MrOneLung said:
    none of them would beat this team


    Andy Lloyd
    Mark Lathwell
    Jon Stephenson
    Chris Cowdrey
    @Leuth (C) 
    Richard Blakey (WK)
    Gavin Hamilton
    Simon Kerrigan
    Martin McCague
    Boyd Rankin
    Jake Ball 


    a brutal snub to darren pattinson
  • SoundAsa£
    SoundAsa£ Posts: 22,537
    Underwood should always be included!
  • Cafc43v3r
    Cafc43v3r Posts: 21,600
    cantersaddick said:
    kentaddick said:
    killerandflash said:
    kentaddick said:
    killerandflash said:
    Just like all time Charlton teams, it's really hard to judge modern day players versus ones from your younger years who give you rose-tinted memories, and those who played before you were born.

    Off the top of my head, just choosing players I've seen (on TV or live)

    Boycott
    Gooch
    Gower
    Root
    Thorpe
    Botham
    Knott
    Swann
    Broad
    Anderson
    Willis

    Which is slightly coloured by trying to imagine how some of the more recent players would have coped with the Windies pace quartet of the 80s


    no disrespect to thorpe as he was our only test level batsman in an extremely poor side at the time but he doesn't get in a look in on that side, especially not in front of pietersen.
    He averaged 44.66 is a very poor side. Imagine how many runs he would have scored striding to the crease with more runs on the board AND a better England set up.

    KP is of course hard to leave out.
    eh, but then if you're going to let thorpe in you may as well think about bell, collingwood etc who i'd rank at a similar level to thorpe. 
    Not even close - Bell and Colly were good in an excellent side. No chance could they do what Thorpey did in a terrible side. Thorpey was a proper player. 

    Bell struggles scoring the tough runs and Colly made everything of the talent he had but there is no arguing he had even half the talent of Thorpey.
    I was going to use Bell and Colly to illustrate a different point.  They are obviously both very good players, you could well include Trott, Strauss, Trescothick as well, who are clearly no where near the conversation as being in the best England team ever.  Maybe even Nasser, Athers and Stewart as well.

    But would you say Stokes is a better,  test, batsman, than any of them? 
  • kentaddick
    kentaddick Posts: 18,729
    i personally just don't think thorpe would stand out in a team of bell, collingwood, trott, tresco and strauss. That's no disrespect to any of them, but it's just if you're saying thorpe should be in the team, those guys are of a similar level. 

    Is stokes a better test batsman than nasser? Yes - nasser was a collingwood type of batsman, played to his strengths and percentage shots. Atherton was cut from the same cloth as boycott, stewart you could also make the argument he was never used correctly or well until maybe later in his career by the time his batting strengths had begun to fade. But i probably would put stokes above those 3, honestly. As much as i loved watching the donald vs athers battles when i was growing up. 

Categories

“Marketplace”